The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com
Arts
Tuesday, February 7, 2017 — 5
‘Becoming Warren’ does
not do the Sage justice
HBO documentary scratches the surface of Warren
Buffet’s fascinating rise to the top of his industry, beyond
Whenever Warren Buffett’s
name is mentioned, there’s
a certain mystique attached.
It’s not simply because he’s
wealthy — his net worth is
estimated to be around 60
billion dollars — but because
of his idiosyncrasies. Buffett
has come to be defined by
his
eccentric
personality,
but,
unfortunately,
HBO’s
new documentary about the
financial magnate, “Becoming
Warren
Buffet,”
fails
to
offer more than a cursory
perspective
into
the
most
intriguing
aspects
of
the
investor’s life.
Directed by documentary
vets Peter Kunhardt (“Nixon
by Nixon: In His Own Words”)
and Brian Oakes (“Jim: The
James
Foley
Story”),
the
biopic sees Buffet chronicling
his rise in his own words.
The
documentary
includes
interviews
with
many
of
Buffett’s
colleagues,
family members
and
friends.
This is easily
the
strongest
aspect
of
“Becoming
Warren
Buffett,”
with
Buffett’s
longtime
co-worker
Charlie Munger
offering
particularly
insightful
anecdotes
about
the
billionaire.
Outside
these
interviews, the documentary
features extensive footage of
Buffett’s daily life, depicting
his morning routine of a
three-dollar
McDonald’s
breakfast sandwich and five-
minute drive to the offices of
the financial conglomerate he
took over in 1970, Berkshire
Hathaway.
Due to Buffet’s intimate
connection
with
Berkshire
Hathaway, “Becoming Warren
Buffett” devotes much of its
time to the firm’s history. The
documentary
outlines
the
winding road the company
has taken since its founding in
1839 to its present ownership
stakes in Coca-Cola, Kraft
and American Express, which
have netted the
company billions
of
dollars
annually. While
these scenes of
the
company’s
history
don’t
make
for
the
most
exciting
television,
the
documentary
does
well
at
explaining Buffet’s decisions
in a clear, succinct way that
makes the firm’s range of
dealings
understandable
to
less financially savvy viewers.
It’s unfortunate, however,
that the documentary is so
keen on focusing on Berkshire
Hathaway.
Learning about
the
financial
behemoth
is
interesting,
but
for
a
Warren Buffett
documentary
to
succeed
it
must focus on
the
real
star
of
the
show:
Buffett, in all
his
eccentric
glory. Although
“Becoming Warren Buffett”
does portray a few of Buffett’s
quirks, like his fondness for
Coca-Cola, it spends far too
little time on them, instead
focusing on the trite, battle-
tested, “rags-to-riches” story
arc. That’s not to suggest that
Buffett’s rise isn’t fascinating,
but it represents a massive
missed opportunity for the
documentary
to
dive
into
what makes the proclaimed
“Sage of Omaha” tick. Even
more disappointing is that
when the documentary does
provide
these
glimpses
of
Buffet’s character — like when
he chooses to buy a 22 cent
cheaper meal simply because
the stock market is down that
day — the biopic is enthralling,
and Buffett’s character begins
to shine through the screen.
At
times,
“Becoming
Warren Buffett”
feels rushed and
it’s
apparent
the
filmmakers
struggled to fit all
of Buffett’s story
into a 90-minute
documentary.
The result is a product without
strong
focus;
one
that
is
content to show Buffett’s life
without going beyond surface
level analysis. For example,
the documentary emphasizes
Buffett’s hatred of Wall Street
and his moral opposition to
predatory banks, yet does not
seek his thoughts on the 2008
financial crisis, which saw
millions of Americans lose
their homes due to cutthroat
banks taking advantage of
them. Confining Buffett to
this sort of vacuum prevents
viewers
from
gaining
a
clearer perspective into his
character, and this, too, feels
like a missed opportunity for
the documentary to separate
itself from other stories about
Buffett’s life.
Overall,
while
“Becoming
Warren
Buffett”
offers
an
intriguing
view
into
the
billionaire’s life, it feels like a
half-baked documentary. The
biopic fails to delve farther. It
likely could have benefited from
a move to a full two-hour piece.
In its current format, however,
the documentary fails to take
advantage of its unique subject
— the Sage of Omaha deserved
more than this.
