Descubriendo a Forrester

Continuing my plan to watch every Sean Connery movie in order, I come to the penultimate movie in his filmography Finding Forrester (2000)

Plot In A Paragraph: A young writing protégé (Rob Brown), finds help with a reclusive author (Connery)

The last REALLY good movie Connery made. It's a wonderful performance that was surprisingly snubbed come awards season. Rob Brown gives a really good performance, even more so when you consider it was his debut. F Murray Abraham is his usual great self!! Perfectly annoying!! Matt Damon pops up in a cameo as a lawyer too.

It has a few pacing issues, a few unnecessary scenes and it's quite poorly lit at times too!! But those are minor gripes, and I for one love this movie. It would make my Top 100 of the decade. This is the movie I wished Connery ended his filmography on. But like with Clint Eastwood, he went one more after a great movie. Although Eastwood's last movie was not the disaster that Connery's was.

Finding Forrester grossed $51 million st the domestic box office, to end 2000 as the 50th highest grossing movie of the year.

I'd heard a little about this movie before and entered into watching it merely expecting to see another of Sean Connery's typical Connery performances. Don't get me wrong, there's nothing wrong with that, he is a very good actor, but he always plays himself. Other than that, I had no inclination what the story was about so there was surprise from the outset seeing that the movie was starring Busta Rhymes and was set in the Bronx.

How surprised I was as this gentle and perfectly paced tale brings together two people who share a common love for writing, one is a faded writer who once had success, and the other is a new talent who faces so many obstacles in his path to let his talent shine.

There are similarities to other films such as Dead Poets Society, but what captures the viewer and their imagination is the restraint and the simplicity. There are no great acts or contrived emotionally charged plot twists, this is real and it's character driven. You believe in the characters, the acting is so natural and understated you are easily drawn into the movie and the characters lives, and it's hard to break free. Choices and actions are small, compassionate, and you can relate them to real life.

The relationship between Forrester (Connery) and Jamal (Rob Brown) is superbly played with Brown holding back perfectly until the scene where his restraint fails, and Connery giving one of the most emotive and complex performances I have ever seen. His performance is simply stunning and totally off of the Connery mould. Watching his face as he struggles with demons long past was extraordinary.

Overall the story is very well written, and doesn't fail to pull you along with the emotional journey and yet never hit the twee button. You can feel the passion that Connery has for writing, and see the complexity of emotions as he wants to help the boy but gets pulled back by hidden problems. Problems which slowly reveal themselves and get shared and dealt with in the most natural of ways, again never falling foul of an emotion overload.

It's warm, uplifting and an inspiring story and I recommend it to anyone. I really can't be vocal enough about the stunning performance by Connery, and the matching performance by Brown. Even Rhymes shows that he has talent.

Director Gus Van Sant also directed `Good Will Hunting' and this film has essentially the same plot. An underprivileged youth is discovered by a reclusive genius and is shepherded to his full potential. What GWH was to math, this film is to literature. They are such close cousins that Van Sant felt compelled to bring in Matt Damon for a cameo.

Regardless of the familiar plot, `Finding Forrester' succeeds because of an excellent screenplay and outstanding acting performances by Sean Connery, Rob Brown and F. Murray Abraham. This kind of story can't help grabbing the audience at a human level. Genius, suppressed by societal class, struggles to emerge and it beats the odds. The story is transcendent for both the main characters. Forrester (Sean Connery) helps Jamal (Rob Wallace) transcend his societal constraints to realize his potential as a writer, and Jamal helps Forrester to transcend the constraints of his emotional traumas to free him as a human being. It is a triumphant story, very uplifting.

Van Sant does a good job of presenting the human element and developing the characters while keeping the photography effective but in the background. The photography is very straightforward, allowing the characters to tell the story without the intrusive use of stylish shots that are all to prevalent lately. Van Sant gives Forrester's apartment a dark and dreary look from a color and lighting perspective, which is particularly effective.

Sean Connery is in top form and continues to make the case for being one of our best and most treasured actors. He gives a virtuoso performance in this film with a complex and ornery character. It is a powerful and moving portrayal. Rob Brown is phenomenal in his first feature film. He was found in a talent search and made an impressive debut with an extremely mature performance. With the right scripts, he has a good chance of having a bright future. F. Murray Abraham is fantastic as the haughty English teacher, who gets his just deserts.

This is a highly intelligent film with a strong story, steady direction and marvelous acting. I rated it a 9/10. Despite an all too familiar storyline, it differentiates itself by its wide-ranging excellence. For those who enjoy good dramatic performances and intriguing character studies, this film is not to be missed.

The mechanics of the movie have been well-reviewed by others. Yes, it could definitely have been a better movie, but then again what movie can't you say that about? In terms of plot and character development what it needed most was another 30 minutes, but at two and a quarter hours already most studios would never allow that. (Note that the movie did not seem nearly that long to me.) Perhaps the plot and story could have been tighter, but it's really a remarkable job for first-time screenwriter Mike Rich.

The acting, while not always remarkable, was quite good. Connery brilliantly underplayed Forrester, yielding a less dramatic but much more realistic portrayal of the writer. Rob Brown's portrayal of Jamal was equally reserved yet forceful. The directing held the two characters in balance well. The other characters were well-acted though not generally well-developed (hence much criticism of this movie).

