reiher@ucla-cs.UUCP (09/28/84)
One of the central questions in "Places in the Heart" is
whether Edna, played by Sally Fields, will, against the odds,
manage to get her cotton crop in before anyone else in the coun-
ty, thus securing herself a $100 prize which she desperately
needs. Robert Benton, the writer/director of "Places in the
Heart", has managed to win a similar race of his own: the great
Country Movie Sprint. His film has narrowly beaten "Country"
(with Jessica Lange and Sam Shepard) and "The River" (with Sissy
Spacek and Mel Gibson) into the marketplace. His award, worth
rather more than $100, is first crack at a movie audience which
may quickly grow tired of stories dealing with country matters,
plus first pass through the critics, before they start viewing
this kind of film as old hat. (As a side note, I recently went
to a theater which showed the trailer for "Country" immediately
after the trailer for "The River". The similarities cracked the
audience up.)
If the other films in this emerging mini-genre share "Places
in the Heart's" strong and weak points, the last of these films
to appear may receive scant welcome. Compared with most other
American films this year, "Places in the Heart" looks very good.
Benton directs with an air of assurance and confidence in his ma-
terial that allows him to disappear into the film, something
which at least one school of directing strives for. The perfor-
mances are uniformly excellent; Sally Field is likely to receive
another Acadamy Award nomination for Best Actress. (There may be
hope for actresses like Farrah Fawcett and Suzanne Summers yet.
I can remember when Sally Field was best known for her tender
portrayals of Gidget and the Flying Nun.) Several of the members
of the supporting cast are also likely to garnish awards. Nestor
Almendros contributes his typically lovely cinematography.
Unfortunately, Benton the screenwriter has not given good enough
material to Benton the director.
"Places in the Heart" is composed of a series of vignettes
in the life of Edna, a mother and wife in a rural Texas town dur-
ing the 1930s. Early in the film, her husband, the town sheriff,
is accidentally killed by a drunken black boy. She discovers
that she is in imminent peril of losing her land to the bank
which holds the mortgage. With no salable skills and no experi-
ence except as housewife, she must provide for her two young
children and somehow find a way to make enough money to pay the
next installment on the mortgage. This is a perfectly good sto-
ry, but Benton's screenplay dips and darts around this central
issue, focussing on events which are interesting in and of them-
selves, but are never integrated into the story. Edna's
brother-in-law is having an affair with another woman. What
does this have to do with Edna's struggle? Well, nothing really.
A tornado hits town. Is it going to destroy the family's cotton
crop, or damage their house, or will someone get hurt? No,
they'll just have to pick up a bunch of rubbish from the front
yard. Edna's 9-year-old son asks her to dance at a party. Is
this indicative of the healing of a rift between them, or famili-
al solidarity against a hostile community? No, it's just the
sort of charming incident that mothers tend to tell each other
about.
Telling a story is not absolutely necessary. Good films
have been made before which tried to provide a sense of place and
time, or to evoke certain emotions, or to deal with important is-
sues, without revolving around a story. Benton's film, though,
is constructed as if it were telling a story; the way these ir-
relevant scenes are put together suggests that they are part of
that story, and yet they are not. All of this might still have
worked if it were presented as a memory film, through the eyes of
one of the children, but the film is constructed as a straight
narrative, which form does not lend itself to digressions.
This lack of focus is not a fatal weakness. There is a lot
to admire about "Places in the Heart". Every scene is, internal-
ly, well written, directed,and photographed. The period detail
is nicely rendered. (The next time I see a Hollywood film set in
the thirties or fourties in which the men have long hair, I think
I'll scream. Quietly, of course, so I don't disturb the other
patrons. "Places in the Heart" avoids that pitfall, at least.)
As mentioned, the acting is very good, particularly John Malko-
vich as a blind boarder Edna is pressured into accepting, and
Danny Glover as Moses, a black drifter who provides the needed
experience to make the cotton crop possible. Ed Harris is strong
as the unfaithful but repentant brother-in-law, but his part is
irrelevant, in the overall scheme of things. His character looks
like part of another movie.
I recommend "Places in the Heart" to those who are not espe-
cially offended by sentimental films. It's a good film, but not
a great film. If Robert Benton had a better notion of what he
really wanted to say, it could have more closely approached the
quality of "The Grapes of Wrath" and "How Green Was My Valley",
two films which obviously influenced Benton, or at least reflect-
ed the same sensibilities. I can't really fault a director too
much for producing a good film instead of a classic, but I do
feel a little disappointed.
--
Peter Reiher
reiher@ucla-cs.arpa
{...ihnp4,ucbvax,sdcrdcf}!ucla-cs!reiherrdz@ccice5.UUCP (Robert D. Zarcone) (12/30/85)
I caught this part of the "Farm Trilogy" the other night and semi-enjoyed it (Jessica Lang was robbed!) until the final scene. What in the world were her husband and the black who shot him doing in the church? Why was a Fellini (sp?) ending thrown onto this HIGHLY predictable film? Why did Sally Fields win the Best Actress Oscar for doing a 1930's version of a weak "Norma Rae"? Would someone please explain?
craig@think.ARPA (Craig Stanfill) (01/01/86)
In article <982@ccice5.UUCP> rdz@ccice5.UUCP (Robert D. Zarcone) writes: > What in the world were her husband and the black who >shot him doing in the church? Why was a Fellini (sp?) ending >thrown onto this HIGHLY predictable film? Throughout the movie there is a strong element of symbolism. Two examples come to mind. The first is the large stone church which shows up at critical points in the film. The church everyone goes to is a small frame structure. However, a large Victorian stone church keeps showing up on distant hills, and sometimes we get closeups of parts of it at particularly critical junctures. I think this use of such a large church building symbolizes the importance of the church in the lives of the characters, even if the building where they worship is small and unpretentious. The second is the broken down automobile full of disposessed people which sits by the roadside until it is wrecked by the tornado. This is symbolic of the difference between the main characters, who confront life's woes, and those who fight back. Finally, we come to the scene at the end of the movie, where most of the characters are present in the small church, taking communion. This is, of course, symbolic of reconciliation in the next world. Sally Field's husband is there, as is the man who accidentally shot him. The black drifter who helped her is there, in spite of having been run out of town, and (I think, but may be wrong) so are the Klansmen who ran him out. Anyway, the movie was never totally realistic; it contained ``Fellini'' touches throughout. It is only at the end that the symbolism comes out and bites you.
tomp@amiga.UUCP (Tom Pohorsky) (01/10/86)
In article <76@uvacs.UUCP> slb@uvacs.UUCP (sandy) writes: >> I caught this part of the "Farm Trilogy" the other night and > >I think one's opinion on the better of these two movies (Country or >Places) depends very much on where you grew up. To me (a po'white I dunno about the geography, but I thought Places was by far the best movie. The River was alright but predictable as hell, Country seemed like a soap-box for Jessica and also predictable, but Places actually seemed to have real characters and development.