Whether or not I will finally find Kriten Stewart interestin, after her protayal as Jean Seberg?
“Seberg,” Kristen portrays an actress (Jean Seberg) in a flawed and fascinating film about fame and martyrdom.
The year is 1968, and Seberg has left her home in Paris — as well as her husband, the writer Romain Gary (Yvan Attal), and their young son — to come to Los Angeles to audition for “Paint Your Wagon.” Her Black Power salute at the airport draws immediate attention, as does her nighttime visit to Jamal’s home in Compton wearing an arresting minidress and driving a not-at-all inconspicuous yellow convertable.
“You’re playing with fire,” Seberg’s lover and Black activist Jamal Hakeem (Anthony Mackey) warns, knowing the F.B.I. will notice her generous donations to civil rights causes and her association with the Black Panther movement.
Seberg’s actions don’t appear to be provocative, but rather as the behavior of a woman unaware that her support for African-American civil rights will lead to the thorough violation of her own privacy and life choices.
Now remember when I queried whether or not the movie Seberg will finally make Kristen Stewart interesting to me? Well in a way it has.
As I watched Seberg, something came to the forefront concerning Stewart’s performance and that the feeling that the latter bestowed an element a of respect in her portrayal of the maligned actress.
Maybe the fact that Seberg was an expatriate living in Paris coupled with her modern-day representative receiving a Cesar (The French Oscar) for role in The Clouds of Sils Maria, that Stewart felt compelled to do the role of Jean Seberg justice.
Full Disclosure: There are things in the movie Seberg that are so obviously not true. Things such as:
Jack O’Connell plays a ‘sensitive’ FBI agent named Solomon that clearly never existed! The movie’s shortcoming fall in the sub plot of a non-existent FBI agent and his struggle to do his job by undermining Seberg’s credibility.
I couldn’t have cared less about this character. Why didn’t I care, because there was no FBI agent that served as Seberg’s Protector/Saboteur! Seriously screenwriters WTF?
Another reviewer put it best when he said that the screenwriters probably put in this lame story arc because maybe they didn’t believe that Stewart would be able to pull off such an iconic role. Well she handled the role quite well.
Stewart, not only proved to be the only saving grace of “Seberg,” but a genuine saving grace at that.
I really am astounding myself when I write that Kristen Stewart is the only reason to see the movie and she’s a really good reason.
Seberg and her husband are walking down a hall at some premiere that she begged him to attend before they separate. As they approach a photographer Stewart as Seberg turns toward the photographer and flashes a smile.
The way she performed this seemingly benign action was so perfunctory,displaying the lie that Hollywood pushes. I can just imagine the photo appearing on the cover of some tabloid extolling the beauty and marital contentment of the subject all while covering up the sadness that Seberg was feeling.
Seberg the movie gives viewers both insight into the destructive tendencies of the male gaze while simultaneously chronicling the slow unraveling of Seberg’s emotional state. So yeah I enjoyed the movie as much as I could considering the unnecessary side trips.