Thursday
Apr142016
Andrew Garfield: free from Hollywood's web
Thursday, April 14, 2016 at 3:18PM For our impromptu and informal Actors Month, members of Team Experience were free to choose any actor they wanted to discuss. Here's David on Hollywood's outgoing Spider-Man.
Andrew Garfield wasn't made for Hollywood; an interview with Vulture last year saw him raging at the very convention of interviews themselves, tired of the constant insistence on self-analysis and invasion of privacy. He was, however, born in Los Angeles, with a father who dreamt of Hollywood - but the Garfield family moved back to his mother's English homeland when Andrew was just four years old. Now he is, by his own admission, firmly transatlantic, "equally at home in both places". He has fulfilled his father's latent dreams of movie stardom, but Garfield grew up on the British stage, an arena where character comes first and celebrity is a rare imposition. Many commentators have made note of how many British actors have taken on major roles in Hollywood franchises, but none seem so conflicted and contradictory about their place there as Garfield.
He is the epitome of a 21st century movie star: his childhood adoration of Spider-Man carried through to his performance, a protective defence of character in the face of the huge Hollywood machine that churned out those disappointing films. He loves the product but hates the process; being on the inside has soured him. Interviews rolling in during the promotion of last year's 99 Homes gave us plenty of soundbites on his disillusion with the industry and the ensuing celebrity. This was an attitude which chimed perfectly with the pessimism and gloom of the film itself, in which Garfield's character reluctantly enters a similarly brutal system and despises his own part within it.
Despite now being 32, Garfield might have been too young to enter such a huge franchise, though the pressure on the two Amazing Spider-Man films came more from the need to rescue the character from his previous critical mauling. But where an older actor like Christian Bale had more wisdom and control in shaping the reinvention of a familiar character, Garfield's position was wounded by the very vulnerability that made him such perfect casting in the first place. It may also, perversely, have set him up for a more rewarding career than we could ever have dreamt of. Would his performance in 99 Homes have been so resonant if the actor didn't have that deep understanding of betraying his own values?
Boy ABrits of a certain age may recall first seeing that messy hair and gawky teenage face in Sugar Rush, a cult British lesbian teenage drama where Garfield’s character pined hopelessly for the main character, even though her own eyes were firmly lusting after her best friend. He used the same hangdog impression to devastating, BAFTA-winning effect in Boy A, a searing film directed by Brooklyn helmer John Crowley. Garfield played a young man released from secure unit, where he’d been since childhood for his part in the murder of a classmate. Writing at the time on a Blogspot long consigned to the ashes of the internet, I gushed about "Garfield's superb, poignant, disconcertingly familiar performance”, and I can’t disagree with the truth of that awkward turn of phrase: watching it back now, Garfield is astonishingly frank and open, laying bare a complex well of feelings of guilt, confusion, fear and hope for the audience to examine.
Roles in dark TV drama Red Riding and low-key film adaptation of Kazuo Ishiguro's tenderly cynical Never Let Me Go also exploited Garfield's emotional perspicacity to keen effect, placing him against drained, bare backgrounds that did little to diffuse the idea of Britain as a grim, cold environment but gave his implosion of naivety an appropriately melancholic fatigue. Garfield's next project, and the film that would prove his Hollywood big break, was David Fincher's The Social Network. The milieu was still downbeat and dark, but Fincher's style lent it a glossiness appropriate to the currency of the subject, and used Garfield's keen intellect for the Eduardo Saverin to Jesse Eisenberg's impossibly difficult Mark Zuckerberg.
The Social Network
He is the epitome of a 21st century movie star: his childhood adoration of Spider-Man carried through to his performance, a protective defence of character in the face of the huge Hollywood machine that churned out those disappointing films. He loves the product but hates the process; being on the inside has soured him. Interviews rolling in during the promotion of last year's 99 Homes gave us plenty of soundbites on his disillusion with the industry and the ensuing celebrity. This was an attitude which chimed perfectly with the pessimism and gloom of the film itself, in which Garfield's character reluctantly enters a similarly brutal system and despises his own part within it.
