Fences

This film is about a man. A man who carries the burden of generations of hardship, who couldn't fulfill his own greatest dreams because of the oppressive context in which he lived and who tries to close himself off from the world with fences. Tragically, in closing himself off he loses site of the changing times, he boxes his loved-ones in, and he creates an oppressive environment that emulates everything he tried to guard against. The timeless question lies within this story (adapted from a Pulitzer winning play) is: can we hate a man like this? Or, when we consider his circumstances and trials, is he a hero to admire?

It's worth seeing and is worthy of praise. If not from the acting (particularly Viola's), from the captivating and poetic screenplay. Every word uttered seems calculated by the mind of a genius.

I didn't like this movie as much as I expected to. Sorry. The movie centers around Troy Maxon (Denzel Washington), a father to two boys of different mothers, a husband to Rose (played wonderfully by Viola Davis) for the past 18 years, an ex-con, a garbage man, and above all, an ordinary black man in the 1950's.

No doubt it was a powerful script that most likely created an incredible play but it was not meant for the screen. It was obvious that it was a play, in the way they spoke and entered a room and carried themselves in a scene. I, of course, have not seen the play so I cannot speak with 100% certainty but I feel like the script wasn't adapted for the screen at all. It's not like it needed any major changes, just a few here and there to improve clarity. The passage of time confused me throughout. A scene would end and it would be the next day, then a minute passes and it abruptly jumps to six months later with no indication. This could be a statement on how his life passed quickly and routinely, but it felt like a swing and a miss for me.

Viola Davis was wonderful. She deserves every award coming her way. I could sing songs of praise about how magnificent she was. 10/10 for her. Beautiful.

Denzel Washington was certainly egging for an Oscar as he did what he did, but that's not degrading his performance. He did do good, but it was a bit distracting when he stole the show and didn't really let the other actors bounce off each other and him as much. It was all about him.

Even though I constantly found myself criticizing this movie, I did like it. It had a magnitude that I cannot explain, otherwise I would've given it a much lower rating. I recommend this if you are willing to. I will warn you, it is tough to sit through a movie with no one to root for. Washington's character is not a good person and very unlikable, you don't really want to cheer him on.

If I hadn't known what Fences was going in, I would have been able to tell before any color hit the screen. In a second before the vibrant world of Fences fades into view, the astute theater-goer will recognize the fast-paced almost narrative cadence of two characters talking as lines written for a stage play. Fences is an adaptation of August Wilson's 1987 play, a part of his Pittsburgh Cycle. It won the Pulitzer Price for Drama in as well as the Tony Award for Best Play, repeating this with the Tony Award for Best Revival of a Play in 2010.

We're not venturing into mere trivia either, as that revival starred Denzel Washington and Viola Davis (both taking Tonys for their acting). Not only do both reprise their roles in this film, but Denzel Washington directs. This probably explains why Washington puts in such a theater-like performance. For him, it must have felt like stepping into old shoes with very little desire for change. As I alluded, those accustomed with the stage will recognize and probably even like the kind of performance that at all times demands audience attention, as on stage, you have to do exactly that. In movie form, some might confuse it for scene-chewing, but either way, it gives his character a larger than life affability. As is said in the movie, his ability to fill a house could apply as much to his small house in universe as it could to a theater house. It goes a long way to explaining why in the end, these characters have such a strange respect for a man who is such a heinous character.

If it seems like I'm only praising Washington's performance as relatively good, that might be because he shares the screen with Viola Davis. Davis's performance is not only more suited for film, a medium she has taken by storm lately, but it's also transcendentally fantastic in its own right. In one pivotal scene, Davis's character pours her heart as the actress pours tears and snot down her face. It's not many movies that I can leave and think, boy, we really should have more snot in our films. When it comes to movies, I like to think of myself as an everyman. I approach the Oscars with a sort of double-speak. There's the film that should win (Moana), and there's the film that should win and has a chance (Hell or High Water). In a rare moment of finding these opinions in concert, I could only describe the possibility of Viola Davis not taking home the Best Actress Award with one word: ridiculous.

