American Fiction reviews

[Mister Tee]

I saw this just before Christmas, and wish I'd written about it before I fell sick, while my impressions were fresher. I think of it as often very funny (I laughed out loud quite a bit), with a cutting-edge premise that keeps topping itself for a long stretch, and also offers some surprising detours. (Wright's mini-debate with Issa Rae shows unexpected respect for her arguments, even if it doesn't fully side with her.) The script also manages to keep things on a realistic plane, with characters that struck me as believable/relatable -- not an easy balance to achieve, when a wildly satirical plot is in motion around them.

Yet, with all that, I only rate it a B+ film, and I'm not entirely sure why (one reason I wish I had my initial-viewing memory at hand). I wouldn't fully agree with Sabin, to the point of calling the non-literary (family/romantic) stuff boring. I liked the sly observations of family friction: the teasing relationship between Wright and Tracey Ellis Ross; the subtle digs Uggams lands on Wright; and, most impressive, the complicated sibling-brother gestalt, with the far more chaotic Brown obviously his mother's favorite despite Wright's clearly life-long efforts. As for the romance with the lady across the street...it was nothing earth-shaking, but compelling enough, with a relatable-for-me moment: how does a writer deal with his partner admiring a piece of writing he considers dreck? I had the same thought about these scenes that I believe Sabin expresses: they amount to the non-exploitive black-centered work Wright's character says he wishes people read. And, since I didn't find these segments so horrible/disappointing, I was okay with that.

But only to a point....and here I may be getting to where Sabin and I align, and why I only rate the film B+, despite the glittering highs. These scenes are interesting enough in and of themselves, but, apart from providing the need-money-for-nursing home motivation, they don't feel they inherently complete the main part of the film. And, as Sabin says, they may amount to a different sort of black narrative, but they don't feel like one Wright's character would himself create. Had the film delved into why Wright is the sort of intellectually-remote writer he is -- if we saw how his fractured family relationships prevent his writing this sort of family story -- it might have cohered better, and, at the same time, been on to something bigger.

So, yeah: the film isn't Tootsie, a movie in which every moment feels part of the same perfect garment (something of a miracle, given that film's lunatic genesis). But saying a film doesn't rank up with one of the best comedies in cinema history isn't exactly a knock. B+ is a pretty good grade (one I'd have applied to precious few films over the past 3 years). This is a very solid, intelligent, witty (did I mention laugh-out-loud funny?) effort, exceedingly well-acted by a very strong cast. If that only puts it into the lower part of the year's top ten...I can easily live with that.

[Sabin]

My take on American Fiction is that it has a lot of big laughs, it's thoughtful, but if the Academy didn't have to go to ten I wouldn't bank on it getting in too much because it offers an unusual journey for its protagonist that while interesting isn't emotionally satisfying. Also, I would've liked it more if I didn't spend most of the film confused by why it was taking the road it was taking. It sets up two hooks (a strong one and a fine one) and either runs away from them or is ambivalent towards them. Hook #1: a perennially disrespected, unpublished black writer becomes a race hustler (not a phrase I normally use but for brevity's sake) and gets his first big hit. Terrific stuff! Whatever movie you think we're going to get, you only get it in bits and pieces. We get scenes revolving around Monk dealing with idiotic white people (all funny; all brought down the house in my theater) but most of the film is spent in Boston with Monk going through middle-aged rite of passage subplots involving his family. Imagine if Tootsie set up Dorothy Michaels winning the audition but spent the rest of the movie with Michael helping his parents in the last stage of their life and dealing with how conflicted he is about his actions. Did nobody think there wasn't enough "movie" there in Monk going thought the literary world trying to cover up his identity as Stagg R. Leigh? Or is that too obvious today? But then I thought "Oh, maybe we're seeing the movie Monk wouldn't get published?" -- although the sense I get is that he's an academic who is stuck in the distant past. Either way, Hook #2 takes us through most of American Fiction's running time in Boston with Monk's family rites of passages. I haven't read Erasure so I don't know how much of that is imagined or there. Either way, is it wrong to say those scenes bored me? Those scenes bored me because they took too long to get going, those scenes bored me because Monk is such a terrific character (utterly himself yet full of contradiction), and those scenes bored me because they're full of sitcom ingredients and yet (save for Sterling K. Brown) refuses to be funny. Also, it really feels like there's a lot unaddressed in who these characters are, what's hurting them, and what they have to learn.

I liked American Fiction enough because it's full of comedic invention and there's a freshness to it. Maybe the fact that it is so split is part of that freshness but I also think it's what holds it back.

[flipp525]

When American Fiction introduces the central problem of Theolonious “Monk” Ellison (Jeffrey Wright) during an early scene at Issa Rae’s character’s book reading, I knew that this film was going to be something special, smart, and fun. I had also just finished All of Us Strangers maybe only a half an hour before starting this and it was a much needed antidote to the emotional devastation I had just experienced.

Because I’m now a published author of three books at this point in my career, I appreciated the peek into the ridiculousness of the publishing world and how soulless and commercial it can largely seem to those on the inside and the outside. The characters in the publishing storyline are honestly not even necessarily caricatures or heightened versions of what these people can sound like in real life.

The screenplay does such interesting things with tone in this film. Without revealing too much, the movie itself starts to become a meta-exercise in what is a “black movie” and, by its very existence, begs a question of why that question needs to be asked. He gets to shoehorn a romantic comedy and a classic family drama into a movie that is supposed to be about subverting established and expected narratives of blackness. And it all largely is pulled off successfully.

And the big “book title” scene in the middle of this is one of the funniest things I have seen this year.

Jeffrey Wright makes it all look so effortless that I can actually see him being left off Oscar nomination morning. He had to play the chameleon prankster and the “Everyman” artist with several facets in between. I think it’s the best work he’s done in a long time, if ever, and he carries the movie with him right until that crazy ending.

Sterling K. Brown, playing Wright’s recently out gay brother, is hysterical, complex, and wise in a performance that steals every scene he’s in. If Best Supporting Actor was not as crowded as it is this year, I think he might have gained more traction (he still can). He is a hoot in this and I can’t wait to see him in more big-screen roles after enjoying his multi-Emmy-winning television work.

Tracie Ellis Ross makes a deep and warm impact in the small time she has on-screen and I thought her character was so essential to what reverberates for and motivates Thelonious for the rest of the film.

Miriam Shor is so damn funny in this too, an actress I always appreciate.

To me, this has surprise Best Picture winner/spoiler vibes. I know this is being touted as a very competitive, banner year - a throwback to pre-pandemic riches of yore, but this is the kind of crowd-pleaser that actually has something to say that could be a dark horse in contests between more established, Oscar-friendly choices.

[danfrank]

I like the premise of this. Jeffrey Wright is an actor that I’ve long figured would one day be an Oscar nominee. I was wowed by him in Angels in America (in San Francisco, before it came to Broadway). It has been more likely that he would get nominated in supporting, but if he can snag a nomination as a lead, good on him.

[Sabin]

Still waiting for more reviews but looks promising. Cord Jefferson has a pretty stellar TV track record. Looks like this (and the Wright) are now in the race. Best Adapted Screenplay is very crowded this year.

https://variety.com/2023/film/awards/je ... 235718122/
https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movie ... 235585956/
https://deadline.com/2023/09/american-f ... 235541396/