Split Decision: "The Fabelmans"
Friday, January 6, 2023 at 9:30AM No two people feel the same exact way about any film. Thus, Team Experience is pairing up to debate the merits of each of the big awards season movies this year. Here’s Ben Miller and Eurocheese to argue over The Fabelmans
EUROCHEESE: Ben, I've never been a huge Spielberg defender, so here's my chance! I was bound to see The Fabelmans through rose-colored glasses because I saw its glowing reception with Steven Spielberg and John Williams in person at the AFI Festival. Even so, scene after scene landed with me and I left the theater smiling ear-to-ear. I'm curious to hear what didn't land with you...
BEN MILLER: Personally, it all felt so phony. I saw everything he was trying to do as the same thing everyone gets on Marvel or Star Wars for. He was too invested in giving us Spielbergian Easter eggs to focus on a coherent story. It's one thing to share little tidbits about growing up if you are an up-and-coming director without the hits, but we are talking about the most famous and mainstream director of the last 45 years! Hell, it's audacious to call this an Original Screenplay. This is essentially an adaptation of Susan Lacy's 2017 documentary Speilberg.
EUROCHEESE: Well, I doubt I'll turn you around on the film but I enjoyed the Easter eggs. Coherent? It plays more like a series of vignettes from his childhood. In vignette films some scenes always work better than others. But I was surprised by how funny I often found the film, and I'm glad it didn't delve into his successes as a director. This could have easily waded into self-aggrandizing territory that no Master should attempt.
He may have handled his own past with kid gloves, but Spielberg has always maintained a sense of childlike wonder in his films, and that's translated to some of his highest watermarks. It made sense to me that he would look back at his own life like that and with a touch of humor. The Fabelmans felt like stories recounted at a reunion, calling back to the glory days while still having enough self-awareness to realize you've thrown in a few fibs. Over the years your story becomes a mix of facts and fables.
Were there any pieces that worked for you as standalones? While the parents' storyline was a bit long-winded for my taste, the high school girlfriend (I'll grant you definitely exaggerated) hit the spot for me, and you can't tell me there was a more joyful movie ending in 2022 than this one!
BEN MILLER: I LOVED Chloe East! One thing the film was definitely missing was hormones and she was more than willing to oblige. She comes in like an absolute firecracker, and never failed to make me laugh.
While I didn't fall head over heels in love with Judd Hirsch (his character feels like an early-film deus ex machina), I was also REALLY on board with Paul Dano. Williams is the manic pixie dream mom and Dano is the quiet dorky force which propels the movie. He is the standout in the cast. As for the ending, yes, I'll admit it was great...especially the camera pan up. It was a pretty good year, actually, for directors playing other directors (shoutout to Spike Jonze for the awesomely unhinged Otto in Babylon). And Lynch is perfect as John Ford.
EUROCHEESE: I'm with you on Hirsch actually, but MAN, my audience just ate him up. Mid-movie applause for his exit. I liked Dano quite a bit, and I appreciated his muted tones, which fit his character perfectly. LaBelle was my favorite, pulling the film together mostly by responding to all the storylines with a believable central throughline that felt surprisingly lived-in. Even Rogen might be giving his best performance on screen. And I hope to see Chloe East again soon!
BEN MILLER: I have a feeling Michelle Williams (who I usually am all about) is the majority of my problem with the movie. I could not get on board with anything about either the character or her performance. I'm assuming you were a big fan. Talk me into it.
EUROCHEESE: Of all the BIG performances this year (Mark Rylance, Margot Robbie, Mia Goth... and at least a dozen others), this might still be the most over-the-top. In early scenes it felt misguided and tonally out of sync with the movie. Still, when the story moved away from her and came back, something fell into place for me. His mother was a larger-than-life figure who shaped his whole world and clearly had some struggles he didn't understand at a young age. When she brought the same high energy while trying to reconnect with him, it recontextualized her. This was a woman who wasn't able to control herself. An adult might see red flags in a person like this, but a child (especially her child) would likely see her as adventurous and mysterious. I need to rewatch the film to see if this take holds after another viewing, but even if this is a case of a big swing crossing over into "way too much" territory, Williams ultimately moved back into the positive column for me. While it's not one of my favorite star turns of the year I would call it one of the bravest. It also might be the only way Spielberg could paint a portrait of his mother that made sense to him. I do wish we felt more of their initial bond to help understand the sting of them being at odds by the time he's a teenager.
