• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer
  • Film
  • DVD
  • Editorial
  • About ScreenFish

ScreenFish

where faith and film are intertwined

  • Facebook
  • Instagram
  • Twitter
  • Home
  • Reviews
  • Interviews
  • News
  • OtherFish
  • Podcast
  • Give

Edward Norton

Motherless Brooklyn: Pulling at the Thread of Power

October 31, 2019 by Steve Norton Leave a Comment

Directed and adapted for the screen by Edward Norton, Motherless Brooklyn tells the story of Lionel Essrog (Norton), a Brooklyn detective in post-war New York. Working with street smart private investigator Frank Minna (Bruce Willis), Lionel (who also goes by the name Brooklyn) and his team uncover the truth for hire. However, when Minna is shot and left for dead, Lionel determines to unravel the mystery, plunging him into a Brooklyn underworld riddled with crime, corruption and colourful characters. As his quest for truth leads him further up New York’s ladder of power, Lionel’s investigation is complicated by his Tourette syndrome, which leaves him prone to compulsive behavioural tics and inappropriate verbal outbursts.

Adapted from the 1999 novel of the same name, Brooklynis a tightly written throwback film to classic Hollywood’s noir films like The Big Sleep or Chinatown. With a stellar cast and tightly written script, Norton creates a world which feels both foreign and familiar. While the film transports the audience back to 1950s New York, it also feels current in today’s culture, highlighting racial tensions and the growing divide between the upper and lower classes. In Motherless Brooklyn, power is a drug that gives people the freedom to ‘do whatever they want, whenever they want’ but it’s also short in supply. Divided by racial and financial lines, Brooklyn is a city on the brink of chaos.Those that have little power are struggling to make their voices heard while those who have much fight ferociously to maintain it. 

As Brooklyn himself, Norton’s performance is sharp, engaging, and loving. At the same time, the character becomes a metaphor for the town for which he’s named. Plagued by Tourette Syndrome, Brooklyn feels as though there’s a chaos in his mind that bubbles over and has to be released. While the casual passerby may not immediately notice Brooklyn’s struggle, his mental chaos inevitably reveals itself. With this in mind, the film clearly draws a line between his character and the city itself, as its own unseen chaos can’t help but overflow from the underground. Diffused lighting and growing shadows point to tension between light and darkness, as Brooklyn (the character) attempts to uncover the truth about Brooklyn (the city). Like his compulsion to pull on the threads of his sweater, Brooklyn also must unravel the web of deception until the facts about his city is revealed.

Furthermore, the film also does not shy away from engaging in the complexities of Brooklyn’s mental health issues. Bullied as a child for his affliction, Brooklyn has always been the one that was pitied by others. After Minna’s death, Brooklyn becomes seen by others primarily for his mental affliction as they constantly try to ‘look out’ for him, rationalizing that he needs their protection. Frustrated by his inability to control his mind and constantly reminded of the burden he is by others, Brooklyn remains ashamed and embarrassed by his behaviour. 

Conversely, however, while clearly struggling with his mental illness, he also recognizes its value. Despite the chaos within him, his Tourettes is also what makes him a great detective by forcing him to ‘pull on the thread’ of truth and allowing him to retain incredible amounts of information. What’s more, the film even paints a portrait of Tourette syndrome with an element of beauty by highlighting the musical aspect of Brooklyn’s mental chaos. (For example, this comparison is highlighted when, in one particularly poignant scene, Brooklyn’s inadvertent vocables cause him to become a participant in a jazz ensemble.)

Featuring strong performances and well-written script, Motherless Brooklyn is an entertaining and engaging return to the noir genre. Under the Norton’s direction, the film is also impressive visually, as the shadows and darkness of New York’s underworld are constantly warring against the light of truth. 

Motherless Brooklyn unravels the mystery in theatres on November 1st, 2019.

