Winter's Bone (Debra Granik, 2010)

[Zot!]

I'm more confused at how treating its subjects as exotic means it does not treat them with respect. Those aren't opposing concepts

I think there was a discussion about Obama taking his mother to see Black Orpheus...which at least was exuberant about it's subject matter rather than bleak.

[Elmyr]

I'm really getting tired of meth dealers in the Ozarks being portrayed in such a bleak manner. Where is the exuberance!?

[Zot!]

I'm really getting tired of meth dealers in the Ozarks being portrayed in such a bleak manner. Where is the exuberance!?

Well the slums of Rio aren't all laughs either, but it manages to be a less condescending portrayal, despite what Obama might think. I think Winters Bone is more akin to something like Superfly than the harsh social-realism picture like Pixote that it wants to be. But now I'm just repeating myself.

[Elmyr]

I didn't find Winter's Bone condescending or its treatment of the characters to be that exotic because I recognized the people in it. Therefore I find any comparisons to Black Orpheus or Superfly a little off the mark. Horses for courses.

[Jeff]

The great credits sequence finds Ree's young siblings playing on the trampoline in a scene capturing the joy and innocence of their surroundings. Then there this lovely scene of authentic "hillbilly music," wherein Ree's extended family engage in the kind of authentic homespun entertainment and family bonding that you actually find in these communities.


It's a neo-noir though. You can't reasonably expect the entire movie to be a meth-fueled hootenanny. I would find a sunny musical about finding joie de vivre in an impoverished community full of meth labs somewhat condescending.

The movie is explicitly about rural poverty and the Ozark meth epidemic.

I am currently waiting for the comments about how The Godfather would have been great if it wasn't for all of the organized crime depicted in the film. Not all Italian Americans are like that, you know!

[James Mills]

I'm really getting tired of meth dealers in the Ozarks being portrayed in such a bleak manner. Where is the exuberance!?

Only not everyone in the Ozarks is affiliated with meth, and people that are affiliated with meth don't act like they do in Winter's Bone. Not one bit.

Yes, the idea that someone from the southern midwest would pay undue attention to the upkeep of their vehicle is totally unbelievable.

Perhaps if Granik tried to contextualize these secondary characters in some shape or form (can you tell me a single difference in all of the revolving robots she interrogates?), I would be more apt to believe that some are simply more cleaner than the others, and that some things are more likely to be taken care of while others appear halfheartedly weathered.

The movie is explicitly about rural poverty and the Ozark meth epidemic.

If this is what the film is really trying to say, then I would argue that it failed even more miserably than I had originally imagined. Not once is an explanation offered for why this area is impoverished, let alone is a resolution or even a dire cry for recognition ever hinted at. If it is really "about rural poverty and Ozark meth epidemic," what have we learned "about rural poverty and Ozark meth epidemic"? Why do either exist, how did they come about? What problems are prohibiting these citizens from overcoming poverty and addiction? What is the outcome of these issues? Why should I care? Do these things simply turn everyone into repugnant clones of one another or something?

[mfunk9786]

Have you been to the Ozarks, then?

[James Mills]

Have you been to the Ozarks, then?

No, nor did I ever imply that I had specific insight into them, so what is your point? I think it's safe to say that not 100% of its grown citizens are affiliated with meth (which is the only assumption I made about the Ozarks). Even if they were, I'd appreciate it if the film explained why this problem had reached multiple standard deviations past the normal rate of the rest of the country, let alone why I should care about it.

[domino harvey]

Have you been to the Ozarks, then?

No, nor did I ever imply that I had specific insight into them, so what is your point?

You've got to be kidding-- you've done nothing but this. Your argument is that this film gets a subsection of the United States of which you know nothing "wrong."

[mfunk9786]

Is James Mills some sort of dignitary or something? I am getting posts deleted that call into question the validity of his at this point? Really, mods?

[swo17]

I think it's safe to say that not 100% of its grown citizens are affiliated with meth (which is the only assumption I made about the Ozarks).

Nowhere near 100% of the people shown in the film are affiliated with the meth trade. Yes, many of the characters with speaking parts are, but how else would you propose telling the story of this film?

