Entertainment
How the men of ‘Task’ see the show’s troubled fathers and the damage they’ve caused
Brad Ingelsby knew after the breakout success of HBO’s “Mare of Easttown” — a crime drama about a police detective (Kate Winslet) investigating the murder of a teenage girl in a fictional working-class town — he didn’t want his next series to be another whodunit.
“That’s Mare’s thing,” he says on a recent late afternoon. “So, you start to go, if you’re going to write another story in the crime genre, what would get the audience to keep clicking to the next episode? I just thought, ‘Well, maybe a collision course show, where [in] every episode, we get a little closer, a little closer, a little closer, until things collide.’ ”
In “Task,” which concluded Sunday on HBO, Mark Ruffalo stars as Tom Brandis, a priest-turned-FBI agent leading a task force investigating a series of robberies in Delaware County, Pa., an area commonly referred to as Delco that was also the setting for “Mare of Easttown.” (And with references to Wawa and Scrapple, along with visits to Rita’s Water Ice, it slips into its role of expanding the universe.) It leads Tom to Robbie Prendergast (Tom Pelphrey), a sanitation worker who robs drug houses at night to provide for his family. Both men are emotionally tortured by life events — Tom’s wife was murdered by their adopted son, who is incarcerated; Robbie’s brother was killed by a member of a motorcycle gang — that have set them each on different, but destructive paths.
In “Task,” Mark Ruffalo, left, Alison Oliver, Thuso Mbedu and Fabein Frankel portray law enforcement officers who are part of an FBI task force investigating a string of robberies.
(Peter Kramer / HBO)
“ ‘Mare’ was about the moms — the damage that all the guys have caused and the women are kind of having to pick up the pieces of that,” Ingelsby says. “This [show] is all about the fathers and being left behind, seeing the damage they’ve done to their kids, how they’re going to fix that in their lives — or not be able to fix it. The guys who are actually doing the damage without knowing.”
Ingelsby says his uncle, who was an Augustinian priest, helped inspire the throughline of the series.
“I’ve always been very intrigued by his idea of faith in God over the years, and how it’s changed over time, and what he believed once and what he believes now,” he says. “I was intrigued by the idea of a guy who, everything he held as truth, all the pillars of his life, have come crumbling down. And Robbie has a much different faith. And it’s through the gauntlet of the story, how their lives intersect, that they both get to navigate their own journeys of faith.”
Over dinner at a West Hollywood hotel, The Times sat down with Ingelsby, Ruffalo and Pelphrey to discuss their faith journeys, economic inequality, fatherhood — and Wawa, too. Here are edited excerpts from the conversation, which contains spoilers about the finale.
After the success of “Mare of Easttown,” creator Brad Ingelsby wanted his follow-up, “Task,” to feel connected, but not repetitive: “ ‘Mare’ was about the moms,” he says. “This [show] is all about the fathers and being left behind, seeing the damage they’ve done to their kids, how they’re going to fix that in their lives — or not be able to fix it.”
(Bexx Francois/For The Times)
The themes of the show involve forgiveness and faith. Every person has experienced something in life that has tested those ideas. How has your own relationship to faith and forgiveness evolved as you’ve lived more life or taken on roles that ask you to live different experiences?
Pelphrey: My faith, to me, is when I got sober. God willing, Oct. 1, which is three days from now, it’ll be 12 years. That’s truly by the grace of God — you hear that phrase, but I genuinely, I mean that. That’s how I’ve experienced faith, through my sobriety. I was raised Catholic, but the experience I had at 31 was like in a different dimension to what I thought of religion or ideas. It’s one thing to have an idea, it’s another thing to have your heart opened. It’s definitely an important part of my life. And I think Brad did such a beautiful job conveying that. My grandma used to have one of these things when I was a kid — not a real gem, but like a glass cut thing so if you put it in the window, the sun shines through a million different ways, and the color goes everywhere. I feel like you [Brad] did that with some themes in the show where you’re like, “Let me just hold it up, and we’ll just look at it a few different ways.”
Ruffalo: My journey with faith is probably very similar to Tom’s. When you get a job or something, it can take you on a journey that you’re ripe to take. It touches your life at a very moment where you need it. I’d say, after my brother died, the whole notion of faith just went out the window for me. But oddly enough, I have a lot of addiction, alcoholism in my family. I say, either you are one or you love one. When you love somebody who’s struggling with that, it takes a lot of faith to let them go and to trust it will be OK. My friend says to me, “They got a God and you ain’t it.”