Filed Under: Film, Film Festivals, Reviews, TIFF Tagged With: Alec Baldwin, Bobby Cannavale, Bruce Willis, Edward Norton, film noir, Gugu Mbatha-Raw, Leslie Mann, Motherless Brooklyn, TIFF, TIFF19, Willem Dafoe

Shadows of Power: 1on1 with Edward Norton (MOTHERLESS BROOKLYN)

October 29, 2019 by Steve Norton Leave a Comment

Directed by Edward Norton, Motherless Brooklyn tells the story of Lionel Essrog (Norton), a Brooklyn detective in post-war New York. Working with street smart private investigator, Frank Minna (Bruce Willis), Lionel (who also goes by the name Brooklyn) and his team uncover the truth for hire. However, when Minna is shot and left for dead, Lionel determines to unravel the mystery, plunging him into a Brooklyn underworld riddled with crime, corruption and colourful characters. As his quest for truth leads him further up New York’s ladder of power, Lionel’s investigation is complicated by his Tourette syndrome, which leaves him prone to compulsive behavioural tics and inappropriate verbal outbursts. Adapted from Johnathan Letham’s book of the same name, Norton wanted to bring the story to life due due to the interesting and complex nature of its lead character.

“The character [of Lionel] was entirely the initial hook for me,” he begins. “The many things that got woven into it to sort of expand on its scope or the broader target that it had ultimately were not where I was within the beginning. I just was completely enamored with this character that Jonathan Letham created, not just because he’s a unique character with a unique condition and the idea of sending him, a person with those mental gifts and challenges, up against the idea of solving mysteries is just sort of fun. [It was also that] Jonathan’s emotional hook is brilliant. It’s exactly what we… transposed in the film.”

“You hear his inner voice from the opening page. You’re inside his head. You know him free of his condition. You know his inner mind, his inner heart and then, you see him on the outside [where] he’s kind of a hot mess of ticks and twitches and shouts [so] watching him navigate that is funny and poignant. That’s all before the end of page two. You’re rooting for him. He’s a great underdog character. You’re laughing, wincing and you [know that] wherever this guy’s going, it’s going to be fun because watching him navigate this is itself the pleasure. That was the entirety of my initial interest in it.” 

Though many of his characters over the years have appeared to struggle with a variety of conditions, Norton feels like this may be the first chance he has had to portray a man with genuine mental health issues onscreen. In order to prepare for the role, much of his research involved exploring the individualistic nature of Tourette syndrome.

“I’m trying to think if I have played characters with authentic mental health issues. I’ve played [many] characters who are faking…” laughs Norton. “So, I actually think arguably this is the first time I’ve played a character with an authentic psychological condition. It’s not a reductive , like how do you approach it? There are documentaries about people with Tourette’s. I’ve met some. You talk to people. For me, honestly, because Tourette Syndrome has many components and can be expressed in people in very individualistic ways… what I set myself out to do was find out what are a credible sort of symptomatic pieces of it and then build my own basket of them for Lionel so that you can create a weave of consistent things, like his compulsion to tap people that he feels close with or his compulsion that the idea of having a single word – in his case ‘if’ – that he says over and over… Then, [I tried to] structure that into the story…” 

However, Norton also argues that much of the importance in representing mental illness onscreen lies in refusing to allow one trait to define the character entirely.

“I don’t actually tend to think that representing physical manifestations of a thing are the hardest thing or the most important challenge,” he explains. “I think the bigger thing is not reducing any kind of disability to the whole of that person’s character. I think [that] if there’s anything people I’ve talked to say really drives them nuts, it’s when it’s made all about the disability. Obviously, in this [film], a huge part of this is Lionel’s love for Frank. It’s his sense of being motherless. It’s as much about the fact that he has never been a person who, as he says, looks past his own problems. So, I kind of concern himself with the rest of the world, you know? He’s got to grow up like anybody else… But what I think is really cool is when Laura [says], that it’s not everything. ‘Everybody’s got something,’ she says kindly. We’ve all got daily battles, right? And, it really pulls him up. Suddenly, someone’s looking at him and not seeing him just for that. They’re saying that’s just a part of life.” 

