Win Win
Win Win is a fine movie I guess, if you love television. Sort of dull, about a pretty dull struggling lawyer, surrounded by others struggling even more, who lean on him like he was a savior. He’s a decent guy, and everyone basically is, and life is struggle but we’re in it together and there are some good things to it, and little moments to cherish. This is what Win Win feels like. It’s shot with a nice film stock, with a cute indie valentine aesthetic, and is cheerful in its darkness. It’s quirkier than Thomas McCarthy’s other films, The Station Agent and The Visitor, which were more subtle and mature, though also rather boring.
Paul Giamatti is a good actor, and it’s nice to watch him inhabit these slightly-off men. But I prefer his loser-ness much more in Storytelling, or his middle-aginess in Sideways. Here, it feels a bit like he’s just playing him. It’s this guy who displays some questionable morality, I guess, but is generally more a victim of circumstance, rather than a sort of failure personally. He has scruples too, and makes a fine wrestling coach to boot. Ultimately, his character is a nice conduit for various bonding: mentor, buddy, husband, boss, caretaker, wise man. He’s all things to all people. It’s a bit hokey.
There isn’t much flair to Win Win, which is typical for Thomas McCarthy. His previous auteur work was slow and small, telling slice-of-life stories with quiet realizations. Win Win is more typical in its form, more dramatic in its plot, and less believable in its narrative. I’m a little confused why a lawyer (who specializes in family law sorts of cases) wouldn’t pursue an emancipation route for the teenager that becomes the center of the film. That seems to be the most glaring plot hole; there are others too. The title also vexes me. It could have just as easily been Lose Lose, except that in these sorts of dramedies, a smile is usually taped loosely enough to the hardship that a veneer of plastic optimism is the lingering sentiment. Woo hoo.