Others have compared Finding Forrester to Goodwill Hunting (also directed by Gus Van Sant) and to Scent of a Woman, suggesting that it is just a ripoff of the plot in those two. If so (which I doubt), those are two pretty good movies to plagiarize. The basic concept of Forrester's story (first novel wins Pulitzer -- what do you do for an encore?) has also been done before, but I've never seen it done so well (and without resorting to The Bottle as an excuse for a wasted life).

What's been missed in the reviews I checked was a discussion of who found whom. When you boil it down, Jamal found Jamal and Forrester found Forrester (just in time), though they found themselves by reaching out to each other and forming a bond of friendship across a gulf of age, suspicion, and race. The way they do this, without the usual twists of self-destruction and miraculous salvation, is both touching and refreshingly real. And finding oneself, in its essence, is what EVERY good drama is about, so, yes, there is a similarity to Goodwill and Scent and every other good movie ever made.

Included in the movie is a very brief first course in writing. Though the movie doesn't dwell on it, the way it presents the process of writing (and of the criticism of writing) is refreshingly realistic.

Speculation about the "real" identity of Forrester is interesting. Salinger has been mentioned, but the similarities are only superficial. Harper Lee (To Kill a Mockingbird) is a much better fit (first novel wins Pulitzer, nothing else ever written, lived as a recluse), but I almost favor the enigmatic Gardner McKay (though Forrester is certainly different in many ways from McKay). However, it's just as likely that Rich had no particular person in mind when he crafted Forrester (since, after all, the First Novel Syndrome is a well known plot theme).

All in all, while not The Great American Movie, it's a very good movie and well worth watching.

As a person who enjoys good movies, as well as reading and writing, I loved this film, and would see it again. Some may accuse it of being formulaic, but I feel that there is just enough unexpected-ness in it to keep the audience interested. I would hope that the apparent similarities to the director, Gus Van Sant's earlier work, Good Will Hunting, do not dissuade anyone from seeing the film. Any similarities are unimportant and do not take away from the fact that this is a good movie which stands alone as a deep film with an good plot. The script is very well written and all of the dialog appears real and natural. It is a thought provoking drama, but it is not depressing or sappy, as all too many dramas are. At the same time, it does not give the impression of simply being a feel-good movie. Also, although there are several humorous lines in the movie, they do not rely on cheap puns or slap stick humor.

William Forester once wrote a Pulitzer Prize winning book, but now is a recluse, hiding from his fame, who never leaves his book-filled apartment in the Bronx, but spends his time reading and bird watching, as well as watching the teenagers of the neighborhood play basketball in the park outside his window. Jamal Wallace is one of these teenagers. He hides his love of reading, and his brilliant writing skills, and chooses instead to gain the acceptance of his peers through his skill at basketball. A prep school has offered Jamal a scholarship because of his high test scores, and their need to win a basketball championship. The two characters meet, and Forester becomes a sort of teacher/mentor, but both learn many things from each other. Symbolism is important in this film, and it makes many good points about people, how we relate to each other, and how we deal with the difficulties of life.

The movie stays away from any violence and sex. It is rated PG-13 because of brief strong language and sexual references, but even these are few, and not over done, using only what is necessary to create real characters and setting -- a refreshing difference from many films that are now being made. The message of the film is good and moral, but it was wonderful to see a serious film staring a young black person that does not hit you over the head with messages of racial tolerance.

One of the surprises in the film is the great soundtrack. It is mostly Jazz songs from Miles Davis and others, which seems well suited to the mood of the movie and to the setting, another well done part of the film. The final song, a medley of "Somewhere Over the Rainbow" and "What a Wonderful World" is great. I was happy that this movie had refused to do what many recent movies have done in capitalizing on a soundtrack and trying to use or create hit pop songs in a movie. It also stays away from sappy and unnecessary orchestra music that is often used to try to create emotion in the audience. This movie does not need to resort to tricks like this in order to make you feel for the characters. Another happy surprise is a cameo from Matt Damon.

The acting is wonderful, particularly from the experienced Sean Connery, playing the title character, and from newcomer Robert Brown, as Jamal. Even the more minor parts in the film, such as Jamal's older brother, played by Busta Rhymes, and Jamal's friends and teachers are well-acted. Anna Paquin is well suited for her role as Claire, a rich girl from the prep school that Jamal transfers to. The two seem to make a connection, but a romantic subplot is not pursued very far in the film. I found this a refreshing change, and one of the factors that kept the movie from being too predictable, as well as much more realistic. Real life romances do not usually happen the way they often do in films. A disappointment was the character played by F. Murray Abraham. Although well acted, there is a complete lack of character development, and the teacher-that-gives-the-brilliant-student-a-hard-time stereotype is hard to ignore. Despite this one shortcoming, this is an excellent film.

As the film ended and the credits began to roll, I noticed that no one in the theater got up to leave, as is usually the case in theaters. The audience remained seated until the credits and music had finished, and the lights came back on. It is just that kind of a movie. I would defiantly recommend it to anyone wishing to see a mature and thought-provoking film that is entertaining and enjoyable to watch, and will leave you feeling inspired.