Despite now being 32, Garfield might have been too young to enter such a huge franchise, though the pressure on the two Amazing Spider-Man films came more from the need to rescue the character from his previous critical mauling. But where an older actor like Christian Bale had more wisdom and control in shaping the reinvention of a familiar character, Garfield's position was wounded by the very vulnerability that made him such perfect casting in the first place. It may also, perversely, have set him up for a more rewarding career than we could ever have dreamt of. Would his performance in 99 Homes have been so resonant if the actor didn't have that deep understanding of betraying his own values?
Boy ABrits of a certain age may recall first seeing that messy hair and gawky teenage face in Sugar Rush, a cult British lesbian teenage drama where Garfield’s character pined hopelessly for the main character, even though her own eyes were firmly lusting after her best friend. He used the same hangdog impression to devastating, BAFTA-winning effect in Boy A, a searing film directed by Brooklyn helmer John Crowley. Garfield played a young man released from secure unit, where he’d been since childhood for his part in the murder of a classmate. Writing at the time on a Blogspot long consigned to the ashes of the internet, I gushed about "Garfield's superb, poignant, disconcertingly familiar performance”, and I can’t disagree with the truth of that awkward turn of phrase: watching it back now, Garfield is astonishingly frank and open, laying bare a complex well of feelings of guilt, confusion, fear and hope for the audience to examine. Roles in dark TV drama Red Riding and low-key film adaptation of Kazuo Ishiguro's tenderly cynical Never Let Me Go also exploited Garfield's emotional perspicacity to keen effect, placing him against drained, bare backgrounds that did little to diffuse the idea of Britain as a grim, cold environment but gave his implosion of naivety an appropriately melancholic fatigue. Garfield's next project, and the film that would prove his Hollywood big break, was David Fincher's The Social Network. The milieu was still downbeat and dark, but Fincher's style lent it a glossiness appropriate to the currency of the subject, and used Garfield's keen intellect for the Eduardo Saverin to Jesse Eisenberg's impossibly difficult Mark Zuckerberg.
The Social NetworkIt wasn't Garfield's first time playing American - he'd made his Hollywood debut in the misbegotten Lions for Lambs, making a mark as a disillusioned student - but this was where he cemented the essential fibres of his on-screen persona, combatting Eisenberg's eccentricities with his own unique character. Garfield brought to both Savarin and Peter Parker a British kind of Americanness: a blind trust in human goodness undercut by a savvy self-doubt, questioning how that morality manifests within his own character. In what is perhaps The Social Network’s most famous scene, Saverin seems embarrassed by his own defiance, as Garfield moves forward with an overdetermined stride, rage and shame overcoming him. He hisses that he’s going to sue for the whole company, but the inevitable sense of his loss (of the company, rather than any money) hangs in the shadow of Zuckerberg’s continued infamy.
Hacksaw RidgeTaking on the role of Peter Parker rather ironically seemed to corrupt Andrew Garfield, whose curtness in interviews seemed to turn to bitterness, though his cutting honesty has never abated. Dropped from the Spider-Man part in favour of fellow Brit Tom Holland, Garfield fled back to independent, auteur-led filmmaking, and thankfully, big names were ready to welcome him after a prolonged absence from non-superhero cinema. 2016 sees him in films from Martin Scorsese and, more surprisingly, Mel Gibson. The latter, Hacksaw Ridge, sees Garfield tackling a different kind of iconic American fighter, the soldier - though a conscientious objector. Most tantalisingly, he’s signed up to bring Angels in America back to the London stage. Forever, perhaps, the outsider on the inside, Andrew Garfield’s small filmography looks set to blossom from the ashes of a failed superhero stint. Hopefully Hollywood has learnt as many lessons as the actor it wronged.
What would your ideal project for Mr. Garfield be?