My faith has been renewed, actually, through Tom [the character] — he is an alcoholic. It’s touched my life in so many ways, even with my brother, that it’s like where I lost my faith and where I gained my faith again has been through this journey with alcoholism and drug addiction. And I waver. You look at the world and you’re like, “Where is God in this? Please show yourself. ” But the thing about faith is it requires you to believe without any evidence of its existence. I’d rather believe in that than nothing. Although, I fought him [Brad] all the time. I was like, “He’s [Tom] not really praying here. He’s trying to pray. He’s going through the actions of praying, but he can’t quite get to the opening sentence, which is “ … God …” He does pray, eventually, but it’s a journey.
There’s the powerful moment in that car when Tom and Robbie finally meet in Episode 5. Robbie says, “I don’t think I’ve ever experienced God in my life.” This is a man that hasn’t felt hope, and he has this glimmer of it with this goal of escaping to Canada. Tom, how was it getting into the mindset of this guy just trying to get out of this life?
Pelphrey: It’s heartbreaking. We’re articulating an American dream that far too many people don’t get to experience, and maybe are starting to lose the hope of ever experiencing it. That’s a very real thing — unfortunately, way too real and increasingly way too common. It was just constantly reminding myself: What does this character want? And at the end of the day, regardless of how extreme some of the things Robbie’s doing, he just wants a decent life for his kids. And the fact that he’s having a hard time getting it is heartbreaking.
That scene and in the car, the first time I read it, I was like, “Oh, he’s [Brad] got some balls.” You have so much s— boiling over — the plot lines, the violence, the stakes are through the roof for everyone now in the show, and we are going to sit in a car for half an episode? And two dudes are gonna talk?
In Episode 5, Robbie Prendergast (Tom Pelphrey), left, and Tom Brandis (Mark Ruffalo) finally meet.
(HBO)
Ruffalo: There’s no chase! And when they finally face each other, they’re not even [actually] facing each other! They’re both pushed to the edge and you don’t know where it could go. Tom certainly doesn’t know where it will go. Tom’s kind of at that point, like, “F— it. Go ahead.” We talked about it a lot, I was like, “I think Tom should die.”
[They break into laughter]
Ingelsby: Every single day he was pitching it.
Ruffalo: I was pitching Tom should have a heart attack at the end and he literally sees God and he says to God, “I’m ready.” He finally finds his faith. It’s finally paid off and he says [gasping], “I’m … reaaady.”
Ingelsby: Enough people die here. But that particular episode has always been very special to me. That’s when the show is operating at the peak of its powers. It just felt like, how do we subvert the expectations of the audience and do that in a way that still feels true to who these characters are? I remember talking to you [Tom] about this. You were like, “As soon as I know Cliff’s done, I’m on a one-way street. I have a plan.” But with you [Mark], once they get out of the car and you feel like you’re going to die, you’re like, “I want to call my family.” That’s when you get activated in a way. You’ve been going through the motions in life, but that’s when it gets very real.
Ruffalo: It’s like being reborn. It opens his heart. He sees how life can be taken away.
We’re in a political and cultural moment where the mood of the country is simmering — there’s anger and rage on all sides, and a lot of it stems from class and systemic issues that are in place that put people in certain positions. There’s that layer, but there’s also the grief element both these men are facing.
Ingelsby: With Robbie in particular, I was interested in a guy that felt really stuck. What I liked about Robbie was, if he didn’t take action, what would happen to Robbie? He’d be a trash man in too deep his whole life. Who cares about Robbie and his family? Nobody. He was left behind. In early versions of the script, I very explicitly said, “He wants his bite of the apple.” There are lots of people like that now. I loved writing Robbie because it felt like he was raging against being left behind and and I felt, in many cases, in the script, why wouldn’t you do something? Whether you agree with the actions or not —
Pelphrey: He had his f— life stolen from him. What he’s going after is a very specific thing. He’s not lashing out blindly against anybody to get any money at any cost. He’s like: “I’m gonna take it from these mother f—, who are bad dudes.” Even within that, he has principles. No one’s gonna die — obviously, the rules all go out the window Episode 2, but we’re not going to take the drugs, we’re not going to sell the drug. We’re going to destroy the drugs. We’re going to take the cash. Even within his brand of lashing out, he actually has a set of principles that he’s operating by.
