by Miguel E. Rodriguez
DIRECTOR: Robert Mulligan
CAST: Sam Waterston, Tess Harper, Reese Witherspoon, Jason London, Emily Warfield
MY RATING: 10/10
ROTTEN TOMATOMETER: 91% Fresh
PLOT: A 14-year-old girl in 1957 comes of age when she develops a crush on a handsome neighbor…who only has eyes for her older sister.
The Man in the Moon has a plot that sounds like a high-concept pitch somewhere between an ABC After-School Special and a third-tier soap opera. But somehow, magically, it transcends the trappings of soap opera and veers towards the truly operatic, touching on grand emotions while keeping itself grounded in reality. I watched the movie in awe, wondering how something so sappy was holding my interest the whole way through. Afterwards, I came up with two overarching reasons: the spectacular debut performance of a 14-year-old Reese Witherspoon, and the sure-footed direction from one of Hollywood’s old masters, Robert Mulligan, who cut his teeth on stage plays for television in the 1950s before directing his masterpiece in 1962, To Kill a Mockingbird.
Like Mockingbird, The Man in the Moon takes place in the deep South. The time is 1957, when Elvis was king and children were still encouraged to say “Yes, ma’am” and “No, sir” to their parents. Dani Trant (Witherspoon) is still young and tomboyish enough to escape her Sunday chores by dashing off to the local swimming hole after church. Her older sister, Maureen (Emily Warfield), is set to start college at Duke in a few months. Their close relationship is established in a sweet opening scene where they sit in their outdoor, screened-in bedroom, doing each other’s hair and talking about life and Maureen’s doubts and how Dani envies Maureen, and so on. Like in real life, the conversation touches on deep topics, but never really resolves anything. It just feels good to talk, to know the other person is really listening. This scene is mirrored in the movie’s final scene in a fantastic bit of screenwriting where the conversation is very different, but the emotions being discussed are more or less the same.
One day, Dani goes skinny dipping in the watering hole and finds an unexpected visitor: Cort Foster (Jason London), 17, whose mother and younger brothers have just moved back to their old farm next door. Turns out Cort’s mother, Marie, is an old friend of Dani’s mom, Abigail. This is the kind of stuff soap operas thrive on, but even at that point, even though I was aware of the contrivances of the story, I never felt overly manipulated. It all just felt very…real. Once again, it’s a testament to the director’s skill in making sure nothing gets punched up unless there’s a reason for it. It’s never bland, don’t get me wrong. But it never feels fake. I don’t like the word “organic” in connection with acting or directing, but that feels like the right word to use here.
Things move swiftly. Dani and Cort become quick friends, but when things get a little too flirtatious at the swimming hole, Cort backs away and admonishes Dani. “You almost got more than kissed, little girl.” Dani asks Maureen for tips on kissing boys. It looks as if Cort is always on the verge of making a bad decision, but he has the good sense to put on the brakes. The film is making you think the movie is going to be about one thing, but then there’s a family crisis, and in the hubbub, Cort meets Maureen, there’s an instant attraction, Dani feels left out…
But that’s enough summarizing. Based on what I’ve written, you may already think you know the arc of the film, but I can assure you, you’re wrong.
Let’s talk instead about Reese Witherspoon’s performance. It must be seen to be believed. It belongs in the pantheon of the greatest debut performances of all time. She is as self-assured and confident and natural as she was in her Oscar-winning performance in Walk the Line. It’s almost like watching some of the early films of Marilyn Monroe; the screen just seems a little brighter when she’s present. Watch her facial expressions when Cort realizes who she is after their first encounter at the swimming hole. Watch her smile after her first kiss. Look at her self-control when she tells her father she understands why he had to take the strap to her (that’s a long story that I won’t spoil). For the most part, I just watched her performance in awe, but once or twice I turned on my analytical mode and tried to see if I could “catch” her acting. Couldn’t do it. The fact she wasn’t at least nominated for an Oscar for this movie is a complete freaking mystery to me.
For that matter, the whole movie is a mystery to me. Before watching it, I had only heard about it from a rave review by Roger Ebert. I couldn’t find it streaming anywhere so I had to pay a relatively pretty penny to get it on Blu ray, sight unseen. (Spoiler alert: it was worth it.) Yet here is a brilliant gem of a film that tells a simple story of love and sadness and doubt and everything in between. There are some plot surprises – I won’t say twists, exactly, it’s not a Shyamalan movie – that I absolutely did not see coming. In retrospect, maybe I should have, but the storytelling kept me engrossed in the moment. It kept me focused on the here and now, so I never felt the need to try and guess what was around the corner. I hesitate to use this word, too, but it was mesmerizing. To tell a story this cornball (on the surface!) and keep it fresh and alive is some kind of miracle.
It’s been said that no good movie is too long. The Man in the Moon clocks in at just under 100 minutes with credits, but I was prepared to stick with it for at least another half hour, just to see what these characters would do and say, and how they would deal with the next challenges life throws at them. When the movie ends, it doesn’t feel like an ending. It has the good sense not to make things too final, as if the solutions to all the issues in the film could be wrapped up in a bow. All that remains is the bond between two sisters, and if they have that, that’s all that matters.
2 UNPAID MOVIE CRITICS!!!! 