Hacksaw RidgeTaking on the role of Peter Parker rather ironically seemed to corrupt Andrew Garfield, whose curtness in interviews seemed to turn to bitterness, though his cutting honesty has never abated. Dropped from the Spider-Man part in favour of fellow Brit Tom Holland, Garfield fled back to independent, auteur-led filmmaking, and thankfully, big names were ready to welcome him after a prolonged absence from non-superhero cinema. 2016 sees him in films from Martin Scorsese and, more surprisingly, Mel Gibson. The latter, Hacksaw Ridge, sees Garfield tackling a different kind of iconic American fighter, the soldier - though a conscientious objector. Most tantalisingly, he’s signed up to bring Angels in America back to the London stage. Forever, perhaps, the outsider on the inside, Andrew Garfield’s small filmography looks set to blossom from the ashes of a failed superhero stint. Hopefully Hollywood has learnt as many lessons as the actor it wronged. What would your ideal project for Mr. Garfield be?
Reader Comments (8)
I met him a few years ago in a pub in London.
My bf LOVES him, but was away at the time. I explained to Andrew how disappointed my bf would be that he missed him. So Andrew phoned him, and left him an extremely charming and witty answerphone message.
For that reason, I will forever think he great.
I liked Garfield best in "Never Let Me Go", mind you, I haven't seen "99 Homes" yet. Big comic book/blockbuster films seem to sap a lot of energy out of actors. Personally I'm grateful that he escaped them, look at Robert Downey Jr. - one of the best actors and he doesn't do anything but Iron Man.
I wouldn't mind seeing Garfield tackle a comedy, it would be interesting to see if he could pull it off.
Otherwise he should just keep doing what he's doing.
I first saw Andrew Garfield in The Social Network. He impressed me so much that I went through his previous works. Boy A and Never Let Me Go were both real gems.
When we examine his filmography, the two Spider-man films look out of place. It was Hollywood's mistake for casting him and his mistake for wanting/taking the role. Everyone makes mistakes; I just don't understand how this particular one ever came to pass.
Glad to see him back on the indies-and-stage track, where he belongs.
LadyEdith: And when RDJ tried to do something substantive outside of Iron Man? The result was The Judge, a movie that's simultaneously massively cliched and far too gross to be the comfort food that such a cliche movie should be, cemented by one of the most atrocious five second moments (Our hero, ladies and gentlemen: He might have molested his child.) EVER. Will EASILY go down as one of the five worst movies to be a Big 8 (Picture, Director, Acting and Screenplay) nominee in the 2010s.
I don't think his work in the Spider-Man films were his fault. I blame it more on the studio and the script as he never really did much to make the character be fun and engaging.
Steven: My big hope for the next franchise is that they're obsessed with Doc Ock in the way the original franchise was obsessed with the Goblin's, but a bit more subtly then by making Ock the first movie's villain. (Start with someone who hasn't been spotlit. Mysterio, Kraven the Hunter, The Vulture at the outside.) How do you communicate being addicted with Ock without that? Have Peter Parker's first girlfriend be Carolyn "Lady Ock" Trainer. Fill in the gaps as necessary.
Another of my screen loves - even if (or perhaps because?) he bears an uncanny resemblance to an ex-boyfriend who it took me the better part of a decade to get over.
First noticed him in "The Imaginarium of Dr. Parnassus," which most people remember (if at all) for Heath Ledger, but I thought AG was delightful in it. Sealed the deal with "The Social Network," and I liked him as Peter Parker and rather enjoyed Amazing Spider-Man 1 though I never bothered to see the second one. Overall am glad he's out of all that - he can, and should, do better work. He was good in "99 Homes," even if I couldn't escape the feeling he was physically miscast.
A tear for him and Emma Stone - they were truly adorable together.
I also first noticed him in "The Imaginarium of Dr. Parnassus" and was quite impressed. "Never Let Me Go" is one of my very favorite films of the last decade, and while it's really Carey Mulligan's show, he's extremely effective in it. So I was already a fan before "The Social Network".
I thought the Spider-Man films were a godawful mess that only made the Tobey Maguire/Sam Raimi films look better... but I don't blame it on Garfield at all, he was okay in them. They were just completely wrongly conceived and entirely unnecessary, and a big disappointment coming from the guy who made "(500) Days of Summer", which I consider the millennial "Annie Hall"!