Mark Ruffalo, left, and Tom Pelphrey star as two troubled men on a collision course in “Task.” Ruffalo portrays an FBI agent recovering from a family tragedy, while Pelphrey plays a garbage collector and criminal involved in a series of robberies. (Bexx Francois/For The Times)
Mark and Tom, as sons and fathers, how did you think about the father-child relationships of these two men and the collateral damage of their choices?
Ruffalo: It’s so hard to be a father, especially now because this generation is like, “We’re not going to do it the way our parents, our fathers did. We see that there’s another way to do it. We’re actually talking about it.” At the same time, we don’t exactly know what it is that we should do differently, plus we have the responsibility of, financially, keeping it together. It’s obviously hard to be a mom too. These guys are doing the best they can.
Pelphrey: Becoming a dad two and a half years ago now, it’s just the most f— awesome, wild, intense, crazy s— I’ve ever experienced in my life. It’s like getting struck by lightning. I’m so in love and I feel so vulnerable and I feel so happy — it’s all the feelings. Then suddenly, when you’re thinking about how you feel, you go, “How do I balance this? How do I protect her, but make sure that she’s brave and experiencing things? And you quickly realize there is so much to this that I will have no power over and the realization of that, in the deepest sense — and I’ve already had moments of that and we’re just getting started here. You imagine what it’s like, when you don’t have kids, but you have no f— clue. One of the things I could say without blinking, ever, is, “I totally understand why he’s doing what he’s doing.”
Was there a version where Robbie lived?
Ingelsby: No, I felt like structurally what needed to happen was Tom had to witness Robbie’s kindness, then his sacrifice. It felt very necessary to be like, “Oh, wait. Robbie — he went up to the woods…” Because he’s always like, “What’s the plan?” Tom realizes, “Oh, I know what the plan was. He went there to die.” Part of Tom’s journey to getting rid of the anger and to believing in something at the end, was to have witnessed the goodness in Robbie. He [Robbie] also gets in so deep eventually, he has pushed himself into such a corner and there’s no good way out of this. What’s an audience gonna think if he gets out of this unscathed? Even if he were to survive, he’s gonna be in jail for the rest of his life. The idea of sacrifice would speak to Tom as a character and get him to his ultimate decision to give the boy [Sam] up, but also forgive his own son and, quite literally, get the house ready for him.
Mark, how did you feel about the statement that Tom winds up giving at the hearing in the finale?
Ruffalo: He had to sit down and write that. I don’t think he really knew what he was going to be writing. He’s taking stock of his life and his son’s life and the story of the life. It’s connecting him to the whole story. It’s not just the loss of my wife, but also we raised that boy. We made this life together and, even in the hard part of it all, that’s where we learned what love is. Then when he gets in there, he doesn’t even know that he’s gonna say it. He doesn’t know he’s going to confront him with it and say [to his son], “Look at me.” But the whole journey, leads us there.
There’s something, too, about his composure in that moment.
Ingelsby: That’s the genius of Mark. That was the first or second take, what we used.
How many versions of it did you write? Was there an overly emotional or dramatic version?
Ingelsby: There was a longer version. But I think what was important about it was — and Mark does such a beautiful job — was that he had to be honest about how hard it was. I was always worried it would be a bit maudlin, if he just went in and said straight away, “I love you.” It was almost like he had to be really honest with everybody, like, “Hey, this was f— horrible.” And the shame of changing your name —
Ruffalo: Yes. To be that honest and to say that I pretended like I wasn’t his father. It’s so shameful. It’s so honest.
Ingelsby: I think because he’s so honest, it makes the forgiveness even more impactful. When he says, “I forgive you,” you believe because he’s earned the trust in the speech by admitting the things that were so shameful .
Ruffalo: It doesn’t just go one way — forgiveness. There’s a lot of shame on it on the other side, that’s where the anger comes from. There’s always this question: What could I have done? The backstory was I left, knowing that he was in an episode, but I had to go. I left her with him, thinking it would blow over. And it didn’t. He has to also be honest about his part in it. What dad says, “That’s not my kid. You’re in retreat already.”
Ingelsby: That’s what we want the ending to be. It’s not that everything’s going to be easy. I think the same for Mare — it wasn’t like Mare’s life was so great at the end of the show. There was a lot of going on.
