Introduction to New Post

In honoring of school ending and summer beginning, I have written a new post, one that considers a subject other than Kurosawa—something recent, even. Confounded? Just read on, brave reader…

(By the way, I apologize in advance for using the offensive phrase, but it's the most accurate one. Now I bet you're curious...)

Michael Clayton, An Above-Average Legal Thriller

Among the five films nominated for best picture this past year—Atonement, Juno, Michael Clayton, No Country for Old Men, and There Will Be Blood—I had only one left to see when I began my Netflicks trial account last week: that one being the man in the middle, Michael Clayton. Though the film lost in this category, and rightly so, I believe that the film contains significant merit that both justifies its nomination and warrants our attention.

Michael Clayton (George Clooney) works as a fixer for the law firm Kenner, Bach, and Dean; with money and personal contacts, Clayton rescues his clients from the consequences of the law. Presently, his firm prepares to settle a six-year, three-billion-dollar lawsuit filed against its defendant, U-North, a corporation accused of poisoning people by polluting the environment. The lawyer in charge of the case, Arthur Edens (Tom Wilkinson), feels nauseated about defending another corrupt company. He erupts during a deposition, and the firm sends Clayton to placate the problem. When U-North grows impatient, Clayton excuses his friend—Edens is bipolar and has forgotten to take his pills. But this only touches the surface. Underneath it, Edens can no longer help companies that expend the weak in the name of capitalistic endeavor: he escapes into hiding, and begins to build a case against U-North. The rest considers how two characters, one from each organization, react to this threat of exposure.

Thematically, Michael Clayton considers what actions a man will take in order to preserve his empire of dirt, and how much of his soul he will squander in order to pay the cost. In the high society this film portrays, success means that one must maintain a spotless surface, even if it covers a collection of deceit, debt, bribery, murder, family neglect, and failure. Under such pressure, man either retaliates like Arthur Edens or breaks like Karen Crowder (Tilda Swinton), general counsel
for U-North who also turns to mess-fixing.

Technically, the demands this theme places upon the actors actually caters to Clooney: it dictates a surface restraint that keeps him from having to explore a broader emotional range, one he often seems to leave unexplored in his dramatic roles. Clooney is a skilled actor, and he has demonstrated that he can succeed at comedy, as well as directing: together, these instances confirm that he possesses a level of diversity. In dramas, however, he plays the wise guy: the inner depths of his characters always remain internal, and his occasional outbursts inevitably have this wise-ass tone to them. Hence, the job of delivering the movie's brilliant opening monologue passes to Tom Wilkinson. Regardless of his range, Clooney excels as Michael Clayton: except for a few here and theres, we forget we are watching George Clooney.

Topically, the film visits gain-the-world-and-forfeit-the-soul territory. The corrupting influence of money—a theme that can collapse into a cliché quite easily—appears in three of the above nominees. In each one, it's a pursuit that costs the family. In There Will Be Blood, oilman Daniel Plainview disowns his son when he decides to begin his own oil company: outside the family business, H.W. only amounts to a competitor. In No Country for Old Men, Llewellyn Moss risks his life and the life of his wife to retain an abandoned bag of cash he finds at a shootout; his find-keepers, losers-weepers scheme ends in utter disaster. In Michael Clayton, the title character has a son, but no time for him. With failed restaurant debt, a broken family, and a gambling weakness upon his head, Clayton offers his son this consolation: he believes that his son is different and will achieve the success he himself has failed to reach. Sounds like a virtue the film treats as vice, right?

By the end, Clayton seems to realize that life means more than money, but what exactly does it mean? What ground enables Clayton to stand beside his final decision? The decision could be motivated by love of his son, it could be motivated by loyalty to his friend, or it could be motivated by a desire to outdo his enemies. Ultimately, the source of a higher significance remains ambiguous; the realm of ideals marks unfamiliar territory to Clayton. He knows his final act is a good one, and that he must perform it whatever its consequences; Edens at least showed him that much. But from there, who knows?

Still, something great lives in this film. In an environment without noble ideals, the human spirit exhibits its need for them; and, even if it knows not where to find them, it will still begin to search. This testament—combined a brilliant opening dialogue and a scene with horses full of awesome mystery—turn an average subject in a routine genre into a worthy endeavor.