Unbroken
Looking at the credits for “Unbroken,” it reads like a who’s who of Oscar-caliber talent. The director is Angelina Jolie, who won Best Supporting Actor in 1999 for “Girl, Interrupted,” and whom made a well-received directorial debut with “In the Land of Blood and Honey,” though I have yet to see it myself. Her cinematographer is no less than Roger Deakins, the master whose images for “Fargo,” “Skyfall,” “Kundun,” “The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford,” and “The Shawshank Redemption” are unforgettable. Her composer is Alexandre Desplat, who has become a much sought after musical voice thanks to lovely, lively work in films like “Fantastic Mr. Fox,” “The Tree of Life,” the last two “Harry Potter” films, and “Zero Dark Thirty.” And the screenwriting credits would make any outside filmmaker jealous: Joel and Ethan Coen (“No Country for Old Men”), Richard LaGravenese (“The Fisher King”) and William Nicholson (“Les Miserables”) adapting the book by Laura Hillenbrand (“Seabiscuit”). I think the motion picture Academy just perked up.
I bring all this up because it feels like a natural place to start with a film like “Unbroken,” which is what some might call an “Oscar bait” film. A crude way of looking at art, to be sure, especially when the film’s story justifies being told by such talented filmmakers, but it’s been one of the obvious narratives about the film since it was announced. Although I have no doubt Jolie had the purest of intentions in her journey to bring the story of Louie Zamperini to life on screen, the film has all the trappings (inspirational true story, talented filmmakers, historical backdrop) of a movie that seems to exist solely to win awards. We’ll see how that goes, but for a lot of us who watch films, that “Oscar bait” stigma can hang over a film like a cloud, and make it difficult to appreciate the film as film craft, although the best ones always transcend it. “Unbroken,” unfortunately, can’t quite shake it, although it is a lovely film in it’s own right.
The film tells the life of Louie Zamperini, an Italian American kid who was a troublemaker growing up, but found his footing as a long-distance runner, and in high school, broke several track records. He went on to represent the United States in the 1936 Olympics in Germany, where he placed eighth, but set a final lap record, and was well on his way to taking part in the 1940 games in Tokyo before WWII resulted in the cancelling of the games. He did get to Tokyo a few years after, however, but as a POW when his plane is shot down over the Pacific Ocean (he was a bombadeer during the war), and after 47 days at sea with two fellow airmen (only one of whom survived), was captured by the Japanese Navy. He spent the remainder of the war in a Japanese labor camp, run by a ruthless sergeant, Mutsuhiro “The Bird” Watanabe, intent on breaking his captives. But Zamperini, as is implied in the title, does not break, and after the war, had a profound realization that forgiveness was more powerful than hate, and spent his post-war life fulfilling that message…apparently. We only learn about that part of his story, which Zamperini called the most important part of his life, on title cards before the credits rolled on Jolie’s 137-minute film.
Did Jolie bury the lead by excising Zamperini’s post-war life, where he battled PTSD and alcoholism before turning to God, and forgiving his captors, including the brutal “Bird?” It’s awfully tempting to think so, because one can see a great, multi-layered cinematic drama unfolding by showing flashbacks of Zamperini’s life with post-war Zamperini trying to overcome the demons that developed during the war. Instead, Jolie decides to tell the most obviously compelling narrative, which is to track Zamperini’s life from his childhood through WWII to a heartwarming reunion with his family. She certainly tells it well, with actors performing the roles with inspiration, starting with Jack O’Connell as Zamperini and Takamasa Ishihara (better known as Miyavi, to Japanese pop fans) as Watanabe, with a back and forth between the two that is the beating heart of the film once Zamperini is captured, although Jolie captures the harrowing stranding at sea powerfully well, also. (It sure beat the heck out of “Life of Pi,” in that respect.) Great parts to a film, but do they make the whole great? Sadly, no, because while Jolie has top-flight talent doing top-flight work with the camera, and on the conductor’s podium, the editing room is what keeps “Unbroken” from being a great historical biopic. The film moves, too often, at a snail’s pace, with a lot of repetitive story beats and artificial dramatic sweep, which is one of the big trappings with an “Oscar bait” film. I don’t know whether narrative filmmaking was the ideal platform with which to tell Zamperini’s story– long-form documentary would have been great, though –but the story Jolie thinks she is telling seems at odds with the one she told, and the result is emotionally muted, despite being well made.