BEN MILLER: There's a really interesting point to be made about how your audience applauded Hirsch. In my screening, I felt like the whole film was a joke I wasn't in on. Every choreographed laugh and story beat was tailor-made for an audience to react to. The Hirsch scene and the John Ford scenes, especially. And that's Spielberg's greatest trick. He has somehow convinced the world he is this avant-garde film dork who only cares about the "reality" of film while simultaneously being a very conventional and commercial filmmaker. He is an exceptional visual director, but I think his true genius is in his ability to know what an audience wants. My biggest shock in regards to The Fabelmans has been its relative lack of box office success. This feels like a movie that people would be flocking to. But maybe it's just bad luck (competing with Black Panther and Avatar = no-win situation).
As for Williams, Spielberg obviously has complicated feelings about his mother. I don't have a problem with going big, but it felt like the Family Guy skit about Dharma & Greg. I get quirks, and I get the free spirit, but it became way too much. Like you, I connected much more with LaBelle, but mostly in the quieter moments. Most of my issues with The Fabelmans are script-related, and when he starts espousing platitudes about how he made the school bully look like he could fly, that stuff lost me. It's true that kids rarely act like real kids in movies, but this film was a terrible perpetrator. Julia Butters (through no fault of her own) was in the same boat playing Spielberg's sister.
Maybe I'm being too harsh. I just saw the film as Spielberg getting lost in celebrating his own mythology. "Hey, did you know I was Jewish?" "Did you know I love the spectacle of movies?" "Did I ever tell you about the time I met John Ford?" I wasn't expecting one of the most celebrated filmmakers of my lifetime to attempt something this phony.
EUROCHEESE: For me, it felt more like a magic trick than something phony. As a director he's always earnestly tried to please the audience. This movie speaks to why that's the case, though. His filmmaking was built on making an impact. I'm generally not a fan of catering to an audience so directly, but Spielberg gets away with it in ways other directors wouldn't dare. As for its box office, not only was it a losing battle against the CG blockbusters I suspect it was a case of expectations. I walked into it thinking it was what general audiences would call a "homework movie" about a boy struggling with family issues. What I found inside was a popcorn film. Its charms worked on me, and if I'm a sucker for getting pulled into his showmanship, well, I'm happy to be suckered.
- All Quiet on the Western Front - poetic or vacuous?
- Babylon - thrilling or interminable?
- Everything Everywhere All At Once - essential or exhausting?
- TÁR - utterly engrossing or underwhelming?
- Triangle of Sadness - facile or multi-faceted?
- The Whale - moving or just plain bad?
Reader Comments (28)
It was a dream. I felt the half time interruption at the cinema as a violence to me as a spectator. Spielberg better work since the nineties. Also one of John Williams better works.
My favourite performances were Labelle, Dano and Julia Butters. I infintively love Michelle Williams but that haircut is a big NO for me.
SPOILER:
Loved that he chose Lynch to play John Ford, announced in the movie as the "greatest living film director"
I didn't hate it. I enjoyed parts of it. But it was far too long. I agree with a lot of Ben's comments and his rationale.
I really didn't enjoy Michelle Williams or Paul Dano. For me, they were miscast.
I see this movie as this year 'The Irishman'. Love it at madness or hate it movie from one the most important living directors, probably going home with 0 Oscars
I never bought into the truth of the project. It is about being Jewish. The generation of Robin Bartlett, Judd Hirsch and the great Jeannie Berliner would never produce a next generation of white bread progeny the likes of Paul Dano and Michelle Williams.
