MovieChat Forums > Trumbo (2015) Discussion > A Critique that doesn't involve Communis...

A Critique that doesn't involve Communism

posted 8 years ago by jmiller1918
5 replies | jump to latest

Reading through some of the comments here, it seems almost every attempt to critique the film gets derailed into varying opinions of what Communism means, or should mean.

My criticism of the film centers on the somewhat circular narrative of the body of the picture. We're given the information we need to know that Trumbo was working for a living under pseudonyms. But an almost endless succession of scenes simply show him working away at the typewriter, or talking strategy to fellow writers who are blacklisted.

Some of the scenes with Louis CK seem a bit repetitive. Certainly life is like that, and we revisit old and ongoing arguments with friends. But it isn't necessarily riveting to watch. Same with the small disagreements and friction with family members.

But the biggest problem with bringing a writer or composer to the screen is "how do you make the creative process entertaining to an audience?". It's all process, and the end product is what matters...but in the film it's the process we see the most of.

Subsequently, although I was really looking forward to this film as I have an interest in the subject matter and era, and am also a Cranston fan, I found the watching of "Trumbo" a less than enthralling experience. Cut a few scenes of writing in the bathtub; writing at a desk; arguing about writing; arguing about arguing, and this story could have been told in one hour- with no loss of meaning. But then that would present a problem, too, wouldn't it?

[–] Petronius Arbiter II 8 years ago

I understand your objection, but I think most of us fans would say we just weren't affected that way. Specifically, I disagree strongly with:

Cut a few scenes of writing in the bathtub; writing at a desk; arguing about writing; arguing about arguing, and this story could have been told in one hour- with no loss of meaning.

Pacing is an important part of conveying meaning. A part of this film's message is, one thing that made the Hollywood blacklist so damned oppressive is, it went on so damn long, almost ten years, as opposed to the eleven months Trumbo spent in jail. So, we are given just twelve minutes of screen time from the time Dalton goes into jail to the time he gets out, and those twelve minutes are rather succinct and relatively fast-paced, compared to what comes after.

So, if you feel a bit antsy sitting through the remaining 70 minutes, if you feel it's all a bit tedious, well, just imagine what it was like for the blacklisted writers to live through it. Meanwhile, the film frequently subverts the idea that Trumbo is a great big major victim by emphasizing Trumbo's wealth, fame and prestige, the fact that so many in Hollywood and elsewhere think the world of him, and contrasting all that to, for example, the black guy who heads the supply department in the prison, who has a rather greater privilege to complain about the hand that life dealt him, and who is unimpressed by Trumbo's fame and even his abilities.

There's a certain subtlety to the way this film presents its themes, and it takes time. A drama is not an intellectual tract, it is a narrative presentation; it has to show us a story, not just "tell" it.

"I don't deduce, I observe."

[–] jmiller1918 8 years ago

Thanks for your response. It's nice to know an intelligent discussion is still possible on IMDb.

I think part of the reason I felt disappointment in the drama that TRUMBO offered was a sense of the anti-climatic. For example, at one point the strain on the marriage seems to be reaching a tipping point, only to essentially subside, folding back into the united family scenario.

The same could be said for the tensions with the daughter, which threatened to attain their own independent sub-plot orbit, only to, again, fall into relative quiescence. The point that the equalitarian Trumbo could be a dictatorial tyrant in his own home was summarily made in that portion of the film, however.

I will give TRUMBO points for a certain realism: most spousal arguments do not end in divorce; and most father/daughter alienations (hopefully) get resolved in a positive manner, as here.

I think the biopic as an art form has innate challenges, when it comes to story telling. Historically, the problem is solved by "Hollywood" artifice, hence the gulf between the classical bio-pic and the real biography as we have many times encountered it.

There is probably a good deal of integrity to your point of the burden TRUMBO carried in refusing to create drama where it wasn't present, and showing the grinding process of continuing to work in a field you have been technically excluded from.

I still feel that dramatizing the creative process is one of the tougher jobs in cinema; if it wasn't, we'd probably have more bio-pics about the major philosophers.

[–] duaneincali 7 years ago

intelligent discussion on IMDB will only be possible until feb. 20 when powers that be will discontinue it.

[–] jmiller1918 7 years ago

intelligent discussion on IMDB will only be possible until feb. 20 when powers that be will discontinue it.

I am disappointed to see that the message boards are being given the "heave-ho".

I often come to IMDb to look primarily at the message boards, and may read only one or two reviews.

Particularly when a film or series has some ambiguous elements, it's fun and often enlightening to peruse the message boards, looking for just that one aspect to be singled out for discussion.

I read the managements "in order to better serve you" "explanation" for dropping this feature, and I'm still wondering wht the *real* reasons are.

[–] bobbyrobertson-22595 8 years ago

I concur.
I felt like they had some great elements to work with yet I saw alot of filler, drivel, and attempts at prophetic statements that fell short. I think they could have done much better.

It is possible I have judged the movie to harshly. I will watch it again in a couple years.