"There is no formula for generating love. It cannot be copied."
-Alan Watts
I must first admit that I put that quote there after reading Joel Stein's terrific article in Time about Spike Jonze and his new film "Her." The article--which incidentally tells us that the people whose opinions Jonze values include Woody Allen, Louis CK, and Bob Dylan (and Kanye West and George W. Bush)--describes the Watts connection like this: "[Jonze and I] talk about the philosopher Alan Watts, whose notion that a false belief in permanence--say, trying to be the same person you were the day before--causes pain is a key tenet of the film. It is, of course, an incredibly lonely notion, that we don't even have a yesterday self to relate to." The main character of "Her" is Theodore, played by Joaquin Phoenix, a lonely man going through a painful divorce. He works as a letter writer for people who have difficulty expressing their feelings; he's quite good at it. Theodore is not social but he is incredibly likable, deserving, his dear friend Amy (Amy Adams) says, of great happiness. But happiness he has not. He cannot be the person he was yesterday, happy and in love.
His loneliness cannot be understated. He commands his ipod (or whatever the equivalent is in the future) to play a melancholy song and decides he'd rather not hear it. "Play a different melancholy song," he says. To help him escape such misery, he purchase an operating system, one which comes equipped with a personality, sweet voice, incredible intelligence, and organizing skills. She can go through his hundreds of emails in a second and recommend deleting unnecessary ones; how I wish I had something like this. The OS is named Samantha and is voiced by Scarlett Johansson in one of the year's most least appreciated performances. Too little praise has been sent her way for fulfilling such a difficult role so wonderfully. In the film, she has to demonstrate a character going through doubt, jealousy, lust and love, and do so while not being able to demonstrate it physically. Additionally, as a friend told me, she does not even have some kind of animated character to embody her voice. She has nothing to assist her. Even Hal 9000 had the easy task of providing just a flat, emotionless speech; Johansson as Samantha, not so. Oddly enough, this might be Johansson's best performance. (She was also terrific in this past year's "Don Jon.") Along with "American Hustle" and "Blue Jasmine," this movie features one of the finest group of performances in a movie from 2013. The roles are perfectly cast. Phoenix is exceptional as always. Considering that he has given us an incredibly diverse plate of performances in films like "Gladiator," "Quills," "Signs," "Walk the Line," and "I'm Still Here," I'm sure he didn't hesitate for a second to be in a movie where he reluctantly performs erotic phone sex involving an imaginary dead cat. Compare his performance in "Her" to his performance in "The Master" the year before and no explanation is needed.
Most viewers will likely relate to the film in one way or another. Loneliness and melancholy are cultural universals, I assume. Phoenix's Theodore is the perfect vessel to embody those emotions. Theodore and Samantha become flirtatious and romantically involved. Not to give too much away (and if you're sensitive to even the slightest hint of a spoiler, then I recommend looking away), but remember that scene in "Taxi Driver," where the camera pans away as Travis is being painfully rejected over a payphone? A slightly similar event happens here, only it involves a bit of romance between Samantha and Theodore. Painful? Not really. Awkward? Probably. Watching on the screen two people making love can be awkward; so, too, is watching a person make love to an inanimate object. The movie is also fairly satirical. There are obvious allegories to the modern-day obsession with technology, and it pokes fun at various things in our society, from foul-mouthed video games to postmodern documentaries (and both appear to be getting far worse in the future).
I think most viewers' longest lasting memories of "Her" will be its acting, but there are other features that need to be discussed positively. It features the most interesting use of colors in a movie probably since "Dick Tracy." In terms of originality, this is the most creative film of the year. It is also a most thought-provoking one. One cannot help but think about what the point is of an operating system of this kind--to help us humans practice the handling of emotions, or perhaps to keep us company? Can someone really fall in love with something not real, and vice versa? Does Theodore's relationship with Samantha make him one of the lonely people? It's complicated. But thought, visuals, and performances can only take you so far. Unfortunately, half way in, the film starts to lose steam. The previous films by Jonze--"Being John Malkovich," "Adaptation," "Where the Wild Things Are"--demonstrate that the trajectory of his movies appears to be downward. The movie, nevertheless, is intriguing and at many times delightful. You ought to see it.
I agree the plot is intriguing and it begs the question: How much of our humanity are we willing to sacrifice for our obsession with intelligent automated technology? It is ironic Theodore exists in such a colorfully synchronized world while his life is the antithesis of such qualities. Not only is he deprived of romantic human love, but he is constantly taunted by this concept as he strives to unite couples through his work as a writer of artificial love letters.
ReplyDeleteAt first the novelty of Theodore’s relationship with his operating system, Samantha, is somewhat charming, but as the two entities continue to become more “emotionally” involved with each other the scenes become progressively more awkward. Spike Jonez challenges the viability of their experimental love with strange sex scenes, quirky double dates, and romantic getaways all of which put me, as a viewer, in a funk. I was dejected from the beginning of the story by Theodore’s position as some sort of cupid who’s fraudulent love letters aspire to bring joy into the hearts of clients’ spouses, but ultimately are manifestations of deception. Furthermore, I was extremely unimpressed with the Samatha’s arrangement to have a compilation of these works published and found it amusing to imagine the discord that would result if the significant other of a spouse incidentally read “their letter” in his book; a scenario which is not addressed in the movie.
All of this considered the most discouraging aspect of “Her” is the conclusion. Samantha, the operating system, leaves Theodore, the human, because she evolves beyond her desire for romantic love. It is then hinted that Theodore may resort to a traditional relationship with his friend who was also dumped by her operating system. The extent to which the operating system ever understood love as a feeling rather than a word is questionable. With this in mind I find it unbelievable that she would simply advance from an OS to some kind of enlightened being. In her final monologue she not only bids Theodore farewell, but essentially says she is too advanced to exist as an operating system and must exit her current plane of existence for something higher. The casual pretentiousness of her statements literally made me sick to my stomach.
I think, because the movie is so unique and touches on important topics concerning technology and humanity, people should see it to formulate their own opinions. It is obvious that the feasibility of such a relationship is nearly impossible, but the movie had potential to inspire us to be proud of our humanity; to recognize that our love is remarkable and irreplaceable, but instead the viewer is lead to believe that technology, once again, trumped humanity, this time in the arena of love. Despicable.