TL;DR –
disappointing movie, lack of character development, flat. 6/10.
Birdman, a
largely recommended and acclaimed movie as of now, was a major disappointment
to me. With an idea so rich and visionary, the producers of the film failed to
have reached the bar of excellence in my scale. The movie ‘Birdman’, narrates the
story of an actor, struggling to regain his glory from the past in his
successful film Birdman. The protagonist, in this film, has been portrayed to
have schizophrenic tendencies (wherein he communicates with his alter ego,
Birdman) and imaginative supernatural powers (such as telekinesis and the power
to fly). In addition, the story also describes his relation with his daughter
and girlfriend, both of whom work as a personal assistant and an actress,
respectively. Furthermore, the writers of the film give light to the lifestyle
and regime of the theatre and film industry by introducing a character in
contrast to the protagonist, named Mike Shiner. In this review, I will analyse
the aspects of the film that could have been improved in terms of execution,
and provide reasoning for the several accolades awarded to this film.
Firstly, the
film deals with universal themes which connect with every individual striving
for success and maintaining family relations in a broken household. Considering
the development of the story around the protagonist, this movie also deals with
themes like supernaturalism, diabolic human nature to achieve success, and the
reality of the film/theatre industry. The picture aimed to illustrate the depth
an actor stoops for regaining a once earned fame, and also build the background
behind the protagonist and different facets of his life. In my view, the film
achieved these aims on a superficial scale without developing the idea
substantially. However, if this story was presented as a piece of literature, I’m
sure language and literary features would do justice to the filmmaker’s idea.
The film
attempts to display the protagonist’s relation with his daughter (assistant),
girlfriend, business partner/lawyer, and his co-actor in the play he was trying
to stage (Mike Shiner). The development and treatment of these relations were done
poorly, as the director alienates the protagonist whilst presenting the entire
movie in his perspective as we see his hallucinations. In several instances,
the characters seemed to lack chemistry in such a way that individuals seemed
to coexist in a setting. In terms of priority, it seems that the filmmaker found
the already highlighted schizophrenic tendencies more important than character
development. The father-daughter
relationship was suppressed by the overpowering actor-assistant relation, thus
making what could’ve been emotionally iconic in the movie more cold and
professional. Nevertheless, there were
sparks of hope where this was rectified, for instance, during the scene where
the protagonist catches his daughter smoking pot, despite spending her sentence
at the rehabilitation centre. Also, the cardinal relationship between the actor
and his girlfriend seemed underplayed/underemphasised. There wasn’t much shown,
therefore not much can be said about the girlfriend. This thus contributes to
the problem of underdevelopment of the protagonist.
What saved a
bit of goodness in this film was the striking contrast between Mike Shiner and
the protagonist. This contrast beautifully addressed several themes and aims of
the film, such as, the method of achieving success (Mike Shiner does so by bad
publicity, whilst the protagonist strives to achieve publicity for good), and
regaining a once achieved fame. In this aspect, Mike Shiner represented
everything the protagonist wouldn’t do for attaining success, to the extent
that Mike Shiner redefines success in his terms. To Mike Shiner, success was
defined by fame regardless if the publicity achieved was for good or bad.
Contrastingly, the protagonist defined success by the appreciation he gets from
the crowd and the critics. Mike Shiner went to the extent of attempting to rape
a co-actress, whilst the protagonist shot himself in a scene to achieve
super-realism, which therefore sprouted appreciation. As the contrasts progress
throughout the film, it is also seen that the protagonist unintentionally
experiences bad publicity when he gets locked out of the theatre in his
underpants, which again highlights the theme of strive for success and achieves
the aim.
Cinematography
though was spot on throughout, the angles, colours, lighting, and shots
contributed well in helping the audience envision the scene with the right mood
and perspective of the protagonist. What the movie lacked in plot and character
enhancement, it achieved in the camera direction that realizes the filmmaker’s
vision. Nevertheless, if the filmmaker stroke a balance with all these aspects,
I’m sure the movie would’ve been considered a masterpiece.
Lastly, my
thoughts on the ambiguous ending: The ambiguity annoyed me more as it added on
to the disappointment I had throughout the movie due to the above mentioned
aspects. Had the movie been properly directed and scripted with a balance of
emotions, character development and depth in plot, the ambiguous end would’ve
added an element of surprise, as seasonings would to a salad. The movie had so
much potential in terms of what the filmmaker envisioned, but was not executed with
justice. If I’d have to rate the movie, I’d give it a 6/10.