HBO
Billionaire Warren Buffet
CONNOR GRADY
For the Daily
“The Space Between Us” is a
paradox: A film with an original
premise but no other original
thoughts. In the beginning, it
is intriguing in just how many
uncharted paths it can take its
characters. It just so happens
that it goes down the same path
that almost every other young
adult romance flick travels. It
has everything — no trope goes
unused; no stereotype need fear
being turned away. “The Space
Between Us” has room for all.
Anybody who has been to the
movies in the last decade has
seen this teen-angst-character-
drama-romance before. This
time around, it’s just been thinly
reskinned as a sci-fi movie.
Asa
Butterfield
(“Miss
Peregrine’s Home for Peculiar
Children”) stars as Gardner, a
fish-out-of-water boy, born on
a human colony on Mars, who
is destined to charm everyone
he
meets
with
his
other-
worldliness. Gardner wants to
go to Earth to find his father,
but he can’t go to Earth because
— and this is completely serious
— his heart is just too darn big.
Still, it’s nothing a little bit of
poorly explained surgery can’t
cure, or rather, postpone until
it’s convenient to the plot, and
it’s not long before Gardner is
off to Earth.
Once there, he meets up
with Tulsa (Britt Robertson, “A
Dog’s Purpose”), a collection
of half-baked character molds
crammed into a single teenage
girl who he met online and who
follows him on his journey with
no questions asked. Together,
they strike off on a road trip
backed by an unending parade
of sappy soft rock songs, and
within
twenty-four
hours,
they’ve fallen in love, because
no one understands them like
they understand each other.
Gardner
and
Tulsa’s
relationship is defined by two
things: his performance and
her dialogue, and neither does
the pair any favors. To his
credit,
Butterfield
embodies
the physicality of Gardner, who
isn’t used to Earth’s gravity,
but emotionally he just doesn’t
work. Any scene that requires
him to emote falls flat. Tulsa,
on the other hand, is plagued
with phrases like “Everyone’s
fronting” and “See you in the
funny papers,” both of which
haven’t
been
used
by
any
teenager since the 1980’s, but
have
apparently
come back into
prominence
by
whatever
crudely
defined
future
period
in
which
“The
Space
Between
Us” takes place.
Eventually, after
a few of the most
excruciatingly
hard-to-watch
romance
scenes
since George Lucas gifted the
world “Attack of the Clones,”
Gardner and Tulsa give into
their feelings and engage in
ludicrously
out-of-place
off-
screen sex. It would almost
be glorious if it weren’t so
awkward.
Besides the fact that almost
every line of dialogue and
character
interaction
feels
copy-and-pasted
from
other,
better movies, the biggest issue
with “The Space Between Us”
is
that
it
lacks
confidence. It is
unsure
of
itself
at
every
turn.
It
can’t
decide
whether
or
not
Gardner is socially
maladjusted;
halfway
through
the first act, it just
springs it on the
audience.
Then,
it
can’t
decide
how
socially
maladjusted Gardner is. He
starts out normal, then has a
working knowledge of Earth,
but by the halfway point he
doesn’t even know what a
horse is. It can’t decide on the
relationship between Nathaniel
Shepherd
(Gary
Oldman,
“Criminal”), the founder of the
Mars mission, and Gardner, a
bond which should define the
film from the outset, but which
takes so many twists and turns
that it’s hard to get a handle on.
Coming into the third act,
“The Space Between Us” is
already on thin ice, but it’s the
climax and the accompanying
twist
which
take
it
from
boring and generic to gleefully,
magnificently
stupid.
Not
only do the final ten minutes
undo, or otherwise ignore, all
of the work done on several
characters, but nothing that
happens
makes
any
sense.
There was no foreshadowing
to what happens, and the film
must then spend so much time
wrapping up the consequences
of that one bad decision that it
forgets to give resolutions to
half of the plotlines it already
started. It ends as paradoxical
as it began, now a film that
feels overlong yet lacking any
satisfying ending.
JEREMIAH VANDERHELM
Daily Arts Writer
D
“The Space
Between Us”
Rave, Quality 16
STX Cinemas
“Becoming
Warren Buffet”
HBO
Streaming Online
Much
of
the
stigma
surrounding young adult novels
is undeserved. People point
to the tired tropes of the most
laughable YA novels as being
representative of the whole
genre — love triangles, mean
boys in leather jackets with
secret crushes, bland female
protagonists named Elektra or
Aurora or whatever, nouns being
unnecessarily capitalized in the
place of actual worldbuilding,
etc.