In light of this, one of the film’s more poignant scenes highlights the complicated nature of Lionel’s Tourette syndrome by comparing it with the sonic beauty of jazz music.

“I think jazz has a very Tourettic characteristic,” says Norton. “There’s the idea of looping around, playing with variations on a theme. The kind of exuberant release that is in jazz. There’s a great passage in the book about Prince’s music, but obviously we weren’t going to do that [due to the film’s period setting]. So, to me, the idea of… a scene where you see and feel for once [of] Lionel happily losing his inhibition and finding a moment of poetic liberation in it was a neat idea. I liked the idea of it that he finds an affinity with a Charlie Parker, [or] Dizzy Gillespie kind of a figure who sees him.” 

While the film’s title extends from Lionel’s nickname, it is also focuses its lens on the future and well-being of Brooklyn itself. Asked whether or not he sees any comparison between Lionel and the city, Norton believes that any comparison lies in the damage that happens when anyone (or anything) is left ‘motherless’.

“I think [the idea of the title, Motherless Brooklyn is expressed when] Laura says that, ‘We all need someone looking out for us.’ On an individual level, it’s a very lonely condition to not have anyone caring for you… Some people said to me, ‘Why are you going to… break your back trying to figure out on a budget how to effectively recreate Penn Station?’ It is kind of tilting at windmills, but it’s not nothing. The micro scale is that its lonely and sad and hard to be alone in the world and people should take care of each other. But, on the macro, it’s that, if our city is motherless, we lose Penn Station. We lose things that we’ll never get back… We lose some of the richest, most diverse communities in Brooklyn [and they] get replaced with the worst ghettos in the world, the projects. They literally [take] stable places, call them slums, rip them down and put up slums. There’s aesthetic loss. You lose the things that make a place great, like Penn Station, and to me it was like, you’ve got to see the ghost of what we lost. To make the subconscious point, these are the costs of allowing power to tell us all to get out of the way.” 

Using the shadows of its 1950s noir atmosphere, Brooklyn explore the perils of absolute power upon the average citizen. With this in mind, Norton believes that the corruptive nature of power takes root when authorities lose sight of the value of others.

According to Norton, “I think that part what creates the drive for power in some people is impatience with other human beings and a lack of authentic affection for [others]. I think we’re in an era where we’re seeing it expressed in a new resurgence of a very exclusionary idea of what America is, not only antagonistic to our actual ideals, but antagonistic to our whole history. That’s what’s so crazy about it. It’s like this romance for a thing that never existed in the first place. But it’s like what my friend (who is Mexican) said, ‘This is the Latin American hefe (or ‘dictator’) problem.’ There’s something base in us that responds to the audacity of someone [else] saying, ‘I’m going to punch through the inefficiency of us having to all work together and just get [stuff] done.’ It’s like some part of us goes, ‘yeah…’ It’s amazing that, in 2019, we’re actually still grappling with the idea that, under the right circumstances, people will elevate a bully.” 

While some might immediately assume that he is solely addressing the current presidency, Norton argues that abuses of power extend far beyond the Trump era.

“I think the thing that I was trying to look at is the idea that, in America, we’re supposed to know where the power is,” he continues. “It’s with us, right? That’s where it’s supposed to be. It’s not supposed to reside in places that we not only didn’t assign it, but we don’t realize that it has become outside of our purview… When where the power is [remains] unseen, that’s a truly dangerous situation because we’re walking around in democracy, thinking everything’s okay. We believe in the system and we don’t realize that there are forces dictating what’s really happening, that do not have our best interests in mind. That’s the most dangerous situation. To me, that’s as much about the Koch brothers as it is about Trump.” 