Ruffalo: She’s going to an AA meeting. Tom and Mare can meet at an AA meeting.
Tom Pelphrey as Robbie Prendergrast, a garbage collector trying to avenge his brother’s death by hitting trap houses belonging to a local gang before getting caught in a deadly standoff. (HBO)
Mark Ruffalo, Silvia Dionicio and Phoebe Fox in “Task.” Ruffalo plays a priest-turned-FBI agent who hasn’t confronted his feelings about the murder of his wife at the hands of their adopted son. (HBO)
To that point, was there thought about whether to incorporate “Mare” characters in this show, if they’re in the same universe?
Ingelsby: It’s funny you say that. [In] one of the early scripts, we had a scene where Emily (Silvia Dionicio), at the end of the show, went to a concert with her boyfriend, Leo, the guy that’s a magician. And Mare’s daughter, Siobhan (Angourie Rice), was playing. And there was another connective piece I’m missing. I think Leo’s brother was in the band. And they had a moment together, because I felt like Emily and Siobhan were very, very similar. That they had the weight of the world on their shoulders in some way, Emily especially —
Ruffalo: They’re well suited for each other. They could just sink to the bottom of the lake together.
He’s got a crossover season mapped out for you.
Pelphrey: If we hold hands, we can sink faster.
Ingelsby: But we did have something connecting them. But I’m glad HBO read it and were like, “Is it a bit much?” It felt like maybe we were reaching to do something that the story didn’t require. And when we took it out, I felt like this story exists on its own, and we didn’t need that. If we had threaded it through the story in a more interesting way, maybe it would have worked, but it would have felt really tacked on and kind of just fan service for the sake of fan service, which I didn’t want.
Can we talk about the Phillies cup? It’s seems like such an obscure detail, but that cup triggered me. I know it well. A father trying to hide his vice.
Ingelsby: That’s another detail of my own life that I can repurpose, steal. That’s my dad. He drinks out of that. He watches every Phillies game. There’s 162 games. And if he can’t watch, he’s listening to it in a radio in the car. I feel like we always talk about in the specific, is the universal. And Mark did the swirly thing.
Ruffalo: That’s what made me want to do the show. That he was drinking out of that. And then he swirled his hand. I said, “This guy is writing character like nobody is doing that I’ve seen in television.” I only read the first episode and I was like, “I want to go. I trust this journey with him.” And it was from that nuance thing. I know that guy. He’s a priest who swirls his vodka and tonic with his finger. In a Phillies cup. And he thinks he’s pulling it over. That’s my family. It’s so honest.
The accent was such a feature of “Mare of Easttown.” I imagine that had its own expectations or pressure for this show.
Ingelsby: “Mare” was more a community — very, very specific community. I felt like, in that show, we had to go all in and Kate did. A lot of Mark’s character was driven by my uncle, who has no accent at all. Because he went to the seminary, then he went to Merrimack College, he was a teacher — he bounced around. And even me, there’s a couple words I’ll say that you can’t pick up a heavy accent. There’s a couple words, where maybe you could pick it up.
Ruffalo: We tried. I tried it. I kept kicking it out, it just didn’t feel right. He does hit some of those words. He does say wooder — cheery wooder ice. We kept some of it in, but we didn’t go as hard at it because he goes another way. I feel like he might have ended up in South America at some point. I was thinking he traveled the world.
Did you pay many visits to Wawa? I remember Kate telling me about her Wawa experiences.
Pelphrey: I grew up going to Wawa. I was Wawa all the time because I was living out in the suburbs.
Ingelsby: I think Kate ate hoagies or something.
Pelphrey: They make a good sandwich.
Ruffalo: Oh, bro. I started with a fat suit and then I had to take it off. I just kept getting fatter. My wife saw me and she’s like [to the kids], “huh, your father’s eating his way through Philly.” But, man, I’d be like, “How about a sandwich for the scene?” [Mimics scarfing down a sandwich.] Like a troll.
Ingelsby: He is an amazing sandwich eater. We were talking about it.
Pelphrey: We were.
Ruffalo: Oh, I knew I was going to be eating a sandwich that day [in a scene], so I starved myself so I could just plow that thing.
Are you interested in a Season 2, Brad?
Ruffalo: No one wants a Season 2. [the trio laughs] No, I’m kidding. That would be amazing.