[mfunk9786]

Oh no, now you've gone and done it, he's going to tell us how he would propose telling the story of this film. Thanks a lot, swo.

[James Mills]

Have you been to the Ozarks, then?

No, nor did I ever imply that I had specific insight into them, so what is your point?

You've got to be kidding-- you've done nothing but this. Your argument is that this film gets a subsection of the United States of which you know nothing "wrong."

Talk about lazy hyperbole. As I have repeatedly stated, the film does nothing to explain why matters are so severe in this area, not that they "got it wrong". The only thing they explicitly "got wrong" was their portrayal of meth addicts, and I'm not going to repeat myself for the tenth time as to why they got that wrong.

You and mfunk go around quoting one sentence from an entire discourse and wrap it with red tape. I'm not going to entertain your trolling any longer, elaborate and comment on my entire posts if you actually want to discuss something and not just argue about something.

Nowhere near 100% of the people shown in the film are affiliated with the meth trade. Yes, many of the characters with speaking parts are, but how else would you propose telling the story of this film?

Which characters weren't then? The (inexplicably) crazy mother? I honestly don't remember that well.

[domino harvey]

No, nor did I ever imply that I had specific insight into them, so what is your point?

You've got to be kidding-- you've done nothing but this. Your argument is that this film gets a subsection of the United States of which you know nothing "wrong."

Talk about lazy hyperbole.

You've got to be kidding-- you've done nothing but this.

[Jeff]

Only not everyone in the Ozarks is affiliated with meth, and people that are affiliated with meth don't act like they do in Winter's Bone. Not one bit.

The movie never implied that everyone in the Ozarks is affiliated with meth. It implied that this specific group of fictional people that are depicted in the film are affiliated with meth. I'm certainly not an expert in what people "affiliated with meth" act like. I didn't even realize that there was a specific set of traits that such people should exhibit. What did the characters in Winter's Bone do that struck you as particularly unmethlike?

The movie is explicitly about rural poverty and the Ozark meth epidemic.

If this is what the film is really trying to say, then I would argue that it failed even more miserably than I had originally imagined. Not once is an explanation offered for why this area is impoverished, let alone is a resolution or even a dire cry for recognition ever hinted at. If it is really "about rural poverty and Ozark meth epidemic," what have we learned "about rural poverty and Ozark meth epidemic"? Why do either exist, how did they come about? What problems are prohibiting these citizens from overcoming poverty and addiction? What is the outcome of these issues? Why should I care? Do these things simply turn everyone into repugnant clones of one another or something?

I said it is about those things, not that it is "trying to say" something about them, which is completely different. It does not have a Message (though I think Teardrop should star in one of those "not even once" ads). You're not intended to learn anything about how rural poverty and the Meth epidemic came about or why they exist. It is not a documentary. If you were genuinely interested in such things, you could read the House Committee on Government Reform's report, Ice in the Ozarks [PDF].

The film is about these things in the sense that you are supposed to accept the reality of rural poverty and a major meth problem in the Ozarks as a matter of course. We understand that these things are impediments to adequate pursuit of happiness in this region, and that they produce added conflict and disharmony for those who live there. They form the milieu in which the noir-styled narrative is situated, and this particular regional and situational uniqueness (or exoticism, if you prefer) is what gives the story flavor and character.

I'd appreciate it if the film explained why this problem had reached multiple standard deviations past the normal rate of the rest of the country, let alone why I should care about it.

It's not the film's job to explain why the problem exists. It is simply a fact that it does. It is, as they say in some circles, indisputable. I don't think the filmmakers expect you to do anything about poverty or meth addiction. I don't want to speak for Woodrell or Granik, but I suspect that they are assuming you'll "care about it" because you are a human being with a capacity for empathy. You'll see the hardships it creates for their characters, and you'll become that much more interested in their narrative because of it. Or perhaps not.

[swo17]

Which characters weren't then? The (inexplicably) crazy mother? I honestly don't remember that well.

Off the top of my head, the family who play the musical number shown in Jeff's photo above, the Army recruiter, the bail bondsman, and Ree and her siblings. As for everyone else, it shouldn't be that surprising that Ree goes to people involved in the meth trade to find information about her meth-dealing father.