“The darker idea is that like there’s a mayor being inaugurated [who is] completely irrelevant and we’re about to learn that the guy who is patiently looking at his watch in the shadow of a column, whose face we haven’t seen…, is the one who calls all the shots. Whether you want to ascribe it to Citizens United or an intrinsic part of American life and capitalism that enormous amounts of power get amassed outside of the political system and to the degree that they own the political system or are evading the political system. That’s what Ralph Nader rightly said. ‘The great challenge of democracy will be whether people can retain the priority of human interest over corporate interests (he would say) … but the interest of power, basically.’” 

To hear full audio of our interview with Norton, click here.

Motherless Brooklyn uncovers the truth in theatres starting November 1st, 2019.

Filed Under: Film, Film Festivals, Interviews, TIFF Tagged With: Alec Baldwin, Bruce Willis, Chinatown, Edward Norton, film noir, Motherless Brooklyn

TIFF ’19: Motherless Brooklyn

September 14, 2019 by Steve Norton Leave a Comment

Written and directed by Edward Norton, Motherless Brooklyn tells the story of Lionel Essrog (Norton), a Brooklyn detective in post-war New York. Working with street smart private investigator Frank Minna (Bruce Willis), Lionel (who also goes by the name Brooklyn) and his team uncover the truth for hire. However, when Minna is shot and left for dead, Lionel determines to unravel the mystery, plunging him into a Brooklyn underworld riddled with crime, corruption and colourful characters. As his quest for truth leads him further up New York’s ladder of power, Lionel’s investigation is complicated by his Tourette syndrome, which leaves him prone to compulsive behavioural tics and inappropriate verbal outbursts.

Adapted from the 1999 novel of the same name, Brooklyn is a tightly written throwback film to classic Hollywood’s noir films like The Big Sleep or Chinatown. With a stellar cast and tightly written script, Norton creates a world which feels both foreign and familiar. While the film transports the audience back to 1950s New York, it also feels current in today’s culture, highlighting racial tensions and the growing divide between the upper and lower classes. Divided by racial and financial lines, Brooklyn is a city on the brink of chaos.Those that have little power are struggling to make their voices heard while those who have much fight ferociously to maintain it. 

As Brooklyn himself, Norton’s performance is sharp, engaging, and loving. At the same time, the character becomes a metaphor for the town for which he’s named. Diffused lighting and growing shadows point to tension between light and darkness, as Brooklyn (the character) attempts to uncover the truth about Brooklyn (the city). Like his compulsion to pull on the threads of his sweater, Brooklyn also must unravel the web of deception until the facts about his city is revealed.

Featuring strong performances and well-written script, Motherless Brooklyn is an entertaining and engaging return to the noir genre. Under the Norton’s direction, the film is also impressive visually, as the shadows and darkness of New York’s underworld are constantly warring against the light of truth. 

Motherless Brooklyn is currently playing at the Toronto International Film Festival. For more screenings, click here. 

Filed Under: Film, Film Festivals, Premieres, Reviews, TIFF Tagged With: Alec Baldwin, Bruce Willis, Edward Norton, Gugu Mbatha-Raw, Leslie Mann, Motherless Brooklyn, TIFF, TIFF19, Willem Dafoe

Isle of Dogs – It’s Cute, but It Has a Bite

April 16, 2018 by Darrel Manson Leave a Comment

If you’re looking for a movie to go to for the fun of it, let me share what my wife’s comment was when we came out of Wes Anderson’s Isle of Dogs: “It made me smile all the way through.” If you want a movie that allows us to consider some important issues in our world, Isle of Dogs fulfills that desire as well. This is one of the great examples of having a film that entertains well and at the same time goads our minds into active thought. It is very much like a cross-cultural extended parable.

(From L-R): Bryan Cranston as “Chief,” Bob Balaban as “King,” Koyu Rankin as “Atari Kobayashi,” Bill Murray as “Boss,” Edward Norton as “Rex” and Jeff Goldblum as “Duke” in the film ISLE OF DOGS.

