“La La Land” is a movie about two beautiful people who are in love and are also following their dreams and also enjoy breaking out into song and dance sometimes. It’s a movie a lot of people think is really great, including myself. Somehow, though, the film has gone from loveable underdog to everyone’s favorite movie to hate. What happened? Is the backlash deserved? Let’s discuss.
How can you make a movie about jazz and only feature white people? This movie is so white. If this movie were a person, it would be Ira Glass. If this movie were a place, it would be SoulCycle. If this movie—
Ok, ok, yeah. “La La Land” is super white, and in a time when representation on screen is such a salient issue, it’s a little disappointing. I won’t try to defend it. Black characters appear on screen, but they all take a backseat to Ryan Gosling, who acts as a white savior for a musical genre white people stole from black people. This, I think, is the real reason a lot of people are annoyed: It’s not that the movie is more overtly white than other films, but that Gosling is a pompous mouthpiece making impassioned speeches about an appropriated art form. Because honestly, this isn’t really even a movie about jazz. Director Damien Chazelle’s sights are primarily set on reviving the magic of classic Hollywood musicals, and one of his characters just happens to be a jazz aficionado. It doesn’t help that the emerging Oscars narrative pits “La La Land” against “Moonlight,” the story of a black man coming to understand his sexuality, directed by an up-and-coming black director. That’s not to say the whiteness in “La La Land” isn’t discouraging, but it should be noted that our awareness of it is heightened.
Speaking of the Oscars: 14 nominations??? Come on, it didn’t deserve that many.
The awards haul for “La La Land” is partially due to the academy’s category structure: Five of the film’s nominations come from sound/music categories, which is to be expected for a highly praised musical. Honestly, this has nothing to do with the film’s quality, but condemning genuinely excellent movies because they get too big for their own good is a longstanding Oscars tradition. “La La Land” just tied “Titanic” for most nominations, another fantastic (yes) film doomed by its own popularity. The popularity theory is also what separates “La La Land” from “Whiplash,” Chazelle’s previous film. “Whiplash” is way more focused on jazz than “La La Land,” and significantly whiter. But “Whiplash” never got the praise “La La Land” has garnered, and thus, didn’t feel a similar sting.
Ok, fine. But Ryan Gosling for Best Actor? He was so boring.
Gosling was really good! Too often the Oscars rewards big, showy performances; acknowledging Gosling’s subdued role is a welcome change of pace. He’s authentically charismatic and somber at all the right moments, and there are few performers in Hollywood who can even come close to Gosling’s smile-that’s-so-soft-it’s-barely-noticeable-but-still-rips-your-heart-out. The problem is that Gosling has to keep up with Emma Stone, who basically acts circles around him. There’s a moment late in the film where Stone and Gosling are having a tense conversation, and Stone goes from elated to incredulous to anguished in an instant. Her emotional range is incredible, and few actors can match it. Placing her next to someone like Gosling just makes the contrast even more stark.
They couldn’t sing, though. Who makes a musical where the leads can’t sing?
No, they’re not bad singers. Gosling can be mumbly sometimes, but they’re both definitely serviceable. More importantly, though, the vocal style is a deliberate choice by Chazelle, who is breaking from the stylistic tradition of splashy, loud Hollywood musicals. Typically, we’re accustomed to musical numbers sharply breaking from the established reality of movie musicals. Here, the melodies are deftly blended into the narrative. They’re both fantastical and grounded, serving as whimsical flourishes that follow naturally from the characters’ emotional conditions. This hushed style, combined with the immediacy of Chazelle’s camera, makes “La La Land” more engaging than many musicals. Moreover, Chazelle isn’t making a musical, per se, he’s making a movie, and the film is more visually inventive than other big-budget musicals. The film’s focus isn’t how high the songs can soar, but how much cinematic magic Chazelle’s camera can generate. How many other musicals could genuinely engage me on mute? The film is drenched in blue and chartreuse, and it's just gorgeous to look at.
Can’t you just let me hate this movie?
No, I really can’t. The songs are catchy, the aesthetics are mesmerizing, and the film has the best opening and closing scene of the year. I’m going to be singing “City of Stars” until Chazelle is accepting the movie’s 12th award. Long live “La La Land.”
