Focus

One of Arthur Miller's finest works, Focus, comes to the screen and while there was a lot to like about the movie, some of it seemed like it was almost unreal (though I'm not sure if that's in a good or bad way).

William H. Macy, great as always, plays Lawrence Newman, average Joe and good guy in Brooklyn, NY in the early 1940's who finds he needs a new pair of specs. Unfortunately, his choice of glasses makes him appear to be, well, Jewish, as this seems to his mother from the start. Lawrence tries to ignore the ignorance and bigotry in his neighborhood against the Jewish people, but with a string of events involving his neighbors (Meat Loaf, David Paymer), and a new girlfriend (Laura Dern in one of her best performances) who knows what trouble Lawrence is in, push him into the conflict of his life.

Often, Focus, delivers a poignant, startling and smart story in showing a character with so much at stake it is making him insane. Macy and the rest of the cast are so close to perfect and if only for them make this a must see. Not to dissapoint the fans of Miller's book, I suppose, but if it does then that is just another flaw. B+

In 1947, two films, "Crossfire" and "Gentlemen's Agreement," opened a queasy Hollywood's examination of anti-Semitism in our society. "Gentlemen's Agreement" dealt with religious bigotry at the level of high, or at least upper middle-class, America while "Crossfire" exposed the brutal violence that always accompanies irrational hatred and bias. Both films made, and continue to make, an impression.

Overall, Hollywood has left anti-Semitism in the U.S. pretty much alone. That many Jews have found success at both ends of the movie camera is well-known. That some of those Jews, many with Anglicized names, particularly feared the sting of the anti-communist fervor of the HUAC and Mc Carthy era, is a still disturbing and lasting legacy of a difficult time in our history. The controversy several years ago about the special Oscar for Elia Kazan brought the issue to the attention of millions ignorant of the heyday of Hollywood's involvement with the anti-communist campaign. Kazan, incidentally, directed "Gentlemen's Agreement."

"Focus," which is showing in remarkably few theaters (only two in Manhattan and I wouldn't bet on a long run) both exaggerates and encapsulates a strain of anti-Semitism in New York City during the Second World War that, even today, few who recall it say much about its pervasiveness.

The War Department was discomfited to learn through surveys that a surprising minority of servicemen thought the war was being fought for Jewish interests or that actually it had been caused by Jews. These beliefs, possibly spawned by the virulent rhetoric of Father Coughlin, the near treasonous utterances of Charles Lindbergh and the organized pro-Nazi rallies of the Bund (the U.S. arm of the Nazi Party), were more widespread than most accounts of the war recognize let alone explore.

"Focus" takes place in a Brooklyn neighborhood of seeming homogeneity marred only by the presence of Finkelstein, the candy store proprietor on the corner. To insure that the audience understands the depth of the community's fear of Jews, quick shots of his unmistakably "frum" (Orthodox) relatives from the Lower East Side are presented several times.

The cohort of organized thugs who harass both the nerdy-with-glasses-mistaken-as-a-Jew guy, William H. Macy, and his glamorous-in-a-forties-way, also mistaken as Jewish, bride, Laura Dern, didn't exist in New York City. Anti-semitic assaults occurred but they were sporadic and involved local youths, not followers of a priest who in the film is the spitting image of Father Coughlin back from hell.

What is so chilling is that the married couple's abhorrence of the growing and organized anti-Semitic harassment is not matched by any introspection as to the baseness of their own feelings about Jews. Both Mr. Macy and Ms. Dern are extraordinary as actors in a small, local drama that recasts their lives without, perhaps, causing them to reshape their own bigoted views. Or do they change?

This is a moving drama that invites exploration of part of the reality of World War II on the Home Front not covered in the continuing outpouring of Greatest Generation memoirs. When available for rental or purchase it should secure the much wider audience it deserves.

This movie tells the story of prejudice against jews in New York City, during World War II. It's great in the fact that I never knew such prejudice existed in our own country, and tells this story well. I would have liked to give this movie 4 stars, the acting was incredible all the way around. The storyline, however, kinda went nowhere, and the ending left a lot to be said. Since this is a book adaptation, which I haven't read, but I almost think they left out the last chapter. If there was some kind of resolution at the end, this would be an even better, fantastic movie. Should you see this movie? Great performances and a driving story, but just nothing left at the end. 10-21-02

This movie packs a punch. There are a few every now and then that make me think deeply, and disturb me a lot. I could see myself in this same predicament - passively allowing things to happen around me, not standing up for the right and decent thing, just trying to avoid trouble. How often do we avoid making waves or sticking our necks out? How often does our inaction condone the evil actions of others. We would never join them, we tell ourselves, we recognize that what they are doing is bad, but do we do anything about it?

Lawrence Newman (William H. Macey) is a low-key, nerdy office worker who has paid off his home in Brooklyn, NY in the waning days of World War II. He rarely gets engaged in what is going on around him, has never married, rarely socializes, just goes to work and cares for his invalid mother. Then a series of events in his very "white" little neighborhood pull him out of his complacent shell into a maelstrom of events. It starts as he witness from his bedroom window the rape of a Puerto Rican girl by the son of his neighbor. Soon after he gets glasses because of poor vision. As he is now better able to see, he becomes less able to deal with the circumstances of his life. The one bright spot is a new love in his life, and he marries, hoping to continue on in his normalcy. Then the virulent anti-semitism on that street catches him, despite his credentials as a Presbyterian WASP. As things spiral further out of control, he discovers he must make an important decision - does he take a stand or does he simply go away.

I cannot how anybody can view this movie without being affected and having to think very much about themselves and what they really stand for. Post war anti-semitism is the setting here, but there is injustice at all times and in all places. It is for the individual to decide where he or she stands.

Others' main criticism of this film--namely that Macy suddenly looks Jewish upon donning his glasses--is misplaced. The glasses are just the little bit of change needed to CONVINCE others he's a Jew. The scene in which he says to his boss, (paraphrasing) "but you KNOW what my background is," along with another discussion with his mother, suggests that he's had to fight this same assumption in the past. The glasses now make him look just Jewish enough to "confirm" his neighbors' and co-workers' existing suspicions. Then there is his new wife's large nose and taste for loud clothes, which OF COURSE means she's Jewish. The whole point of the film is how those little stereotypical nothings become the entire basis for judging others.

If he has a lisp, he must be gay. If he has long hair, he smokes dope. If he's Hispanic, he's got a knife...and if he has round black glasses and he's slight of build, he must be Jewish. Those statements all sound equally (im)plausible to me. If the conclusion people were jumping to in Focus was reasonable, the whole point of the story would be lost.