Set in the near future in the Japanese city of Megasaki, there is disease spreading among the dog population. Fearing that the disease could spread to humans, Mayor Kobayashi decrees that all dogs will be deported to Trash Island, starting with his own family dog, Spots. Six months later, a small plane crashes on the island. As a small pack of dogs check this out, they discover a 12 year old boy as the pilot. Atari Kobayashi, the mayor’s nephew and ward, has come to look find his dog. The group sets off across the island to seek Spots.

It turns out the Mayor’s family has a history of animosity towards dogs and may have engineered the entire “crisis” as an excuse to finally eliminate all the dogs from Megasaki. As Atari and the dogs begin to discover the truth, it becomes a mission to bring down the government and restore the rights and lives of the doomed dogs.

The enjoyment of the film is very much like most of Anderson’s film. It is an inventive story that was developed by Anderson, Roman Coppola, Jason Schwartzman, and Kunichi Nomura. Part of the quirkiness of the film is that the dogs speak in English, but all the human characters speak in their native language (although the Japanese is nearly always translated to English). The voices are supplied by a long list of well-known actors including Bryan Cranston, Edward Norton, Jeff Goldbloom, Greta Gerwig, Scarlett Johansson, Liev Schreiber, F. Murray Abraham, Tilda Swinton, and Ken Watanabi.

But for all the canine enjoyment the film offers, it also has a bite. In a world filled with the politics of fear, Isle of Dogs reflects the reality of life in many places. Mayor Kobayashi uses dogs as a scapegoat, and in the process promotes his own power. This is not a new strategy—it is probably nearly as old as humanity itself. (We need to keep those Neanderthals away from our good people.) Watching not only the dogs and Atari, but the developing political situation in Megasaki makes it very clear that we are seeing the kind of things that go on around the world every day. Most importantly though, we should be reflecting on the ways these dynamics are taking place within our own society.

Every time the President speaks of the rapists and drug dealers that come from Mexico, he is attempting to stoke fear. The fears do not have to be legitimate—only believed. Islamophobia, homophobia, xenophobia, and racial prejudice are all attempts to create fear so that someone else can gain a bit more power. When we allow those fears to rule the day, it means we will likely cede more power to those who claim we need protection. But, as we also see in the film, the truth and determination can eventually defeat the lies that are spread.

Photos Courtesy of Fox Searchlight Pictures. © 2018 Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation All Rights Reserved

Filed Under: Film, Reviews Tagged With: Bill Murray, Bryan Cranston, comedy, Edward Norton, Japan, Jason Schwartzman, Jeff Goldblum, Liev Schreiber, Roman Coppola, Scarlett Johansson, stop motion animation, Wes Anderson

1on1 w/Allan Loeb (screenwriter, COLLATERAL BEAUTY)

December 26, 2016 by Steve Norton Leave a Comment

collateral

https://screenfish.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/1on1-with-Alan-Loeb-writer-Collateral-Beauty.mp3

One last present under the Christmas tree! This week, Steve has the privilege to speak with screenwriter Allan Loeb (21, WALL STREET: MONEY NEVER SLEEPS) about his latest film, COLLATERAL BEAUTY, which stars Will Smith and Helen Mirren. They chat about love, death and the nature of fables.

A special thanks to Allan for joining us on the show!

15021626_83452_still_2_s-high

Filed Under: Film, Interviews, Podcast Tagged With: 21, Allan Loeb, Christmas, Christmas movie, Collateral Beauty, death, drama, Edward Norton, film, Helen Mirren, interview, Kate Winslet, Keira Knightley, life, Michael Pena, Oscars, Wall Street, Will Smith

Collateral Beauty – Arguing with the Cosmos

December 16, 2016 by Darrel Manson Leave a Comment

“When something starts with a six year old dying, nothing’s going to feel right.”

