Roman Polanski‘s Carnage is my kind of film. Cast four talented actors, throw ’em in a room, give them something to argue about, add some biting dialogue and see what happens. Played as a dark comedy, Carnage is only a comedy because life is truly funny and equally absurd, especially when you mix parents, emotions, children and alcohol and this film only gets better and better the higher tempers rise and the more alcohol gets consumed.
Yasmina Reza and Polanski adapted the script from Reza’s Tony Award-winning drama “God of Carnage,” which, from what I’ve read, is magnificent. Having never seen it I am blissfully unaware of how good it may be on stage and only have this film to go by and for my money it’s worth every cent.
Set in a New York City apartment, Carnage centers on two couples whose boys have had a bit of a “disagreement” at the playground, which resulted in one hitting the other in the face with a stick, making for a necessary visit to the ER. Jodie Foster and John C. Reilly play the parents of the “victim” in this case and they’ve called over the parents of the “guilty” party (Kate Winslet and Christoph Waltz) to settle matters like adults rather than get into a petty legal squabble. What begins as a cordial exchange soon devolves into spit and hellfire as common courtesy goes out the window.
I won’t go so far as to say this is a perfect film, because it isn’t, but that doesn’t take away from my appreciation and enjoyment. Within the first few minutes I was looking on with a questioning glance as Winslet and Waltz were already in the hallway, making their way to the elevator as matters seemed to have already been resolved. A few words are exchanged and they’re invited back in for coffee.
This “get them back in the apartment” technique is used more than once and the comedy isn’t so farcical that it’s funny they can’t seem to part ways. Instead it’s the film’s lone frustration, but one I was able to overlook and enjoy the fracas once the parties were back inside. I saw these moments as brief breaks from the battle within the apartment walls.
The cast was perfect and while they may not be playing people you like or can necessarily identify with, that doesn’t mean what they’re doing isn’t entirely entertaining. Jodie Foster plays Penelope Longstreet, a self-declared “good person” who spouts off about her volunteer work in Africa and her recipes. She’s married to Michael (Reilly), a home-goods salesman who’s a bit softer in his approach and by no means a match for his wife’s intensity as Foster grows increasingly enraged as the film moves forward.
Kate Winslet plays Nancy Cowan who’s just as perturbed by Penelope’s attempts to tell her how to raise her son as she is by her husband’s constant cell phone interruptions as Christoph Waltz plays Alan Cowan, who, in my opinion, steals the show.
Alan is a big shot lawyer and for most of the running time he’s seen interrupting the conversation by stepping away to take a phone call. When he’s not on his phone he’s prone to short answers and questions, often meant to push buttons more than actually arrive at a solution. His approach to the conversation is absolutely delicious as far as I’m concerned as he’s not against taking advantage of even the slightest weakness in someone’s argument and using it to forward an agenda he clearly doesn’t care much about, but would rather toy with the people in the room for his own amusement.
After all, Alan is only sticking around because his wife insists, he couldn’t care less what comes as a result of this conversation, believing his son to be a juvenile delinquent, much to his wife’s disapproval, and even invites Penelope to talk to him if she truly wishes to do so. It’s his ultimate insult to Penelope as they are the two truly waging war here and when he shows clear indifference to a situation that resulted in her son having to visit the hospital it throws her over the edge.
Polanski doesn’t do much more than let the camera capture the action, this is an actor’s feature and he lets them chew up the scenery. I can imagine people not liking the film because it doesn’t seem real or because they simply don’t like the characters. These are fair arguments, but I don’t think they are realistic nitpicks. This is clearly a heightened reality meant for this film alone. Neither marriage in this film is a good one as neither couple respects their partner and the conversation here allows those feelings to come forward.
I wouldn’t believe for a second that either of these marriages could possibly survive, these couples are married for one reason, for this movie to exist. That’s fine with me because it’s all about the argument and I love a good argument. I don’t care what these people do in their day-to-day lives, the more I learn about them here the less I would ever care about what they do outside of these 79 minutes. The argument at the core of this film reveals their true colors, then again, who’s to say if you don’t put just about anyone in this world in the exact same situation they wouldn’t react the same way or even worse?