I’d rather have seen Adrien Brody and Mayim Bialik.
A thing I noted is that often when people discuss about this movie they concentrate on the family storyline and not so much on the "wanna work in movies but people think is just an hobby or that the industry will rip me apart but I keep going cause I love it" storyline. INMHO the latter is the real heart of the movie and this as a cinema worker make me love this movie so much.
I adored this movie. I felt the thing that worked and shocked me was that all the Spielberg glitter and nostalgia seemed in service of something darker and disturbing he couldn't keep hidden--the distancing and controlling power the camera gives him. (That's why the final "joke" is so funny and slightly queasy in a great way.) It wasn't just a salute to movies...it was a salute and a critique. The Kushner script would make a great companion piece with his work for the musical Caroline or Change. My spouse was shaking and had to turn away during the "editing" discovery scene because it struck such a true note.
I really loved "The Fabelmans." Spielberg has had a tendency in the past to be too schmaltzy. The framing of "Saving Private Ryan" is so guilty of that. But "The Fabelmans" shows that Spielberg has sanded off that tendency to a nice edge. This is not a brutal film about family, but it is told with such generosity of feeling and honesty that made me so grateful for the experience. I do think Michelle Williams is the worst thing about the film. I think I prefer her in more naturalistic performances. I don't think it's a masterpiece, but I do think it's a unique film in Spielberg's oeuvre for its intimacy. I actually would love a sequel of young Fabelman in his early years in Hollywood.
This was the seasons biggest letdown,the title annoyed me from the start,why is it called The Fabelmans.
I found it fairly heartfelt but for Spielberg and family only with bland characters and many long boring scenes and I really wanted to like it but the more it went on the less I did like it.
The bullying scenes we're so obviously done and the actors playing in them woeful.
Michelle Williams in Grayson Perry drag is the least believable she has ever been,she seemed to be acting in a bubble of her own,is this really being considered as one of the 5 Best Actress achievements of the year.
The Judd Hirsch scene was so contrived though he blustered the hell out of it.
The only 2 characters I liked we're Labelle who was far more handsome than Spielberg ever was and Dano,they created at least some sort of chemistry.
Did we really need a film as ordinary as this to tell us Spielberg was Jewish and didn't know how to handle it and that it most likely helped rather than hindered him.
The only good bits we're him attempting to make it as a film director,I enjoyed those bits a lot.
The film was missing what makes Spielberg's film special,those cinema moments he can create,every scene was like the one before and it's no crowd pleaser.
Did I say I thought Williams was flat out awful especially during the editing montage moment,I felt zero for this woman.
It's funny that the main thing we heard at first was how amazing Michelle Williams is and how she's a threat for the win... and throughout the season, she's been one of the consistent acknowledgments of the film.
Yet, all I hear now is she was terrible, or her performance didn't work... or at best, the viewer "came around" to her performance.
I haven't seen this film and really have no interest honestly, but now I am kinda curious about her performance now...
Also, regarding box office - this could've been a crowd pleasing hit back when people really went to the movies. Nowadays, it seems extraordinary for a movie that isn't comic book / superhero / reboot / remake to really do business.
Philip H i think opinions will differ but I found her 100 per cent unbelievable,the voice,the mannerisms,most of her dialogue,I couldn't wait to get back to Labelle.
Opinions differ for sure, but I do feel the majority of what I've read have found issues w her performance in the film.
Really loved this article.
I loved the movie when I saw it, but have found my feelings waffling. I see both sides of the conversation.
@PP92: I think you articulated it well for me. I loved the story of a kid reconciling his passion with his future. What's fascinating is watching him realize that his gifts have consequences (such as discovering his Mom's affair, shaping how people see the bully). Gabriel LaBelle is fantastic.
Michelle Williams' performance loses power with me every day. I don't love the "this person isn't X so they shouldn't play X," but you do feel the inauthenticity of Williams.
I think you're all crazy. I'm Kidding but i do LOVE this movie.
