Home Artists Posts Import Register

Content

54/100

Another instance of light dawning during the end/"opening" credits (we get only the title up front), which revealed to ignorant me that this apparent character study was adapted from the sort of broadly reported nonfiction account that sports an expository subtitle: Nomadland: Surviving America in the Twenty-First Century. That knowledge makes retroactive sense of what puzzled me throughout, viz. the film's seeming uncertainty about whether its protagonist is an individual or a symptom. Is this a life that she's freely chosen, or has it been forced upon her by capitalism's merciless dictates? No points for guessing which of those two options I'd find more compelling, but a Barton Fink-style "Both, maybe?" might be the worst possible choice, and that's where Zhao decided to take it. Her skill at guiding nonprofessional actors through re-creations of their own experience remains impressive, and I perked up during sequences depicting the larger nomadic community, with McDormand's Fern functioning as more silent witness than focal point. And there are some strong traditionally dramatic stretches as well, most notably Fern's brief visit with her more conventionally-minded sister. But the thorniness of that dichotomy gets undermined by the lost-Empire backstory, and vice versa; Zhao tries to make Fern at once an iconoclast and a victim, as if there's some coherent middle ground that she's being denied. It's like a mournful-dirge version of Lost in America that opens with Albert Brooks being laid off by Amazon and setting out sans any nest egg whatsoever, but retains all of the Easy Rider posturing. A straight documentary probably would've been more incisive, really. Or, y'know, just read the book. Not everything needs to be a movie! 

Files

Comments

Anonymous

I think it's fascinating how the film plays with the basic notion of storytelling - the fact that a story exists only when the viewer comprehends the narrative’s cause-and-effect links, which the author has logically assembled. Indeed, the film bridges certain events into a causal relationship (e.g. the subplot with Strathairn’s character leading to the climax); however, others occur somewhat randomly, without a fixed predictor. For instance, Fern works for Amazon, then discusses her life with her neighbours, then (all of a sudden) sells rocks, then (all of a sudden) paints her van. Zhao constructs Fern’s haphazard life in opposition to the "laws" of storytelling since her nomad life cannot be logically systematised. And I find it wonderful - the way Fern’s purposely fragmented actions serve as a diversion for the viewer while it all seamlessly blends in with the cause-and-effect side of the narrative. You deem the conflict with the sister one of the film's better parts, but, for me, the fact that Zhao utilises conventional dramatic enhancers to get to the climax really fucked up the aforementioned perfect balance.

gemko

Interesting. Can’t say I perceived the film as fragmented—Zhao skips past a lot of establishing-type stuff that other filmmakers might include, but not in a way that I found at all disorienting. It was just “Okay, now she’s working here”; that we don’t see her apply for the job or get hired didn’t strike me as vitally strategic. Cause and effect pathways are evident, merely compressed. I found it effective but not revelatory.

Anonymous

Thanks for the reply, Mike. Means a lot! Exactly, the skipping of the 'establishing-type stuff' isn't disorienting. It's actually set in unison with Fern's 'chaotic' nomadic life—the fact that as a person without anything 'steady' in her world, Fern is going from one place to another, doing one thing and then another, without an actual predictor. That is for me what makes Zhao's storytelling enthralling—she allegorises the nomadic life with seemingly chaotic storytelling while it, at the same time, being cause-and-effect-driven. As though a person in the mountains, wandering around in Brownian motion, manages to get closer to the peak by holding onto an invisible rope. Maybe you're right—the technique isn't revelatory—but for me the nomadic languor, resulting from the technique, is novel.