Unresolved grief fills and drives Collateral Beauty. The film opens with a joyful Howard (Will Smith) presiding over his ad agency’s Christmas party, reminding his employees that they make connections with people through three key concepts: time, love, and death. Then the film jumps ahead three years. The joy is gone from the office. While others quietly work, Howard spends days at a time building elaborate domino structures, just to knock down the first block and walk away. Obviously something has happened.

Three of his partners, Whit (Edward Norton), Claire (Kate Winslet), and Simon (Michael Peña) watch this, wondering when Howard will snap out of it. The business is beginning to suffer. And they have an offer to buy the agency, but Howard won’t even talk with them. So they hatch a plan they hope will bring Howard back—or if not, be evidence that he is incompetent.CB40594.DNG

They come across three actors, Brigitte (Helen Mirren), Amy (Keira Knightly), and Raffi (Jacob Lattimore), who operate out of a very off, off Broadway theatre (The Hegel Theatre). But perhaps it is the actors who really find them. When it is discovered that Howard has written angry letters to Time, Love, and Death, the coworkers hire the actors to confront Howard as Time (Raffi), Love (Amy), and Death (Brigitte). In time the seeming hallucinations drive Howard to a grieving parent group when the leader (Naomie Harris) connects with him. But it turns out that the three coworkers also have their own issues that need to be addressed. As the co-workers work with the actors to focus on Howard, Time, Love, and Death also seem to speak Whit, Claire, and Simon as well.

Besides working well on the level of plot and character, this is a film that also provides some philosophical depth. (Note the theatre’s name.) As the actors confront Howard as the cosmic personae, the discussions become heated and quickly move into more complex ideas that many films would not want to touch on. Because these are impassioned philosophical discussions, they never become off-putting or overly cerebral. But the film does respect the audience’s intelligence and ability to comprehend that ideas being presented without talking down.15021626_83452_still_2_s-high

Along the way, as Howard vents his rage at the cosmic forces, he gives voice to all the pain and anger that can often accompany grief. That pain and anger includes religious concepts that never seem adequate for people in the time of loss. He is an equal opportunity ranter. He takes on Christian, Buddhist, and secular ways that we use to try to explain away the pain of death.collateral

It should be noted that a simpler film would have just set Howard against his idea of God but, through blaming these non-divine cosmic forces, we can still imply that Howard is rebelling against a divinity he finds inadequate. (Although there is a certain Trinitarian vibe to the trio of Time, Love, and Death.) In this, Howard is the newest incarnation of Job. He is willing to state his case that the way the universe works is wrong. Like Job, Howard receives answers that may be less comforting than he wants, but in the challenge of confronting the questions there is an opening for him to begin to find a way through the pain to see again that there is beauty in the world and his life.

 

Filed Under: Film, Reviews Tagged With: Edward Norton, grief, Helen Mirren, Jacob Lattimore, Job, Kate Winslet, Keira Knightley, Michael Pena, Naomie Harris, Will Smith

Primary Sidebar

THE SF NEWS

Get a special look, just for you.

sf podcast

Hot Off the Press

  • 7.17 Culture and Carnage in GODZILLA VS. KONG
  • Held: Stuck in a Marriage You Can’t Get Out Of
  • My True Fairytale – With Superpowers?
  • The Last Right – Acts of Grace
  • O Canada! Telefilm Canada launches new site devoted to Canadian film
Find tickets and showtimes on Fandango.

where faith and film are intertwined

film and television carry stories which remind us of the stories God has woven since the beginning of time. come with us on a journey to see where faith and film are intertwined.

Footer

ScreenFish Articles

7.17 Culture and Carnage in GODZILLA VS. KONG

Held: Stuck in a Marriage You Can’t Get Out Of

  • About ScreenFish
  • Privacy Policy

© 2021 · ScreenFish.net · Built by Aaron Lee