I am so baffled by it having so many detractors. all the things that come up in conversations about critiques feel utterly intentional to me from Michelle Williams heightened performance (Nick Davis reminded me last week of how utterly "extra" the real Spielberg Mom was at the 1993 Oscars) to the vignette structure, to the "overly written" dialogue, to even the title (fabelmans is a PERFECT homophonic title for a film about the family of a mythmaker) to basically everything.
I think it's Spielbergs best film since 1993.
Nat I do not see what you saw at all but am glad you found something to enjoy in this underwhelming film landscape.
My critique is not intentional,as a Spielberg fan I wanted to love it but I found it tediously boring and mostly badly acted and the one good thing LaBelle seems to be getting less praise than the established names,this baffles me,he is the only genuine thing and his scenes sing,Dano was fine but Michelle sheesh.
Are you serious about it being his best in 30 years when Saving Private Ryan,AI,Lincoln,Munich,Minority Report,Catch Me If You Can and West Side Story exist.
I'm very much on the "I hate Michelle Williams' performance" train for this film and I never say that. It's a weird place to be, but I honestly cringe every time I see a photo of her in that wig. Dano was by far the standout for me.
Michelle Williams gives a truly embarrassing performance, like the assignment was portraying a creepy marionette doll. It’s a garish and offputting turn from her, I can’t imagine why people liked it.
I would honestly go farther than Nathaniel. To me, it's his best picture since E.T., way back in 1982. Also, I was skeptical of Williams on the first watch but must say that both she and Dano improved on re-watch. The fact some people keep bringing up the wig - a replica of the haircut sported by Spielberg's own mother - when lambasting the performance is very weird to me.
Reading this, knowing about the best and worst aspects noted by you, it seems like The Fabelmans have all things I usually hate on Spielberg’s filmography. I personally dislike some of his most acclaimed works (ET, Private Ryan, Lincoln) and love things like Munich, Empire of the Sun and Catch Me If You Can. Maybe I should pass this one by fear of having the adorable Michelle Williams in a bad performance.
Wow, I am cool on the movie overall but feel Williams is the highlight! She brings vivacity and idiosyncrasy to a film that is oddly stodgy. Her bigger-than-life creative energy is key to making us understand Spielberg's (oops, Sammy's) closeness to her.
The worst thing about the movie, darlings, is LaBelle's EYES! They are not the same color as the child actor playing the character and he looks like an alien! Although maybe this was an intentional nod to ET! LOL.
I'm in the "I hate Williams" camp. I've always loved her, this is the first time I've seen a bad performane from her. She's in a completely different film. Manic pixie dream mom. Every single second is cringe inducing. It's not her fault, completely. Spielberg's direction and screenplay are all over the place. The entire high school bully middle section is never ending, cliched, extremely poorly written and obvios. I honestly don't get the love for this film. On the bright side, I thought the lead kid out acted everyone in it.
Claudio are you really serious that The Fabelmans is a better film than classics like S/List,ET and Jurassic Park.
It is certainly an okay film but I can't believe for 1 second anyone could place this above Schindler's List or Jurassic Park or ET
For everyone who says they don't like it someone pops up and says it's his best in 30 or 40 years,I cant get behind hyperbole like that.
If someone had said his best in 10 or 15 years i'd still disagree but saying it's better than his classic films seems misguided.
Mr Ripley79 -- It's not hyperbole, merely my opinion. If you can't believe it can differ from yours, that's just a lack of imagination. Curious you bring up SCHINDLER'S LIST since I don't even think it's his best film from 1993, and it contains one or two sequences that give me great pause. For the record, there were two films I may rank above THE FABELMANS depending on my mood - LINCOLN and EMPIRE OF THE SUN - but I'm feeling exceptionally generous towards the newest picture right now. Moreover, I may love AI more, but I can't entirely ignore its fragilities, its faults. Indeed, they are what makes me love it so much.
Maybe I just have a very wacky personal ranking of Spielberg's oeuvre.
