Little Children: Film Review

The back cover of the DVD explains Little Children simply as a tale set in suburban America which explores the way in which a couple’s affair precipitates the unravelling of their lives (this is a paraphrase, not a quote. The actual description is about this length though!).

The setting is suburban America. The demographic is white, middle-class, conservative and aspiring. The lead characters, Sarah (Kate Winslet) and Brad (Patrick Wilson) are educated, bored and idealistic stay-at-home parents of young children. They are both in relationships that fail to satisfy emotionally and sexually. The latest news in the neighbourhood is that a man who was convicted of exposing himself to children has been released and is living in the area. This, of course, causes the hysteria one would expect from a community that values safety and certainty over almost all else. Indeed, little children are the most important aspect of life for the people in this community. Yet, for Sarah – with her Masters in English Literature – and Brad – a graduate of Law School – this aspiring life is anything but inspiring.

Thus, the recipe is there for a wonderfully clichéd exploration of the soul-destroying effects of the ‘American’ or, indeed, ‘Australian Dream’. Those in the film who are representative of the suburban culture, for the most part, are cast as simple, un-cultured and lacking any creativity and idealism. As I said, all the clichés are there.

So then, as I settled down to watch this movie, it became apparent that there would have to be either – and preferably all of – a great script, superb acting or careful, thoughtful directing for this to be more than a mere cliché.

The story moves quickly enough through the key events that shape the film. The fact that there are a number of plot conflicts, revolving around a number of different characters, provides the viewer the kind of variety which helps the film to maintain the audience’s interest. However, as can often result, there is a lack of engagement between the viewer and any one character.

Kate Winslet is – as always – very good as the leading actress and the direction (Todd Field) seemed to mostly get things right. Yet, despite this, I felt that the movie was not able to capture the audience as it should. I wonder whether it did not quite know exactly what it was trying to do and so just missed the mark in a number of ways. I almost felt as if I was watching the unravelling of the Film’s own existential crisis. It was not quite a great love story. It was not quite a psychological thriller. It was not quite a social commentary. It was not quite a tragedy.

Even the resolutions are ambiguous. When an equivocal ending causes us to ponder, wonder and discuss long after the film is over, it is often a triumph. Yet, the ambiguity in this film is not so much about how we are to respond to the climax, but exactly to what it is that we are to respond.

Nevertheless, if one can deal with the clichéd premise (or indeed can’t get enough of it!) of the film and its seemingly existential crisis, then there is enough in the way of interesting themes and subject matter to make viewing an enjoyable experience. For me, though, I just could not quite get into it.