A- A A+

David v Goliath in the beautiful British countryside

Megan Graham |  15 August 2017

 

Hampstead, 2017. PG Starring: Diane Keaton, Brendon Gleeson, James Norton, Lesley Manville. Directed by Joel Hopkins. Running time: 103 minutes.

xxxxxOne lone man daring to interfere with the evil plans of the rich and powerful: it’s not exactly a new angle, but there are a few scraps of satisfaction to be found in Joel Hopkin’s latest film Hampstead—just not in the realm of originality. It’s a sleepy story that meanders along with a mildly pleasant mediocrity.

If you felt like switching your brain off and staring at beautiful British countryside, this could be worth a view. In the latest performance from acclaimed actors Diane Keaton (playing Emily) and Brendan Gleeson (playing Donald), we learn about hermit Harry Hallowes – a real person who in 2007 won squatter’s rights to the land he’d been self-sufficiently living on in London’s upmarket Hampstead Heath.

Despite its being based on a true story, the film feels like a cutely contrived fantasy ideal for Annie-Hall-nostalgic seniors with a heart condition—due to the fact it is a rom-com that appears to have all the actual surprise or excitement taken out.

Recently widowed, Emily is part of wealthy clique in London’s upmarket suburb of Hampstead (to give some perspective, recent figures state the average house price in the area is £1,545,448). As she faces her rather dull day-to-day activities sans her late husband, she begins to realise the layers of inauthenticity that have plagued her life for some time.

We learn quite quickly that her husband was a philanderer. There are also indicators that, while still alive, he did not plan for their financial security and died leaving a big pile of debt. Meanwhile, Emily’s conservative ‘friends’ are campaigning to have an old hospital knocked down and an apartment block developed at the famous Hampstead Heath.

The group’s ringleader aims to coerce Emily, and the rest of the ‘ladies who lunch’, into supporting her campaign. Little do they know that a gruff Shrek-like swamp-dweller, Donald (Gleeson) has been squatting in a ramshackle house in the heath for 17 years.

Emily and Donald serendipitously meet in a fanciful rom-com way, and the conflicts of interest, and characters, begins.

The film has the feel of a slap-job patchwork quilt; there’s some very pretty bits, some old bits, perhaps a little square here and there, that hint at meaning. But overall it feels like disparate pieces sewed together for plot convenience.

 

"It becomes a classic battle between faceless corporate Goliath and ‘little guy’ David."

 

Emily’s friendships with her rich meddling matriarchs seem entirely unreal, and it’s hard to swallow the notion that she was ever close with them. There’s no clear narrative that indicates how her life got to this point, or why she’s so dissatisfied with it now.

As for Donald’s character arc, it is equally indistinct. We are dealt another trope; a stoic man injured in love a long time ago who has not dared to love another since. Now, awakened by the right woman, he is learning to love someone new after so many years alone.

Of course it’s a nice idea, particularly in these sorts of films, but the depiction of Donald’s life and story smacks of—to use the word again—contrivance, and thus it seems to lack depth. His character could have been richly imagined, yet it seemed there just wasn’t much of substance for him to say.

Hampstead has a couple of redeeming points however, beyond the pretty cinematography—and does manage to raise some contemporary issues. Donald lives ‘off the grid’, growing his own vegetables and fishing for his dinner. He generates his own electricity, and is warmed by a fire he makes in a discarded conventional oven. His shack is made entirely from recycled materials, and he has seemingly no need for money.

When he is eventually taken to court by the company looking to clear his house and build apartments, it becomes a classic battle between faceless corporate Goliath and ‘little guy’ David, with a humble legal aid lawyer in place of a slingshot.

While on the stand, the prosecuting lawyer asks Donald what he has contributed to society; has he paid taxes, or council rates? Has he worked a job that contributed, as others in the room do?

Donald’s retort is that he has grown his own food, caught his own dinner (fish) and generated his own electricity for 17 years—while causing no harm to anybody. His carbon footprint being therefore non-existent, he reckons he has done more for humanity and the planet than the prosecutor.

It’s a point tidily made, attracting cheers from a throng of millennial-aged supporters who have gathered to show their (albeit unsolicited) support for Donald. In this way, there is a clear dichotomy between high-wealth baby boomers wanting to bulldoze and erect profitable apartments, and the younger, and more ecologically aware, generation organising protests and standing up for ‘the little guy’.

Whether this is fair or not, it seems to be a subtle message from the film. As in one or two other scenes, there was a glimmer of a real statement being made. At the same time, none of the points about wealth-obsession, ecological recklessness, squatters rights and so on are particularly strong, or approached with anything much more than a superficial nod.

If you don’t want to think much; if you appreciate a predictable moral victory, a quaint soundtrack and a film that vacillates between relaxation and tedium – Hampstead might be for you.

  


Megan GrahamMegan Graham is a Melbourne based writer.

 



Comments

Comments should be short, respectful and on topic. Email is requested for identification purposes only.

Word Count: 0 (please limit to 200)

Similar articles

Non-ants and animal whimdom

2 Comments
Barry Gittins | 24 July 2017

xxxxxants don’t sleep elephants weep presidents creep oolong teas steep and we observe. dictators serve goosekillers swerve ignorance hits curve art shows verve and we obsess. rabbits stress tortoises press paedophiles confess corporations bless and we object


Spider music

1 Comment
Chris Jackson | 17 July 2017

Spider webI am, of course, a spider: my obstinacy, a viola; my gossamer back-and-forthing, woven ruminations of a violin. Watch me, busy always to continue a spider's life. All things love the little kingdom they inherit. This is home, intricate with fetched fidget, this scratchy bow-flight is a busy cello urging me to tracery, all tossed about in winds of orchestra.


Finding the high way

11 Comments
Andrew Hamilton | 26 July 2017

xxxxxIn our society ethical questions such as those to do with marriage, crime and punishment, the beginnings and endings of life, and freedom of speech are often highway issues. Protagonists establish in advance the right way to go, keep their foot down and their eyes on the road without noticing the terrain the highway traverses. Road signs indicating another destinations or alternative routes are ignored and towns by-passed. Certainty is gained; understanding of country is sacrificed.


The thin line between apes and humans

9 Comments
Megan Graham | 26 July 2017

xxxxxI came to the Planet of the Apes films a little late, thinking it was just a bit too far on the silly side for my tastes. But with time to kill on a holiday in 2014, I watched Rise of the Planet of the Apes and Dawn of the Planet of the Apes and found myself surprisingly invested in the emotions of the characters. Released in Australia today is the latest episode: War for the Planet of the Apes.


Civil War gender power games

Tim Kroenert | 19 July 2017

This is a deliberate subversion of typical, destructive Western tropes by Coppola, in which it is the male character who is objectified by the female gaze. In this she probes how this particular man either thrives under or is stymied by such objectification. John is more than aware of the sexual and romantic stirrings he has aroused among his new companions. But in his assumption that his objectification is empowering, he has utterly underestimated the emotional and psychic complexities of those doing the objectifying.