Wakefield (2017)

Very well executed

Simple and well acted, it has tension enough to knot the stomach.

It’s sentimental, ridiculously long and only occasionally funny

The movie turns out to be a little better than the average. Starting from a romantic formula often seen in the cinema, it ends in the most predictable (and somewhat bland) way.

If you enjoy watching psychotic middle aged men completely abandon their families while completely isolating themselves from society then this movie is for you!! Two exciting hours of watching Bryan Cranston become increasingly more disgusting and manipulative with the bonus of seeing him defecate in a bucket. After you survive those two hours, you are rewarded with the most insulting ending you will ever see in a movie. Not only, will you never get that time back, you will waste more time being angry at that complete bs ending AND writing a review on IMDB because the ending was seriously THAT bad.

Successful and wealthy litigator Howard Wakefield (Bryan Cranston) suffers a nervous breakdown and decides to hide out in the family attic for several months. During these months, Howard observes his family continuing their lives without him and as time passes by his behaviour becomes increasingly erratic and he often wonders whether he can return back to his old life (or indeed if he wants to)...Wakefield bravely tries to tackle a rather complex issue - one of a man suffering a nervous breakdown which I suppose could be classed as a mental health issue. Howard, for me, was a rather complex character with a torrent of varying emotions - Cranston does an excellent job in trying to give some depth to his character. The issue I had is that I didn't find that the narrative had any real depth; the focus is on Howard spying on his family, but I found that the cause of his nervous breakdown was glossed over meaning that I could never identify with or really understand Howard's motivations. The film also doesn't show anything from his wife's perspective - Howard's narration gives us an idea of what she may be thinking, but more input or insight from her as a character might have made the film a tad more involving.Other more notable flaws/issues with this film lay with believability; I found it hard to believe that Howard could manage to hide out in his attic for months on end without being spotted by his family or any of his neighbours at any point - considering how often he is roaming around outside. Also I find it hard to believe that no-one would think to look in the attic at any point to see if he was hiding out in there? He steals food and drink from his own home, but his wife doesn't notice at any point. The idea of him also surviving for so long by eating thrown away leftovers is also something of a stretch in credibility. The main selling point with this film is Cranston; he gives the best performance by a mile and his multi-layered performance does make this film more tolerable than it otherwise would have been. Garner is OK, but she's given too little to work with to make an impression on the picture and the same can be said of the supporting cast.Wakefield for me was a disappointment and something of a missed opportunity - the script lacked the complexity and insight necessary to make this a good character study. I do like the idea of a man looking into his own life from the outside and seeing what life is like for his family without him being around (there are actually shades of It's a Wonderful Life in this film), but with so little depth to the script I basically found myself watching Cranston spying on Garner which after a while became rather one-note and tiresome.

Those (few?) who watch Robin Swicord's 2016 offering "Wakefield" will not be surprised at her earlier involvement with "Benjamin Button" - there's the same kind of tone in there somewhere. Here Swicord turns to a Nathaniel Hawthorne (and later EL Doctorow) short story to make what seems like a VEEEERRRRY long story. Basically, we're expected to sit around for 106 minutes and look at very similar, grubby and at times also offputting scenes, while star and absolute dominant of the film Brian Cranston - as Howard Wakefield - also sits around and makes comments on the life of the wife (played somewhat seductively by Jennifer Garner) and two daughters he has abruptly decided to leave ... without trace, for some months. He is able to do this, because he's in fact living hobo-like in a kind of outhouse building that overlooks their place, and he has a pair of good binoculars to watch the unfolding scene... He's rather sad to be apart from his family, but also sad about what life with that family had been like before. And he comes to the conclusion that, while maybe he was not the easiest or most dynamic of men, he was basically the hardworking funder of his family's activities, yet less and less recognised for his efforts as day followed day and month followed month.He rather quickly becomes convinced that the three are better off and happier without him, and was clearly on the point of becoming invisible at home even before he REALLY vanished... If the film has a point - and it's slightly debatable - it lies in the way we become so terribly blasé about relationships that do still have love in them in fact (as Howard realises once he is separated). Even when we are there, we are half-absent, regularly irritated, and not really trying hard enough. Of course, modern life with its rat race, trivialities, mountains of stressful nothingnesses and lack of time makes everything worthless get in the way of what really matters, so maybe it's not fully our fault. "Concentrating the mind wonderfully" by today's standards means husbands calling their wives from the supermarket on the way home to discuss the choice of yoghurt; and it's all so far from the elemental, tough-but-more-real days when a man went down the mine, or to battle, or off to sea, or into the field or the woods, and the dangers might be such that there was no absolute certainty he would ever be seen again. So Howard decides - abruptly enough - to emulate those days of yore by not being seen again. As time passes, he begins to realise what he's missing, but also reflects on all the many, many things he did not much like about his chosen woman, with whom he nevertheless sympathises, and for whom he feels growing love. How mixed up is that? Perhaps as mixed up as many a modern-day marriage.He wants her to need him, but she seems just to press on with life. He would like her to be heartbroken, but she isn't, so that ought to be his cue to get out of there. But he doesn't ... or can't.For much of the film thereafter, we in the audience feel palpable tension as to whether this is all going to end with something - or with nothing - resolved; with no closure at all. Given the cynical tone of much of the film we naturally fear the worst.And the ending is as it is...Some of us - maybe many of us - in married life do actually NEED the message that this film has to give us; but few if any are likely to make the effort to stick with and get it. But even if we watch just a few minutes, we could try and do better than Howard Wakefield, and seek not to make his mistakes. But will we actually do so? And CAN we actually do so, with the modern world dragging us down?Clearly this is not a worthless film, though the dry-as-dust Cranston has a hard job evoking much sympathy in us, and - in the end - maybe this tale was best left on the printed page, as opposed to on screen?

Thoroughly enjoyed this movie from start to finish, a view most of us will not see .and the mental issue's most will not have to suffer.