[James Mills]

What did the characters in Winter's Bone do that struck you as particularly unmethlike?

Again, I'm sorry but I'm not going to repeat this anymore. Read my original posts.

I said it is about those things, not that it is "trying to say" something about them, which is completely different. It does not have a Message (though I think Teardrop should star in one of those "not even once" ads). You're not intended to learn anything about how rural poverty and the Meth epidemic came about or why they exist. It is not a documentary. If you were genuinely interested in such things, you could read the House Committee on Government Reform's report, Ice in the Ozarks [PDF]. It is about these things in the sense that you are supposed to accept the reality of rural poverty and a major meth problem in the Ozarks as a matter of course. We understand that these things are impediments to adequate pursuit of happiness in this region, and that they produce added conflict and disharmony for those who live there. They form the milieu in which the noir-styled narrative is situated, and this particular regional and situational uniqueness (or exoticism, if you prefer) is what gives the story flavor and character.

So, in other words, the area's poverty and meth addiction simply present an attractive locale for a suspenseful noir film? It takes more inspection into these issues for me to care about them, as I'm not interested in mere exploitation.

Off the top of my head, the family who play the musical number shown in Jeff's photo above, the Army recruiter, the bail bondsman, and Ree and her siblings. As for everyone else, it shouldn't be that surprising that Ree goes to people involved in the meth trade to find information about her meth-dealing father.

Actually, the crude closeups and same creepy direction of that musical scene suggest that these people are also backward and addicted to meth, not the opposite (and it certainly never implies that they're not addicted to meth). Because they're not from the same area, the normality of the army recruiter and bail bondsman (both acted awfully imo) is accentuated to emphasize how backward everyone from the Ozarks is; that further proves my point. And obviously Ree and her siblings aren't addicted to meth, they're the "good guys". Everyone else are "bad guys". Unfortunately, that's about as in depth as we get with anyone in this film.

[domino harvey]

If you think the army recruiter "acted horribly," I just... Wow. At this point I'm not convinced you've actually met a human being

[Jeff]

What did the characters in Winter's Bone do that struck you as particularly unmethlike?

Again, I'm sorry but I'm not going to repeat this anymore. Read my original posts.

My fault. I did inadverdently skim over this earlier comment from you:

Also, having been raised by a meth addicted mother, I can assure you that meth addicts don't act like anyone in this film. They don't stare each other in the eyes and make coherent sentences, or talk in clever prose, let alone readily offer meth to each other in every scene (effusive reminders that "there's drugs here!"). It's actually quite the opposite in every instance.

I'm not convinced, however, that every meth addict in the United States behaves in exactly the same manner. It sounds like what you're really saying here is that you had a problem with John Hawkes' acting, which is a much more specific reservation than questioning the authenticity of the entire film.

So, in other words, the area's poverty and meth addiction simply present an attractive locale for a suspenseful noir film? It takes more inspection into these issues for me to care about them, as I'm not interested in mere exploitation.

Attractive? No. Specifically unattractive. Suspenseful, sure. More importantly, the distinctive setting adds interest and distinguishes it from other, similar suspense narratives. I guess I simply do not find the mere presentation of authentic settings to be inherently exploitative of those settings.

[Michael Kerpan]

Is it simply my imagination -- or is the rhetorical "style" of old Mr. Nothing and new Mr. Mills quite similar? Perhaps the latter has carefully studied the methods of the former?

[Tribe]

Is it simply my imagination -- or is the rhetorical "style" of old Mr. Nothing and new Mr. Mills quite similar?

You aren't the only one who has noticed the similarities...Mr. Mills though, to his credit, has not yet reached the level of sheer offensiveness of The Other.

[mfunk9786]

Unless you mean offending others' intelligence, in which case...

[Mr Sausage]

Mr. Mills, you should check your Private Message inbox.

[Grand Illusion]

Mr. Mills, you should check your Private Message inbox.

Teacher says, "Please see me after class." And all the students whisper.

[HistoryProf]

for a year that was rather exceptional with the number of outlandish trolls around here, this thread is a rockingly apropos end to 2010.