Review of About Schmidt (2002) by Fred V — 24 Feb 2012

A hilariously bleak drama about the mindlessness of modern life and a bitter satire on the whole "everybody makes an impact" mindset everybody has, Alexander Payne's "About Schmidt" is probably his highest artistic achievement. Not only does it implement his trademark skewering of society in such a marketable way that it's profitable, it's also a really good film. Period. Ranging from the most demented of black comedy to the most poignant of drama, this subversion of the self-discovery uses its monomyth spine for more sinister purposes, namely that of title character Warren Schmidt. I was recommended this by my film professor Carrie - and I have to say that she was very wise in doing so. This film not only managed to blow me away with its darkly comic depiction of tiresome suburbia, it also floored me that somebody could make something so sarcastic and yet so touching. We feel for Schmidt, but at the same time, we know he's an idiot attempting to make an impact in a world that he has absolutely no knowledge of. He doesn't know how to do anything other than be a corporate slave.

Plot goes as this: Warren Schmidt, actuary at Woodmen of the World (hey, I'm a member of that company), retires after a noticeably unfruitful tenure there, so much so that his colleagues give half-assed and out-of-the-can speeches commemorating his mediocrity. He decides to go on a road trip with his domineering and doting wife Helen, but her death adds a hiccup to that problem. In the midst of self-pity and a promising transformation, he finds that his wife didn't really care about him AT ALL and sets out to make a difference in his daughter's life so she won't marry a slimy and similarly-mediocre waterbed salesman. Off he goes on his journey, running into many strange things along the way (including a naked Annie Wilkes) and visiting remarkable places that he remembers. Also, he sponsors a child, but I won't spoil any of that for you.

What makes this film so good is its pitch black humor. Everything about the film, from the outright hilarious comedy to the subtle nuances of satire, is funny in one way or another. It accentuates the blase that is Schmidt's life - the film is about his misfortune not with people, but with the entire world. He was a born loser - he had no chance to be a contender, to twist the late Budd Schulberg's words. He's done absolutely nothing to make the world a better place. All he does is predict when people will die and complain incessantly about his life to some African kid who can't relate to any of his problems (or can, depending on how you interpret the ending). To use an old cliche of mine, he's like Christian Weston Chandler in that they've done nothing but make fools of themselves during their lifetimes. They're written off as idiots - and with good intention. They spend their days going on some contrived journey of discovery just so they can get away with acting like the complete selfish jerks that they are.

Another great thing about the film is the way Alexander Payne and cinematographer James Glennon compose and film these beautifully unremarkable shots of suburban/commercial-zoned America. They show how boring we have become - how typical that we are. These shots show what we consider as normal to be soulless - these places where people go in order to enact on half-assed terms of rebellion. Landscapes are deprived of the Fordian-Malickian beauty we've all seen a million times. They look raunchy, ugly, and unappealing - stripped of their beauty by what we did back when we were pioneers. Even Dairy Queen, with all of its hometown goodness, is rendered nasty by this film. There's no visible dirt - all we see is a society that doesn't want to do anything besides stay in the status quo. It states that the woodsmen so praised by the Woodmen of the World merely ravaged our world and made it more soulless - just typical human nihilism.

And another good thing: Jack Nicholson and Kathy Bates. My God, they are so immersed in their roles. No evidence of "paycheck" acting, but merely acting for the fun of it. It's obvious they've done the research. And it's obvious that they have a great screen chemistry (or anti-chemistry) together. It's great to see these guys acting in a film together - why don't people see this. Why do people write this off as a dumb little film with Jack Nicholson? This film should be praised. Like, transformative in American cinema praised. Why don't I see anybody writing papers about this? Are they afraid that if they watch this film, they'll see themselves in Warren? You gotta face the truth one day.