Men in Hats

THE ADJUSTMENT BUREAU

By Clarence L. Donowitz


The dark tales of Philip K. Dick have been ample sources for movie adaptations. The most famous example is Blade Runner, the most recent is Next. It is easy to see why; most of Dick's stories thread a thin line between reality and a fantasy in a way that the reader is rarely sure which is worse.

The Adjustment Bureau envisions the Dickian universe as modern-day New York City with a gloomy London-like weather pattern. Matt Damon plays David Norris, a
young and promising politician with a wild streak. His lead in the polls which will surely put him in the U.S. Senate is blown when a tabloid runs a photo of him exposing his
lighter side. While rehearsing his concession speech in the men's bathroom, he chances upon Elise (Emily Blunt), who like many free-spirits hangs out in the stalls of mens'
bathrooms clutching a bottle of champagne. They hit if off right away. She is the breath of fresh air in David's schedule-laden, market-tested life and in this is the rare truthful moment in this film. Their attraction feels right and keeps the ensuring machinations watchable.

To make a long story short, there exists a plan somewhere that destines that Elise and David should not be together. Decreed by "the Chairman", the plan is carried out
by "case workers", sour-looking men in Brooks Brothers suits who rarely question their orders. Instead, they wear throw-back fedoras and use literal doorways to hopscotch through space. In their world, you can open you closet door to retrieve your tie and find yourself in Yankee Stadium. They use a device that looks like a cross between a Bible and and iPad to chart the course of ordinary mortals.

Humans are supposed to be ignorant of the forces controlling their lives. However, due to a slip up, David arrives at work ten minutes early and finds the case workers doing their "adjusting". The head honcho, Richardson (John Slattery) has no choice but to let him in on the secret. Their job is to make sure that David sticks to the Chairman's plans. He wasn't meant to peak behind the curtains, but now that he has, he must keep the secret or risk being "reset", which is techno-speak for being lobotomized.

Being wild at heart, David decides to pursue Elise. He catches up with three years later (another glitch, I suppose) and from here on, the film explores the question of free will in entirely predictable terms. As David pursues his own goals regardless of the plan, the case workers begin looking like overworked auditors at the height of tax season.

 


The Bureau decides to call in the best of the best. This proves to be the rumpled shape of Thompson in the rumpled shape of actor Terence Stamp. Thompson is all business, but even he finds time to give David an exposition-laden speech. The adjusters' job is to
make sure humans stay on track. Left to our own devices, we are liable to alternate between world wars and economic devastation. But how does Elise figure into all of this? According to Richardson, David cannot be both a great lover and a great leader (hints of the Oval Office as the Holy Grail are never far in movies that concern fate and power). If he stays with Elise, he will let her jeopardize his all-important career. I guess the case workers never heard the saying "behind every great man is a great woman".

No matter. It is speeches like Thompson's that expose the fundamental flaw of the film. While David and Elise's passion and their desire for each other is real, the
adjusters thwart their plans with a bored indifference. Supernatural beings tempering with human fate is nothing new. But while the gods of ancient Greece and Rome have
charm and wit, these angels are either as serious as cancer, or naive in a teenage sort of way. The latter is exemplified by Mitchell, played by in colorless tones by Anthony Mackie, who decides for reasons unknown to help David. He even lends David his magic hat, endowing him with supernatural powers.

The ending is the biggest cop-out of them all. It is tantamount to those dark thrillers where it turns out that the most vicious mob henchman is really an undercover
cop and therefore all those killings are excusable. Director George Nolfi who also wrote the screenplay based Dick's short story "The Adjustment Team" says the movie is meant to raise questions. It surely does, but they never get above the level of metaphysical discussions which is the exclusive domain of fifteen-year old pot smokers. Sadly, all those "deep" questions merely look silly once the ganja smoke settles.

If I may be allowed a naive side note of my own. Why is it that movies which tinker with Judeo-Christian implications of an omnipotent God portray Him as a joyless
watchmaker, whose plans are mysterious but rarely interesting? Wouldn't the act of creation be one of pure joy and a magnificence which we, as God-like splinters of the Whole should be able to fathom? I imagine creation to be an endlessly spiraling Shakespearean drama that is a sight and sound to behold. Instead, in popular art (film
being the art form of our times), God is often reduced to a highly efficient tax collector who gets flustered when someone fills in the wrong form.