‘The Son’: How to Destroy a Great Comedy

In 2020, the fateful year of the pandemic, it arrived in Spanish cinemas (almost for the first time, since it was one of the few international markets open) ‘The Father’, the masterful debut of the celebrated French playwright Florian Zellerwhich adapted his play of the same name, won four Molière Awards, and whose film version won two Oscars, for best adapted screenplay and best actor for a splendid Anthony Hopkins. The title was the second chapter of the thematic trilogy that the artist created on stage with his family as a backdrop.

Given the incredible success of ‘The Father’, Zeller wanted to bet on the risk of bringing to the big screen what was the culmination of his stage trilogy, “The Son”. Considered “a masterpiece” by Le Point and “the best work of the saga” by Le Nouvel Observateur and “a tremendously moving piece” by Télérama; everything pointed to ‘The Son’ as a magnificent adaptation and was the essential star of the 2022-2023 awards race. However, its resounding failure at the Venice Film Festival had already warned that Zeller had not been as successful in the adaptation as “The Father”.

And that’s it Zeller betrays the theatrical essence of “The Son”, try to expand it to break that feeling of watching filmed theater. However, an essential feature of ‘The Father’ is that the director has embraced the origins of him. Turning them down prompts Zeller, who is rewriting the script for his film version with Christopher Hampton, to add flashbacks and subplots that destroy the minimalistic, raw and direct character of the original theater piece. Add to this the fact that Zeller seems unable to transform Hugh Jackman into a kind-hearted but arrogant and cynical bourgeois, as Yvan Attal and Stéphane Freiss were in the original staging of the Comédie des Champs Elysées.

It is true that the subject is tremendously delicate, but Zeller removes all the uncomfortable part in which he was a direct critique of the Parisian bourgeoisie. It also doesn’t help that, despite being set in New York, the way its characters express themselves or the mental health treatment feels wholly artificial, producing that feeling that the story really should be set somewhere else. This, of course, was not the case with ‘The Father’ where London has done a magnificent job of replacing the original Paris.

A heartbreaking melodrama that fails to live up to its main theme

Eliminating the criticism of the bourgeois family, wanting to excessively humanize the father figure (when, mind you, in the original work it is not that the father was bad, but human, having a series of errors typical of a person unable to look beyond his own nose) and wanting to upload more ink so that the message is more explicit, invite them to do so “The Son” is a good example of destroying a work that used to be magnificent and which earned his young actor, Rod Paradot, the Molière for best new actor… something that cannot be said of his film counterpart, in which Zen McGrath lacks any nuance and whose interpretation is too widespread enough to believe that this is a correct picture of teenage depression.

Teenage depression was a central theme of ‘The Son’, even if Zeller underlined the parents’ inability (especially the male parent) to understand the pain of their son, whose depressive origin has many readings, the most concrete being the couple’s sentimental breakup. Yes, there was some ambiguity, but because Zeller has delivered the message with sparse, direct dialogue and minimalistic staging, he leaves a clear interpretation of what he has tried to portray in terms of the torment of being a teenager. In this case, Zeller beats the bush, creating tear-jerking sequences that lead nowhere.

Added to this is the inability to create more depth in the female characters. Yes, in the original play, the roles of mother and stepmother were left in the unobtrusive background, the parent-child relationship being the main thing. But, since Zeller insisted on expanding the story, introducing scenes that err on the side of mock melodrama, that flaw of the original piece is found more evenly, especially with the Vanessa Kirby case, whose character lent a certain degree of brightness to an eerie story. He also mentions the addition of Anthony Hopkins, Zeller’s quirk, and that while the veteran performer is magnificent, he contributes absolutely nothing himself. It’s more, gives the impression that Zeller wants to emphasize his message, as if the audience is not intelligent.

Zeller in the theater has shown the ability to undress everyday family tragedies. He knew how to do it with “The Father”, but he didn’t know how to do it with “The Son”. The only thing that saves the furniture is the very accurate production planning of the rooms closed, especially the paternal house, the work of Simon Bowles. But that’s all, not even the cast of him is saved, even if there have been comments in favor of Jackman.

Decidedly, “El hijo” is a complete disappointment, a tremendous kick in the foot by a playwright who had proven to have a wise cinematic eye and who was now unable to respect the basis of his work. What would have led to wanting to see the climax of the trilogy in theaters, with ‘The Mother’ (which, paradoxically, was the first theatrical piece in the series), now only causes let Zeller focus on the tableswhich appears to be its natural habitat.

Note: 4

The best: His production design is great, the only notable thing about the film.

Worse: The frustration of seeing a gorgeous comedy turn into a cheesy after-dinner movie, all that was left for Zeller to add a babysitter.