You will always love movies that you can relate to - at some level at least. And you will always love going back to a movie that gives a new meaning every time you watch it. Good Will Hunting is one such movie. I first watched it almost 12 years back and since then I have seen it at least 10 times. Good Will Hunting has a lot of emotional heft. It asks many interesting questions. Is it a responsibility of every individual to justify his talents?, or rather ‘Is it criminal not to? Doesn’t the progress of humanity depend on everyone contributing up to his capability? Should heart follow the mind or other way round? Is there no place for just flowing with the tide? How does one define success and failure? Isn’t pursuit of happiness a good enough pursuit, or is it like giving up on doing the hard bit? Is there such as thing as underachievement or is it just about perception? Roger Ebert in his review of this movie says that “Good Will Hunting is the story of how this kid's life edges toward self-destruction and how four people try to haul him back”. But I do not think that the authors necessarily mean that Will’s life is on the path of self-destruction, underachievement yes, but not self-destruction. At a personal level, I ponder on these issues quite a lot, and that is why the film resonated with me. And I was so impressed to know that Ben Affleck and Matt Damon were in their 20s when they wrote the script (and won the Oscar for it).
The central character is Will Hunting (Matt Damon), a self-educated, or rather well-read, genious in early 20s. He has rare once-in-ages talent. But he has had a difficult childhood, mostly in foster homes. He grows up with a bunch of much lesser intelligent friends (Chuckie, Morgan, Billy - Ben Affleck and Casey Affleck), ‘retarded gorillas’ as the movie puts them. All these guys together work at a construction site, metaphorically shown as the most mindless of tasks. But they are as close as adversity and common misfortune can lead to. This is established early on when all jump in to settle score with a gang, one of whose member had bullied Will long back. Or when Will uses his smarts to put in place a guy who tries to humiliate Chuckie by showing off his knowledge. This happens at a Harvard Bar this group frequents, because they are not intimidated and would go wherever they fancy. The bonding of this group is important to partly explain Will’s reluctance to embrace opportunities when they arise.
Will’s talent is spotted by a renowned (Field’s Medal winner) Mathematics professor (Prof. Gerald Lambeau played by the charismatic Stellan Skarsgard) who wants him to research with him. But Will is ‘content’ with what he is doing and stonewalls any attempt by Lambeau to rein him in. He is too smart to fall into any therapist’s trap. So Lambeau seeks help of Sean Maguire, his batchmate from MIT and professor of some ‘behavioural’ subject. (As a side note, the movie pits a Science professor and a Humanities professor with the undertone that Humanities is considered a lesser or simpler discipline with Science getting greater respect). Sean has had a rough upbringing, similar to Will (in a wry scene later in the movie, they exchange notes on the tools used by their fathers to beat them). Sean is able to succeed when all trained experts failed. They have an initial skirmish where Will tries to outmaneuver Sean by interpreting his life by analysing a painting, and Sean sets him in place by showing how hollow Will’s knowledge is without any emotion, how a person is more than a painting or a book. Sean succeeds by waiting, drawing Will out. In Sean’s words, “I won't talk first.” and Will’s silence is: “To show me he doesn't have to talk to me if he doesn't want to.”
From this point, the movie is about gradual unraveling of Will - both by Sean and by Skylar, a Harvard student who becomes his girlfriend. His collaboration with Lambeau shows his sure-footed and cocky side. At one point he says to Lambeau who is prostrated on ground to save a piece of Mathematics proof from burning “Do you know how fuc**** easy it is for me?” and Lambeau acknowledges he is no match for Will. One the other hand, Will’s meetings with Sean and Skylar show his vulnerabilities - a kind of evening of the balance between intelligence and soft skills. Sean is the voice to explicitly state the psychological undertone of the movie. One thought he shares is “Will pushes people away before they have a chance to hurt him” - which can explain how many times we misinterpret somebody’s arrogant behaviour.
In the last 30 minutes, the movie reaches a point where Will has matured and calmed down but must decide on his future. Is he willing to let go of this defense mechanism and fight it out in the world. Lambeau wants him to join any of the top institutes, such as NSA, which can tap his strong mental faculties. Will is uncertain. Everybody wants Will to succeed apart from him. He still argues why does he have to do justice to his talent? To whom does he owe this? That there is an honour in the construction work he does. There are many memorable scenes and dialogues at this point - between Sean and Lambeau, between Will and Chuckie and Sean and Will. Lambeau and Chuckie take the side that a person owes it to humanity to do justice to his talent, even if it requires a sacrifice of self. Will and Sean take the side that a person should follow the heart and success is not necessarily decided by what one achieves but in living the life fully. Sean gives a trivial example of this when he tells that he gave the ticket of one of the best baseball matches of all time just to follow a girl he had fallen for. In the last scene between Will and Sean, Sean says “Do what’s in your heart son. You’ll be fine”. In such movies, climax is not relevant, the movie is not about the goal but about the path.
All the leads give competent acting, but Robin Williams and Stellan Skarsgard were especially impressive. Their chemistry was sparkling. The strength of the movie is its script and it really shines. There are two glitches for me. One was that for a movie written so well, it places the entire focus on Will. While there is a background for other characters, but their existence is premised on bringing out different facets of Will. Be it Sean, Lambeau (he shows no envy and is relentless in pursuit of Mathematics, even at the cost of his pride), Chuckie or Skylar. They sidestep whenever Will has to shine, and that simplifies the situation greatly. Another minor quibble is that by the end, the movie starts to explain a lot, leaving little to interpretation. While this was fine with me, as I needed it, I am sure it would not stand well with those looking for the subtlety that such topics require. Nevertheless, the movie is not preachy and requires each viewer to answer the questions at a personal level, to take sides, to form judgement, a lot of which will come from own experiences, cultural nuances, times we live in!
No comments:
Post a Comment