It's nothing to do with my imagination because I do believe and enjoy the fact you have a different opinion but to say it's his best in 40 years seems to me like contrariness for contrariness sake but each to his own.
I think most would agree that JP,ET and S/List are classic films,maybe not personal faves but they changed the film landscape,they are cultural films that ingrained themselves into society and the director's career,I don't see that happening with this particular film
I found the movie very stylized. I Really liked Paul Dano and the young boy . I thought Michelle Williams very weak in the role ( I usually like her as an actress... but not here)
it seems I aim not the only one feeling this way. It definitely is not one of Spielbergs' greatest.
"Most of my issues with The Fabelmans are script-related, and when he starts espousing platitudes about how he made the school bully look like he could fly, that stuff lost me. It's true that kids rarely act like real kids in movies, but this film was a terrible perpetrator. Julia Butters (through no fault of her own) was in the same boat playing Spielberg's sister."
100% agree, esp. w/ the first point. Teenage boys simply do not process w/ each other the way these two did here. It was so jarring, it took me out of the story. I overall enjoyed the movie but I think it's far short of being some sort of masterwork. It's middling Spielberg at best.
I honestly think that Spielberg will only be *truly* appreciated by film pundits after his death, just like Hitchcock was. Hitch was also famous for caring about what the audience wanted (his famous quote about his movies being a "piece of cake" instead of a piece of life can also be applied to Spielberg). No other director has ever made me feel so much in the movie theater; I always connect with his films (except for BFG and 1941) and I find his narratives so accessible and full of life, of humanity (his films and themes never get old); also, his childlike curiosity and wonderstruck approach to cinema is IMO one of his biggest qualities; going to the movie theater, for me, has always felt like a childlike experience, despite of the film: it's all about opening your heart for the next experience and be vulnerable, be curious about it, be open for what it may tell/show you.
As it regards The Fabelmans, I don't think it's his masterpiece, I don't think it's best movie since 1993 (Munich, AI, Minority Report, Catch me..., I love Bridge of Spies and I'm still impressed by West Side Story, considering how much I love the original film), but it's a very honest, visually striking beautiful film. I find quiet funny how so many people want to say how he should've portrayed his OWN MOTHER, come on now. It's the way he remembers her, I felt that was so obvious in the film; it's not supposed to be realistic, it's a freaking 1940s film produced in 2022, that's what it is (and I'm sure James Stewart would've played his father, but who would've played his mother? Funny exercise). He's revisiting his parents and trying to freeze, to survive them in film.
Spielberg didn't go to college like many of his 1970s friends, his narrative is built through his passion for movies, his collaborations and his appreciation of spectators - that's how he became so intuitive. And of course many of his films will feel very "commercial" once he became so successful in the 80s that his style have been simulated and imitated for 40 years - he's the definition of commercial, but his style was already there, his tendencies were already there before he became a box-office juggernaut.
I could keep writing about him all day, but I'll finish by saying that it's truly remarkable that he's been so universally relevant for 6 decades (I'm a young director from Brazil and my relationship to cinema have always been marked throughout time by Spielberg films).
Fascinating discussion here. I come out somewhere in the middle of all this - liked but didn't love the movie, was a bit put off by Michelle Williams' performance but appreciated what she was trying to do. Judd Hirsch didn't do anything for me, but agree that Dano and LaBelle were best in show.
I think this works much better as a movie about moviemaking than it does a movie about Spielberg as a person. It's especially, almost discomfitingly good at highlighting the power of the filmmaker to manipulate (truth, emotions, self-perception) - the whole narrative with the high school bully is built around that, which is probably why it doesn't feel all that realistic.
“I find quiet funny how so many people want to say how he should've portrayed his OWN MOTHER, come on now.”
Does this mean Spielberg/Williams can do no wrong in presenting this character and we should all shut up and appreciate it? No thanks, I’ll pass on that.
20th Century Women came to mind as a miraculous depiction of a complicated, eccentric mother…as much as the filmmaking romanticizes her, Bening doesn’t. That’s where Williams goes disastrously wrong.