SPOILERS******SPOILERS*****SPOILERSIf I am asked which would be my favorite Hugh Jackman performance, which would it be --
(Don't look but the answer will be at the bottom of this page
)
Let's talk about BAD EDUCATION --
I had toyed with the idea of watching it a second time since I have it on a streaming service, but decided against it.
Because
first impressions always reflect my instinctive reaction to the movie. And SORRY if I sound preachy here - because this story is like a morality tale at heart.
When I was a fresh graduate with an accountancy major, one of my first jobs is to be the lowest member of the totem poles of external auditors who audit the financial statements of client companies. I remember that on the first day of office, I was not asked to go to training right away. Instead, I was asked to relax and read a book. It was called "The Thief in The White Collar"!
Because most corporate malfeasance happens presumably with those who are not expected to be criminals!
That was what struck when I first learned the basic plot of BAD EDUCATION. That it will be more investigative in nature, but with a very charming persona guilty of the crime.
What it turned out to be was a story which could not decide whether it was a crime story, a dark comedy, or simply human drama! Or all three, so it now seems ! But all for the good! What a stunning film focused on characters!
Its central character, if you look at his real identity, does not strike me as charismatic enough to have accomplished all that he did in raising the profile of the community because of what he did for the school or did not even look as if he would be guilty of the crimes he was charged with. But it seems that in real life, he did fully believe that everything he did was not all criminal ( when charged of the corporate theft of $ 2.2 million, he allegedly protested that he only stole $ 1.1 million or approximately in that vicinity) because he probably believed that in some gray areas ( the so-called "representation & entertainment" expenses in real life), he was doing it all for the good of the school. Which raises the moral issue of when a crime is committed or was it done in the interest of the institution. Also, having an auditor mentality - I have thought of 2 malfeasances that may have been overlooked. What was the auditor doing all this time? It's not as if only 1 criminal act was committed over time. What about the external auditors that review financial statements for purposes of attesting to their relative accuracy? Over the years, the crimes were overlooked and a high school junior was sharper that all those formally trained to do their jobs correctly. What about institutional/corporate oversight from the Board of Directors? They may have exercised some leeway in allowing certain expenditures, but for it to reach the $ 11 million level reflected either some amount of complicity ( because it benefitted them indirectly through enhanced property values) or neglect!
And sometimes one also wonders if the competitive pressure to succeed or to reach a desired level of affluence or social influence at whatever cost ( to be at the top!) reflects on the role of society in shaping values and actuations.
Beyond those issues --
if we concentrate simply on the telling of the story before, during, and after the criminal acts were discovered -- it was enjoyable storytelling that was full of human drama! The character study of Frank Tassone, as so very well-portrayed by Hugh Jackman, is quite an acting feat. The nuances in his character - his personal aspirations, his succumbing to continuing flattery from the school body, even the life he led outside of the ambit of the famous school, his unravelling moments ( especially his poignant reference to wanting to be a teacher), all signify how an actor of the caliber of Hugh can emote simply by facial expressions, body language, and vocal inflection -- changing from the proud school superintendent to the irony of his downfall! I have always liked Hugh when he does drama ( that is why I like seeing him in plays on Broadway or in movies) - because that is where his training and instincts as a dramatic actor are elevated! He enjoys musicals but in drama his nuanced potrayals are heightened and can even be mesmerizing. Look at the reactions to his portrayal of Frank Tassone - it looks like the critics, the film bloggers, and the fans are one in giving him the ultimate thumbs-up for being such a great actor. And he does not even look like Frank Tassone - so no mimicry! This is one reason why I don't like biopics - when the actors focus more on looking like and acting like and speaking like the person being portrayed. What Hugh did was probably to study the motivations of the person, adapt his impressions of the character into his portrayal... so what we see is the essence of what drove the story ( not the weight loss or gain, not the hairstyle or the facial hair). So, all hail to Hugh Jackman for utilizing all his dramatic gifts to give us a portrait of a man at the height of his powers and in his inevitable downfall.
Allison Janney portrays a more one-sided character. From the beginning, she had taken advantage of her position for big gains ( I was quite surprised to learn that Pam Gluckin actually stole double what Frank Tassone did but was given a lighter sentence because she testified against Tassone) early on. Frank confessed that it started with petty theft ( charging a sandwich and a salad to the school credit card, but with Pam's complicity, it grew and grew). Allison portrays the hardnosed assistant with authority and even when her crimes came to the forefront, she was still pretty much sure of her composure ( except for that moment of despair when she realize she could no longer find a job of similar prestige). The persons portrayed by Allison and Hugh were equally ambitious and they had found that each could cover up for each other. Their fall from grace was exceptionally well-acted ( I was laughing when they showed her final note to Frank : "I'm not the sociopath here") while Frank seemed more lost!
While she had reaped favorable reviews, I am not so sure of the portrayal of the student Rachel. It seems that being only half -interested in the project initially, all of a sudden she gains not just the determination but the technical skill to do a full audit!
But the movie is complex, thought-provoking, and a well-made film. I did not find the pace lagging ( as some people suggested) when they were trying to establish the characters and how they became who they were before the crimes were found out. To me, it is also personally resonant, having been involved in corporate investigations into corporate malfeasance. Sometimes there are stories that can be heart-breaking...but one has to bear in mind that objectivity must prevail and use compassion only when it is called for.
The sets are very realistic, the cinematography focused too much on Hugh's wrinkles ( LOL!), the film scoring came in not too often and at the right time, the costume department exaggerated too much ( who thought of giving Hugh that paunch - too much bread, Mr. Jackman
), while that hairstyle is worse than his bald look in other movies. Also, Cory Finley does not know how to direct a dancing scene for a Broadway triple-threat
I will likely change some of my opinion after I have seen it a few times.
End of first impressions!
Has this dramatic performance knocked over my favorite acting portrayal from Hugh.
Er… No
I still like how he portrayed that singing convict-turned mayor-turned Dad-turned revolutionary and who spoke French in his mind. The character arc is more magnificent and the portrayal touched the heart and the mind more! Still my gold standard!
But for sheer ability to stun us with an unexpected multi-layer portrayal -- this deserves to be considered for the best acting honors for Hugh Jackman !
Jo
OZalots HQ - a place to celebrate The Boy(s) From OZ
)