Birdman (2014) ****½/5: This is a very good film that is a moving experience. I was a bit distracted by the fantastic elements which took something away from the film.

Birdman or the Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance is quite an impressive film and it continues the great tradition of films about the theatre. I was impressed because I was moved and for me that meant it achieved something. There is dazzling technique here and there is something to say about it but not in a general review. Some of the technique is not quite as effective but it’s dazzling for several reasons. The main effects of the techniques utilized in this film are the various transitions from backstage to live performance and the shift in perspective with no edit.

Birdman focuses on how a washed up movie star, Riggan Thomson (Michael Keaton), attempts to get his directorial debut on Broadway off the ground through a series of comedic mishaps. More fascinating is how he grapples with his demons particularly his birdman superhero persona that saw him attain so much fame in the distant past. With his directorial debut he attempts to be taken seriously as performing artist especially as he is pushed to the brink with his capabilities seriously challenged.

Positives

The primary positive in this film is the portrayal of Riggan’s battered psyche. The performance by Keaton is superb and I never knew he could be this superb, dramatically. On the surface Riggan tries to stay humble and pleasant but inside he is a mess as he duels with his birdman persona which suggests that he has a split personality. Every time he tries to assert himself he is beaten down or abused. This is the case with most people perceived as humble on the outside for underneath is a hotbed of repressed emotions as they give others the opportunity or confidence to unleash their own tirades or express themselves how they wish. When these humble individuals assert themselves it seems like a joke and they are mocked by the extroverts. It is almost similar to the picked on nerd who returns with a machine gun to kill everyone or the man who commits suicide because he feels that asserting himself has done no good whatsoever and only revealed his own weaknesses.  When people like this are broken they either  put forward their more aggressive persona and become unrecognizable because you never saw it coming or they simply retreat from the world. There are some telling scenes that expose him. For instance after a fiasco with the lead actor, the popular Mike Shiner (Edward Norton), Riggan unleashes a tirade in his room and when he is exposed one can almost feel for him because this is not how he is viewed customarily. Look for that discussion between Riggan  and Lesley (Naomi Watts) where we see Riggan in the mirror trying to stay pleasant as everything falls apart.  There is also a telling discussion with his daughter Sam (Emma Stone) that is also affecting and his encounter with The New York Times critic. All these scenes reveal how broken Riggan is; how far he has fallen from his glory days when he used to play the superhero birdman.

His birdman alter ego gives him the strength he needs but it also reveals how deluded or how lost he is. It actually reveals how shallow actors are where their fictional personas (in some cases) come to be a part of their identity. Some actors seem to become so immersed in their roles that you can’t really tell who they are apart from these personas on screen. It seems that Riggan has bought into his birdman persona as being characteristic of who he is. I guess for their own sanity it’s good for actors to attempt playing multiple characters and not be so dependent on one even though it brought you so much fame. One can understand why Riggan made the move to switch to broadway because it seems as if he is trying to find himself especially as for so long he has been dominated by this birdman persona internally and externally. Chris Rock attempted to portray this dilemma in his film Top Five though not as successfully as it is done here.

There are also some interesting comparisons and contrasts with the high excellence of the performing arts in the theatre and the commercial nature of film. Film has assumed its own identity where one does not have to excel in the performing arts to be considered for a role. All that is needed is a celebrity profile. This is a far cry from the days of All About Eve (1950) where one had to prove themselves in the performing arts before one could be considered a bona fide dramatic star. In those days you had to do a play or two to really prove yourself. In these days, thanks to the blockbuster, it’s not much of a requirement.  The theatre still clings to its high standards and Riggan has to grapple with this because he is known primarily for his blockbuster role as birdman. In this film it seems like more of a sign that his career is washed up when  he decides to do a play for broadway but in this age of blockbusters it is made clear in some very fantastic moments that he could easily return to Hollywood  for Birdman 4.

I liked the portrayal of backstage theatre particularly how Inarritu made the transition from backstage to the live performance sometimes without an edit. Also the roving camera backstage also switches perspective without edit in some cases and this is very impressive.  There is also change in perspective for the schizophrenic Riggan to the real world i.e. what’s going on in his head vs. what’s in the real world.

The film is also very comedic and although a lot of the comedy focuses on things falling apart around Riggan, Mike Shiner also shares in this comedic  spotlight. Edward Norton does very well here and I was impressed.

This film however does  contain some of the elements found in Shakespeare in Love (1998). This is true of one particular element in Shakespeare… where although things appear to be falling apart the character played by Geoffrey Rush is always asked how does he know that things will work out and he says something like ‘I don’t know they just do.’ This is also the case in Birdman where although things appear to be falling apart they will work out in the end although there is an explanation this time around as Riggan puts on the performance of his life.

Great supporting cast.

I was moved by this film and that must count for something.

I liked the downbeat musical score

Michael Keaton should have been able to identify with  the lead character considering his batman roles in  ’89 and ‘92.

Negatives

The primary negative in this film for me was that the fantastic elements that sought to bring out Riggan’s bird man persona were not as effective for me. The main reason is that while we understand that he used to play birdman can he be so mentally fragile that his alter ego is birdman himself. We see scenes where he believes that he can fly or has telekinetic powers but it takes away from the backstage reality and seems like a diversion rather than adding to the story.  It might be good to portray the fantastic elements that are the norm with these Mexican directors but the birdman persona is more effective as a voice than a image. It made me wonder if someone could really believe he’s birdman unless he is schizophrenic. Is he just sick or is it a fantasy within his mind? It’s not really clear but all indicators suggest that his mind is broken and that he is on the verge of madness.  The director still wants it to assume fantastic proportions and only once or twice hints that he is just crazy. Without that acknowledgment the birdman is just a broken man who has lost his grip on reality. So whereas it’s fantastic and comedic and we come to sympathize with Riggan’s plight there should have been a more realistic assessment of his insanity which would have sobered the film up somewhat.  

All those fantastic elements, therefore, seem more like madness than inspiration. Maybe that’s the point but it could have been dealt with better. Instead Riggan appears like a genius as a result of his actions. Even the final shot appears more  fantastic than sobering; naïve optimism instead of cynicism. His release is through madness but it’s never addressed. It does not take away from his performance towards the end, because he felt it, but it does seem like there was denial by the other characters.

Some of the issues related to the other characters were not resolved as everything is centred on Riggan and so they come across as caricatures in some cases. If not caricatures then  not very developed. It is not clear what their objectives are apart from being actors. Only Edward Norton’s character gets some sort of development in contrast to Riggan but the actresses could have had more to do in terms of being more central to the story. Emma stone does the best here but I felt there was more to be said on her part particularly as she provides support to the two male leads.