reiher@ucla-cs.UUCP (11/06/84)
"Firstborn" is typical of Hollywood films of recent years,
at least in terms of preferred methods of resolving plot diffi-
culties. Nowadays, the standard Hollywood solution to any prob-
lem is violence, and "Firstborn" accepts that standard,
compromising its plot in order to make a violent resolution
dramatically acceptable. This is a pity. If the makers of
"Firstborn" had been able to resist this temptation, they would
probably have had a better film. Since "Firstborn" is pretty
good anyway, they may have missed the chance to make a really
fine film.
The modern tendency to resort to violence in almost any si-
tuation has at least two causes. The primary one is that
violence sells. A substantial portion of the audience likes to
see people beating each other up. A more subtle cause is that
violence is an easy plot device. If you present a problem which
you can't figure any other way out of, have the characters fight
their way out. It's a lazy solution to plotting difficulties,
and, like most forms of laziness, it compromises the quality of
the product. Of course, violence in films has been around for a
very long time, but the inappropriate use of violence as a plot
resolution device is much more popular today than before.
"Firstborn" is a particularly unfortunate example. The sto-
ry deals with the difficulties children have when their divorced
parents start to date again. With so many divorces, this is a
topic of some interest to a lot of people. Is it fair to chil-
dren to force a new replacement parent on them? Is it fair for
the children to totally dictate their parents' choice of compan-
ions? How does a stranger go about fitting himself into a fami-
ly, particularly when the children will almost invariably be hos-
tile? There has to be a good, thoughtful film in this subject.
"Firstborn" isn't it. Director Michael Apted and screenwriter
Ron Koslow have compromised their story, either for commercial
purposes or to avoid problems with the screenplay, the kind of
problems that require hard work but whose resolution can some-
times lead to extraordinary results.
Instead, "Firstborn" cops out in favor of the easy solution.
Rather than show a balance among the major characters, the mother
is a deluded fool and her new boyfriend is a sinister heavy who
is obviously up to no good. Teri Garr and Peter Weller do a good
job with these parts, but the film would have been better served
if the mother was a bit less blind and the boyfriend quite a bit
less creepy. Christopher Collet is excellent as the eldest son,
who must save himself, his brother, and his mother from Weller.
Corey Haim is also fine as the younger brother. The handling of
the two sons is much better than that of the adults. The rela-
tionship between the elder and younger brother is the best ele-
ment of the film, and will be recognizable to anyone who has si-
blings. While the turns of events in the plot are improbable and
melodramatic, the boys' reactions to them are very well done.
Given the script he was working from, Michael Apted has done
a good, professional job. However, Apted has a fair amount of
power, certainly enough to get revisions made in his scripts, so
I must presume that he approved of the direction "Firstborn"
took, and thus must shoulder some of the responsibility. Ron
Koslow also deserves both praise and blame. The early part of
the story is very well constructed, and the dialog is excellent
throughout, but he wrote the second half of the screenplay, too,
with its rabble-rousing vigilante resolution.
"Firstborn" is a typical Hollywood film in terms of all of
the production values. Another reviewer has applied the adjec-
tive "slick", and it's accurate. The cinematographer and set
designer employ all of their best tricks to deck the picture out,
to good effect. Typical is the fact that Collet plays lacrosse
at school, rather than football. This gives the Apted a chance
to show us slightly different athletic sequences and gives the
film a slightly ritzier tone, but ultimately is of little signi-
ficance, unless one counts the opportunities it affords to show
lots of shots of lacrosse players wacking each other with sticks,
thus preparing the way for more pertinent violence to come.
"Firstborn" is a handsome film, for what that's worth.
In truth, I may be too hard on this movie. For what it is,
"Firstborn" is very well done. I just can't help seeing it as
emblematic of the growing trend in American films to opt for the
easy way out of hard problems, particularly if some violence can
be spliced in to boost grosses. "Firstborn" is definitely supe-
rior to many of the major films of the year, and is quite enjoy-
able in some ways. Almost everything happening on the periphery
of the story is excellent and worthwhile, and there is enough of
this to make the film worth seeing just on that basis. Apted
does get good value out of his melodrama, which should satisfy
many people. My reaction is really a matter of timing. If I had
seen "Firstborn" before having seen so many other films which
needlessly resorted to violence, I probably would have been less
critical of its faintheartedness.
--
Peter Reiher
reiher@ucla-cs.arpa
{...ihnp4,ucbvax,sdcrdcf}!ucla-cs!reiher