Denzel Washington certainly doesn't need to feel upstaged. While August Wilson wrote the screenplay himself before passing away in 2005 (a little uncredited work was done on it by Tony Kushner, who settled for a co-producer credit), it's still no small feat to take something designed for the small stage putting it on a film screen. A while the film is still more than a bit obvious, I think Washington really did as much as he could to make it as a good a movie as it could be. There are few real scenes and constant talk, but there's just as much constant motion. Characters walk down a crowded street, transition through the house, come in and off screen organically. It gives a similar effect as if a long scene was done in take. But none of this would matter if it weren't for the impeccable set design. Taking place in the actual Hill District of Pittsburgh that was so important to Wilson's stories, the recreation of the 1950s feels almost too alive. The back alley where the eponymous fence is being built is very reminiscent of the set of Rear Window, perhaps smaller in scale, but feeling no less lived in.

Fences is a film built upon quite a pedigree, but what is it about? I believe that Fences is a story about masculinity. In the film, masculinity provides. It helps you ensure that get what you are owed. But masculinity also takes. Troy Maxson (Washington) is an old man obsessed with what he believes the world owes him. The world owed him glory in sports. The world owed him a better profession. A better standard of living. He even believes that the Grim Reaper owes him life. Even though there are legitimate arguments as to why he never obtains these things, we can still say that they are fair wishes. But as the movie progresses, we see that when he tries to take the things he's owed, he doesn't necessarily think about who he's taking from or what they are owed.

Due to its strict adaptation, Fences is extremely dense in its amount of talking compared to other films. The depth this gives to its characters and sheer literature value certainly goes a long way to cement Fences as one of the smartest films of the season. But I have to be a little self-aware and recognize that as a source of entertainment, Fences probably appealed to me mostly as a man who enjoys the stage. Others might not be as indulgent with it as I am.

When you pair up Denzel Washington with Viola Davis on screen, you know you're in for two of the most outstanding performances you'll see all year and that's exactly what you get from FENCES. That said, if only director Denzel Washington and his crew could've figured out some ways to lessen the stage play feel to it and make this seem more cinematic. But then again, breaking out of that format is indeed usually the challenge when dealing with straight up adaptations from stage plays, just like "August: Osage County" a few years ago.

Scripted by August Wilson, adapted by Wilson's own Pulitzer Prize-winning play, Denzel Washington plays an African-American father struggling with race relations in the United States while trying to raise his family in the 1950s. He's still bitter from his doomed baseball career in the past, blames it on the white man, so when his son tries to get into sports, he discourages him, telling him that the white man wouldn't give him a single opportunity out there in the field. Denzel's character's wife, played by Viola Davis, faithfully stands by his side despite the secret that would change their family forever.

Story-wise, it doesn't get more well-thought out than FENCES, it's dialogue-driven, it's performance-driven, this material is every actor's dream come true because it has so many layers and it provides room for you to showcase the best version of your chops. We know Denzel and Viola Davis are phenomenal, but FENCES allows them to venture into places and show us shades that may not have been seen before. And I'm sure it feels liberating for all the actors involved in this film to just dig deep down, tap into those emotions and lay them bare for the world to see, and there's no wrong way of doing it.

The conflicts in FENCES are powerful, like a fist through a wall. Nuances surround the characters so you end up understanding where they're coming from despite being in agreement or disagreement with many of their decisions. To a certain extent, I think Quentin Tarantino and Aaron Sorkin fans would find FENCES appealing since each of the characters has incredibly long lines that run like 100 mph. Marital affair, resentments, built up hatred, forgiving your past, there's no shortage of drama in FENCES, its cup overflows. But again, as I said earlier, I think there's a missed opportunity here, the film just didn't do enough to make itself appear cinematic. Composer Marcelo Zarvos' music is almost non-existent. Forget the backseat, many of film's elements are practically locked up in the trunk.

The acting in this film is outstanding. Denzel and Viola are truly at their best and the consistency with which they convey the depth of emotion required of them in this film is outstanding. To me, this was the best part about the film. It was a little difficult to sit through this one, mostly because it is a movie in which not much happens. Don't mistake this as a comment from someone who loves action-packed movies (although I do sometimes), but rather it plods along and neither has very high highs or very low lows. As such, I drifted in and out of the story and was still able to keep up. It is important story to tell, but I can see how it was potentially better as a play. It is definitely worth seeing, if nothing else for the superb acting.