Boyhood

Richard Linklater – USA – 2014

In my view, Richard Linklater is so head-and-shoulders above all of his contemporaries that he’s barely in the same business.  The difference may not be obvious, but I see him as a filmmaker who retains a childlike sense of wonder about the potential of cinema and makes films first and foremost because he loves film itself, not to win awards.  His films are about ideas rather than 'issues' and gimmicks.  They’re artistic without being arty; mysteriously spanning a difficult margin between American frankness and European experimentation, where he and his characters are as equally likely to play baseball or repair cars as to discuss quantum physics and existentialism, and in which lean narratives can suddenly give way to exhilarating, bold non-linear styles, and all without being cloying on one extreme or pretentious on the other, and, furthermore, all without it seeming to produce a sweat from his brow.  I don’t know how he does what he does, but ever since seeing Slacker in its original release in 1991, I have regarded him as a visionary auteur who – with no institutional training – instinctively knows how to engage an audience gently and hold it effortlessly; a dramatic contrast to the prevailing philosophy of most of his colleagues, which is to grab us by the throat and shout in our faces; which may impress the types of people who issue awards but which does not produce the feeling of spiritual edification that great art is supposed to inspire.  [The only real criticism I can make about Linklater is that his best films are too far between; it’s been a long time since Waking Life (2001) and there are just a few too many Bernie’s (2011) and Me & Orson Welles’s (2008) on his resume; though I suppose those may pay the bills.]

Boyhood takes its place in line with Linklater’s long career of introspective and warm coming-of-age stories.  By shooting scenes for the film once a year over the course of twelve years, he lets his characters age before our eyes.  What was known for so long as the “untitled 12-year project” would be worthy of praise for its design alone, but that was never enough for Linklater.  This concept is no mere gimmick; it both propels and underscores the very themes of the film, which have to do with choices, consequences, dreams, growing pains, breaking away, and the nourishment obtainable from strong art, which can compensate for its absence in other areas of life, such as the nuclear family.  Without ever being sly or winking to the audience, the film manages to convey everything that has been great about Linklater’s films; his comfort with leisurely pacing, his interest in having characters debate ideas that interest him, and most of all his pained affinity with youth.  Where Boyhood goes further than his past films is in its unflinching portrayal of the helpless position children are in; their fates are left to chance with regards to the horrible things that befall them at the hands of parents, teachers, and other authority figures, whose beliefs about mentoring are little more than justifications to take out on the powerless their anger and resentment about their own failures in life.  Seen from ages five to eighteen, Mason (Ellar Coltrane) is effectively presented by Linklater as a type of ‘everyman;’ likeable enough to be endearing as time goes on but not so specifically troubled or passionate that his story becomes more important than his journey.  More than ever, Linklater’s instincts are sharp and solid; he avoids predicable clichés like announcing the film’s jumps in time, tying up loose ends (or what would be considered ‘loose ends’ in other films), and making references to his own past work at times when it would get an easy smile from the viewer.  I can’t say any more that hasn’t been said by all the critics and fans already.  Linklater’s ambition, foresight, trust and patience are staggering – unheard of in today’s film world – and should put to shame all self-important filmmakers who are so content that they are doing grand and brilliant things.