And
yes,
these
tropes
are pervasive and annoying,
but they’re window dressing.
They’re never at the heart of
what
makes
teenagers
love
young adult books.
Cliché is not the same as bad.
If this were true, then I guess we
all would really hate “Star Wars.”
After all, it’s home to all those
dumb tropes like love triangles,
mean boys in leather jackets and
the
egregiously
capitalized
Empire
and
Republic.
Many
of
the
surface-level YA
criticisms
have
much more to do
with derision of
teenage girls and
the things made
for/written
by
women than they
do concerns over
actual
literary
quality, but I digress.
What I’m trying to get at
here is that a book that features
corsets
and
enchantments
and not one, but two mean
boys in leather jackets with
hidden hearts of gold, is not
inherently dumb or bad. Silly?
Yes. Ridiculous wish-fulfillment
fantasy? Absolutely. Fun as hell?
But of course.
Stephanie Garber’s “Caraval”
is 400 pages of pure pulp joy.
The
protagonist,
Scarlett
(spoiler: she wears many red
dresses,
because
of
course
she does) is the daughter of a
powerful, ruthless and violent
man who terrorizes her and her
sister Tella (short for Donatella,
because of course it is). Scarlett
is engaged to be married to a man
she has never met,
but
she
secretly
dreams of seeing
Caraval, an annual
performance
where the audience
participates in a
Hunger
Games
minus the murder
(well, kind of) style
of
competition.
Caraval
is
a
weeklong experience in which
participants stay on a magical
island where they solve a series
of riddles, competing to see
who can get to the end of the
puzzle first. With the help of the
mysterious sexpot sailor Julian
(Leather Jacket Boy #1), Scarlett
and
Tella
are
whisked
away
to
the
show,
where Tella is
immediately
kidnapped
by
the
magical
mastermind
Legend,
who
is
also
the
organizer
of
the
event.
In
this
year’s
competition,
whoever
finds
Tella first is the winner of the
Caraval. It’s up to Scarlett, with
the help of Julian, to find Tella
and return home in time for her
wedding.
“Caraval” is so easy to poke
fun of. In this novel, there is no
such thing as too many adjectives
or too many synonyms for the
color red (“cerise”? Really?).
There is — no joke — a character
named Dante (Leather Jacket
Boy #2, duh) who has completely
unironic tattoos of black roses
and falcons on the backs of his
hands and neck. There are many,
many extended sequences of
Scarlett and Leather Jacket Boys
being forced into increasingly
hilarious situations where they
have to stand really really close
together and make breathtaking
eye
contact.
At
one
point,
Scarlett says the
word “scoundrel”
with
complete
sincerity,
and
LJB#1 is honestly
offended.
And
yet,
Stephanie Garber
is no dummy. She
knows
exactly
what kind of book she’s writing
and never shies away from the
ridiculousness. Garber works
entirely within familiar YA
story structures, but she clearly
understands exactly how to
maximize traditional narratives
to be their very best. Every
character
is
well-developed,
interesting
and
complicated
(except for Dante, but I mean, the
dude’s name is Dante. It would
be a little redundant if he had a
personality). The relationships,
though
predictable,
develop
organically
and
believably.
And the plot twists may be
numerous, but they make sense
and work within the larger
story. Structurally, this book is
precisely written and airtight
in its construction, building in
momentum by the page.
“Caraval” has its flaws, and
it may be silly, but it works. A
functional, entertaining and
effective story is no easy thing
to write, especially within
traditional
YA
frameworks,
from which people often expect
the worst. It’s melodramatic
and
deeply
entertaining.
Ridiculous
and
glorious.
All hail “Caraval.” Here to
remind us just how weird and
wonderful YA can be.
Garber embraces the cliché of the genre in her latest novel
All hail ‘Caraval,’ and all
hail the young adult novel
BOOK REVIEW
SOPHIA KAUFMAN
Daily Book Review Editor
“Caraval”
Stephanie Garber
Flatiron Books
‘Space’ is YA nonsense
STX CINEMAS
sgsbs
Sci-fi drama is all tropes and litte substance and originality
TV REVIEW
FILM REVIEW
It’s unfortunate
that the
documentary is so
keen on focusing
on Berkshire
Silly? Yes.
Ridiculous
wish-fulfillment
fantasy?
Absolutely.