Ingelsby: It would be amazing. If people respond and we get a chance to do it.
Could we get that “Task”-”Mare” crossover?
Ingelsby: A lot could happen.
Ruffalo: Some “Mare” people could show up. There could be a love affair.
Movie Reviews
Movie Review: ‘Agon’ is a Somber Meditation on the Athletic Grind
Entertainment
Bob Spitz proves the Rolling Stones are rock’s greatest band in magnificent new biography
By early 1963, the Station Hotel in London had become an epicenter of the burgeoning British blues scene. On a blustery, snowy night that February, the Rolling Stones’ classic early lineup took the stage for one of the first times, dazzling the audience with ferocious renditions of blues standards like Muddy Waters’ “I Want to Be Loved” and Jimmy Reed’s “Bright Lights, Big City.”
Multi-instrumentalist Brian Jones, the band’s founder and leader, synchronized guitars with Keith Richards, who favored a distinctive slashing and stinging style. Drummer Charlie Watts, the group’s newest member, a jazz aficionado and an accomplished percussionist, propelled the music forward with a rock-solid beat.
Anchoring the rhythm section with him was bassist Bill Wyman, who was recruited more for his spare VOX AC30 amp that the guitarists could plug into than for his musical skills. The stoic bassist proved a strong and innovative player. Together, he and Watts would go on to form one of rock’s most decorated rhythm sections.
Ian Stewart’s energetic boogie-woogie piano style rounded out the sound. Months later, manager Andrew Loog Oldham kicked him out of the band for being “ugly,” although Stewart continued to record, tour and serve as the band’s road manager until his death in 1985.
This April 8, 1964, file photo shows the Rolling Stones during a rehearsal. The members, from left, are Brian Jones, guitar; Bill Wyman, bass; Charlie Watts, drums; Mick Jagger, vocals; and Keith Richards, guitar.
(Associated Press)
Fronting the group was Mick Jagger. Channeling the music like a crazed shaman, Jagger shimmied and sashayed, owning the stage like few lead singers have before or since. By the end of the night, the Stones had the crowd in a frenzy. Although only 30 people had made it to the gig because of the treacherous weather conditions, the hotel’s booker had seen enough: He offered the Stones a regular gig.
“The Rolling Stones had caught fire. The music they were playing and the way they played it struck a chord with a young crowd starved for something different, something their own… It was soul-stirring, loud and uncompromising,” writes Bob Spitz in “The Rolling Stones: The Biography,” his magisterial work that charts the 60-year journey of “the greatest rock and roll band in the world.”
Spitz, the author of strong biographies on the Beatles and Led Zeppelin, as well as Ronald Reagan and Julia Child, captures the drama, trauma and betrayals that have kept the Stones in the public’s consciousness for more than six decades. It’s all here: The Stones’ evolution from a blues cover band to artistic rival of the Beatles; the musical peaks — “Aftermath,” “Let It Bleed” and “Exile on Main Street” as well as misfires like “Dirty Work”; Keith’s descent into a debilitating heroin addiction that nearly destroyed him and the band; the death of the ‘60s at the ill-fated Altamont free concert; Marianne Faithfull, Anita Pallenberg, Bianca Jagger, Jerry Hall and other lovers, partners and muses; the breakups, makeups and crackups; and perhaps most important, the unbreakable bond between Jagger and Richards at the center of it all.
Although Spitz unearths little new information, he excels at presenting the Stones in glorious Technicolor. Spitz homes in on the telling details and anecdotes that give the band’s story a deep richness and poignancy.
Take “Satisfaction,” the Stones’ 1965 classic and first U.S. chart topper. The oft-told story is that Richards woke up in the middle of the night, grabbed the guitar that was next to his bed, and recorded the iconic riff and the phrase “I can’t get no … satisfaction” on a cassette recorder in his Clearwater, Fla., hotel room before falling back asleep. But as Spitz notes, the song initially went nowhere in the studio. That is until Stewart purchased a fuzz box for Richards a few days later, which gave the tune a raunchier sound that perfectly matched Jagger’s lyrics of frustration and alienation. A classic was born.
Piercing the Stones mythology
Spitz’s deep reporting often pierces the mythology surrounding the band. Contrary to the popular belief of many fans, for instance, Jones bears much of the responsibility for the rift with his bandmates and his tragic demise.
