Thursday, March 13, 2008

Thoughts on the script and the movie: Gone Baby Gone


I really liked Gone Baby Gone - both the script and the film. The script was adapted by Ben Affleck and Aaron Stockard, whose only previous credits include assisting Affleck and Matt Damon on previous films.

MAJOR SPOILERS AHEAD

The script is pretty powerful, but there are some significant differences from the film. For one thing, the entire first five minutes or so is completely different. The script opens with Patrick (Casey Affleck) tracking down a deadbeat dad. The film trades that entire sequence for a voice over from Patrick while we see shots of his Boston neighborhood.

Normally I'd be wary of a film that traded a scene full of action for a scene full of talking, but in this film it was a wise decision, as are all the other decisions Affleck made to change from the script to the screen.

I'm guessing all the changes were made for the same reason. At the end of the film Patrick must choose between leaving a little girl with the man who kidnapped her and will probably raise her with love and compassion or returning the girl to her coke-head drug mule mother. And I think the majority of us feel like he made the wrong decision. Certainly his girlfriend does.

In the script it's very clearly the wrong decision. It's almost an absurd decision. The mom is so clearly a horrible parent who will never change, but for some reason Patrick feels obligated to bring her back the child, who is named Amanda. It doesn't make sense to any sane person.

So to understand why Patrick makes that decision, you have to give Patrick a reason for making it and you have to understand Patrick. He's already kind of a little guy who gets picked on a lot throughout the story so we need a better reason to love him besides his clever dialogue.

To that end, the voice over was added. Instead of watching Patrick ride around chasing some dude down - which he does kind of easily and without any really heroic behavior - we hear his voice explaining his philosophy of life. So we start the film understanding a bit of Patrick's motivation, the motivation that will affect his decision later.

For the same reason Helene, Amanda's mother, is softened. In the script she's pretty much a selfish bitch the entire time and nobody in their right mind would give her a child to care for, but in the film she goes to Patrick in one scene, telling him she'll change, making it clear that despite her failings as a mother, she really does love her child. It's not until the last few minutes that we realize how temporary her love was when it's clear she didn't even know the name of her daughter's favorite doll.

There's also a great deal of dialogue added to the end where Patrick explains his motivation. In the script, Patrick says he must bring the girl back simply because Helene is her mother. He never gives a more detailed answer than that for taking her away from a man who will love her.

In the film, however, he and Doyle (Morgan Freeman) have a battle of words over what Patrick plans to do with his knowledge of where Amanda is.

Doyle tells Patrick he doesn't want to explain to the Amanda's future children why their mother is so screwed up. And Patrick responds that he'd rather do that than explain to grown-up Amanda that he knew where she was living with her kidnappers and did nothing to bring her home.

From that perspective, the decision he makes goes from being an obvious mistake to being a genuine moral quandary. It's a stronger film as a result.

7 comments:

  1. Great book. Great script. Great film. Ben Affleck could be our generations Clint Eastwood if he keeps up this nonsense.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Anonymous3:08 AM

    I thought the script and the movie were both great. As you said there were differences, but nothing that would totally make you think one was better than the other. I thought the script did better at letting you know the mother didn't really know her kid or care about her but that's about it. I specifically like the direction of the the quarry scene in the movie.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Just saw this last week. I fall on the side in which I think he made the right decision... hard as it is to accept. I'm glad you contrasted the script and film, because those little changes really do make for a better film in which you're allowed to choose... if filmed from the script as you described it, the decision would have essentially been made for me.

    ReplyDelete
  4. i haven't read the script, but i agree with the changes. another rare example of a good v.o.

    i wonder how many people get the doll name clue - none of the other people i watched it with caught it. it's not necessary, but it's a great extra kick-in-the-gut if you do.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Anonymous5:18 PM

    Haven't read the script, but didn't think the movie was very good. What's funny, is my argument for what makes the film not good would read similarly to your post. I did like the idea of the movie, and wouldn't mind seeing it made differently. Maybe a stronger cast, or a little more interesting early, or a little less plastic characters. If this movie was a puzzle, it would look like the ocean from space after the final piece was placed.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Haven't read the script but liked the movie. Might be in my top 5 from last yr.

    Liked the realism and moral dilemma presented. So many movies these days just hand the answers to the audience, make the protag a definitive hero. Filmmakers (at least Amer ones) these days seem afraid of complexity & are content w/ one dimential char & themes.

    The structure was a bit awkward. The weird 'break' kinda threw me. The VO seemed to be wrapping the story up but then... no.... wait.... there's more story... the movie's not finished yet....

    I think they could have softened that by eliminating, or at least changing, some of the VO. But the movie kept being interesting after that false ending so it didn't ruin it for me.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I was so close to blogging about this same thing -- specifically, the ending of the movie, and the genuine moral dilemma. I'm glad you beat me to it (though how could you not? I'm the slowest blogger ever!) because I didn't realize those changes had been made between script & screen. Very interesting.

    I'm with Pimmy -- however tragic it is to bring the kid home, I actually think it was the "right" thing to do. You don't get to decide that a mother can't raise her own child. (Unless it's via the law.)

    I also felt strongly that the Morgan Freeman character was less than 100% pure, in that he was clearly seeing this child as a kind of replacement for his own daughter, murdered years ago.

    But I was surprised I fell on the side of the line that I did, and I love that the movie made me so torn.

    ReplyDelete

Please leave a name, even if it's a fake name. And try not to be an asshole.

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.