The most musically adventurous member of the group — he plays sitar on “Paint It Black” and dulcimer on “Lady Jane” — Jones wasn’t a songwriter. That stoked his jealousies and insecurities, along with frontman Jagger stealing the spotlight from him. A monster of a man, Jones impregnated multiple teenage girls and physically and emotionally abused several women, including Pallenberg. Perhaps that’s why she left him for Richards. Over time, Jones made fewer contributions in the studio and onstage, becoming a catatonic drug casualty. The Stones fired Jones in June 1969 but would have been justified doing so a couple years earlier. He drowned in his pool less than a month later.
Author Bob Spitz
(Elena Seibert)
Similarly, Stones lore has long romanticized the making of “Exile on Main Street” in the stifling, dingy basement of Richards’ rented Villa Nellcôte in the South of France, where the Stones had decamped to avoid British taxes. In this telling, Richards, deep in the throes of heroin addiction, somehow managed to come up with one indelible riff after another built around his signature open G tuning — taught to him by Ry Cooder — leading the band to create one of the best albums in rock history. That’s not entirely accurate, according to Spitz.
Yes, Richards came up with the licks for “Rocks Off,” “Happy” and “Tumbling Dice.” But it’s equally true that a strung-out Richards missed myriad recording sessions, invited dealers, hangers-on and other distractions to Nellcôte, and repeatedly failed to turn up to write with Jagger. Far from completing the album in the druggy haze of a French basement, the band spent six months on overdubs at Sunset Sound in Los Angeles, where Jagger contributed many of his vocals.
Beatles vs. Stones
One of the more interesting themes Spitz develops is the symbiotic relationship between the Beatles and Stones, with the Fab Four mostly overshadowing them — until they didn’t.
John Lennon and Paul McCartney wrote “I Wanna Be Your Man” and gave it to the Stones, whose 1963 rendition, with Jones on slide guitar, became the group’s first UK Top 20 hit. The Lennon-McCartney songwriting partnership inspired Jagger and Richards to begin penning their own songs. In early 1964, the Beatles came to the U.S. for the first time, making television history with their appearance on “The Ed Sullivan Show” and playing Carnegie Hall. A few months later, the Stones kicked off their inaugural American tour at the Swing Auditorium in San Bernardino. In 1967, the Beatles released “Sgt. Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band,” a psychedelic masterpiece. The Stones responded with “Their Satanic Majesties Request,” a psychedelic mess.
The Rolling Stones: The Biography cover
As the Beatles began to splinter, Spitz writes, the Stones sharpened their focus. The band released “Beggars Banquet” in late 1968 and “Let It Bleed” the following year, albums every bit as innovative and visionary as “The White Album” and “Abbey Road.” For the first time, the two groups stood as equals.
When the Beatles broke up in 1970, the Stones kept rolling. With Jones replaced by virtuoso guitarist Mick Taylor — whose fluid, melodic style served as a tasty foil to Richards — they produced what many consider their finest works, “Sticky Fingers” and “Exile on Main Street.” More impressively, the band, with Taylor’s successor, Ronnie Wood, has continued to dazzle audiences with incendiary live shows, touring as recently as 2024 behind the late-career triumph “Hackney Diamonds.” The Beatles, by contrast, retired from the road in 1966 and devoted their energies to the studio.
Hundreds of books have been written about the Rolling Stones, but few sparkle quite like Spitz’s. For anyone who loves or even likes the Stones, it’s indispensable.
Like most of the band’s biographers, Spitz gives short shrift to the post-“Exile” period after 1972. He curtly dismisses 2005’s strong “A Bigger Bang” and 2016’s “Blue & Lonesome,” a back-to-basics album of blues covers, as “adequate endeavors that signaled a band living on borrowed time.” That critique is both off target and under-developed. Spitz ignores the band’s legendary live album, “Brussels Affair,” recorded in 1973, or why the band waited decades before officially releasing it.
These are small quibbles. Spitz has written a book worthy of its 704-page length; another 50 or so pages covering the later years would have made it even stronger. To quote the Rolling Stones: “I know it’s only rock ‘n roll, but I like it, like it, yes, I do.”
Marc Ballon, a former Times, Forbes and Inc. Magazine reporter, teaches an advanced writing class at USC. He lives in Fullerton.
Movie Reviews
FILM REVIEW: ROSE OF NEVADA – Joyzine
‘4’, the opening track on Richard D James’ (Aphex Twin) self titled 1996 album is a piece of music that beautifully balances the chaotic with the serene, the oppressive and the freeing. It’s a trick that James has pulled off multiple times throughout his career and it is a huge part of what makes him such an iconic and influential artist. Many people have laid the “next Aphex Twin” label on musicians who do things slightly different and when you actually hear their music you realise that, once again, the label is flawed and applied with a lazy attitude. Why mention this? Well, it turns out we’ve been looking for James’ heir apparent in the wrong artform. We’ve so zoned in on music that we’ve not noticed that another Celtic son of Cornwall is rewriting an art form with that highwire balancing act between chaos and beauty. That artist is writer, director and composer Mark Jenkin who over his last two feature films has announced himself as an idiosyncratic voice who is creating his very own language within the world of cinema. Jenkin’s films are often centred around coastal towns or islands and whilst they are experimental or even unsettling, there is always a big heart at the centre of the narrative. A heart that cares about family, tradition, culture, and the pull of ‘home’. Even during the horror of 2022’s brilliant Enys Men you were anchored by the vulnerability and determination of its main protagonist.
This month sees the release of Jenkin’s latest feature film, Rose of Nevada, which is set in a fractured and diminished Cornish coastal town. One day the fishing boat of the film’s title arrives back in harbour after being missing for thirty years. The boat is unoccupied. And frankly that is all the information you are going to get because to discuss any more plot would be unfair on you and disrespectful to Jenkin and the team behind the film. You the viewer should be the one who decides what it is about because thematically there are so many wonderful threads to pull on. This writer’s opinions on what it is about have ranged from a theme of sacrifice for the good of a community to the conflict within when part of you wants to run away from your roots whilst the other half longs to stay and be a lifelong part of its tapestry. Is it about Brexit? Could be. Is it about our own relationships with time and our curation of memory? Could be. Is it about both the positives and negatives of nostalgia? Could be. As a side note, anyone in their mid-40s, like me, who came of age in the 1990s will certainly find moments of warm recognition. Is the film about ghosts and how they haunt families? Could be…I think you get the point.
The elements that make the film so well balanced between chaos and calm are many. It is there in the differing performances between the brilliant two lead actors George MacKay and Callum Turner. It is there in the sound design which fluctuates from being unbearably harsh and metallic, to lulling and warm. It is there in the editing where short, sharp close ups on seemingly unimportant factors are counterbalanced with shots that are held for just that little bit too long. For a film set around the sea, it is apt that it can make you feel like you’re rolling on a stomach churning storm one minute, or a calming low tide the next. Dialogue can be front and centre or blurred and buried under static. One shot is bathed in harsh sunlight whilst the next can be drowned in interior shadows.
Rose of Nevada is Mark Jenkin’s most ambitious film to date yet he has not lost a single iota of innovation, singularity of vision or his gift for telling the most human of stories. It is a film that will tell you different things each time you see it and whilst there are moments that can confuse or beguile, there is so much empathy and love that it can leave you crying tears of emotional understanding. It is chaotic. It is beautiful. It is life……
Rose of Nevada is released on the 24th April.
Mark Jenkin Instagram | Threads
Released through the BFI – Instagram | Facebook
Review by Simon Tucker
Keep up to date with all new content on Joyzine via our
Facebook | Bluesky | Instagram | Threads | Mailing List
Related
-
Vermont6 minutes ago74-year-old woman fulfills childhood dream as EMT at fair in Vermont
-
Virginia12 minutes agoVirginia Sen. Mark Warner’s daughter has died: ‘Heartbroken beyond words’
-
Washington18 minutes agoA look at the roots (and routes) of immigration to Washington
-
Wisconsin24 minutes agoRubber bullet carnage as 1,000 animal welfare activists storm beagle breeding lab in Wisconsin | Fortune
-
West Virginia30 minutes agoWest Virginia’s Underrated State Park Is A Serene Getaway With Picturesque Trails And A Unique Hemlock Forest – Islands
-
Wyoming36 minutes agoFormer House Speaker Albert Sommers seeks to win back Wyoming legislative seat
-
Crypto42 minutes agoCentral Banks Say US Stablecoins Threaten Financial Integrity | PYMNTS.com
-
Finance48 minutes ago
How much will Social Security go up next year? See latest forecast