"Birdman" follows (most of the time quite literally) an actor played by Michael Keaton as he desperately attempts to put on a broadway play that his character both wrote and is directing while attempting to gain some respect in the artistic community. No doubt purposely the play he is attempting to put on in many ways mirrors the inner dialogue that Keaton's character is feeling within the story. In it Keaton finds himself both wondering what it is to be loved, and wondering aloud why it is that despite his giving all he had for it, that he seemingly is reciprocated with no love at all. Keaton's ex-paramour is given the line to explain all this to Keaton when she brilliantly points out Keaton's unfortunate fault of mistaking admiration for love.
It is this internal struggle for love or admiration or whatever he can get that makes the movie an absolute wonder. Keaton is perfectly cast to in many ways play himself. It seems quite clear that either one of two things were happening on the screen, either we the audience were being given a gift of seeing some of the most perfect acting on the screen to date, or in some way or another we were seeing some part of Michael Keaton himself on screen. I can't help but feel that the latter is true, but perhaps that is just me being fooled by the skills of Mr. Keaton.
Despite the movie's introspective and art house demeanor, it is fascinating to me how hostile the movie actually is. Almost every audience conceivable is at least one way or another shown as cinical, insincere, big-headed, or corrupt in one way or another. Even the main character, whom we as an audience are meant to side with and empathize with, indeed in most ways we are experiencing the movie from his perspective (something which in some ways I wish had been true throughout the entire movie), even this character is subtly shown as corrupt, full of himself, and in many ways just another baby searching for attention. We are shown visions and self-created super-powers that he possesses in his mind which are no doubt merely delusions supporting his image of himself of importance and of a greater being than his audience. When it seems towards the end that audience might be taken from him, he loses all hope and delusions of grandeur and decides that the only way to fully show his superiority, is to literally go out with a bang.
But this is not the only target of both admiration and ridicule. Online culture, artistic culture, the good actor, the producer, the director, the bad actor, the beginning actor, the slutty actor, all of theses are made targets. And yet what makes this movie truly amazing is that none of them are shown as evil or degrading, but merely as existing for what they are. Like the incredible long-shot cinematography that was shown, each piece is shown as being a messy, disfunctional, and irreverent piece of a larger messy, disfunctional, and irreverent whole.
In fact the only complaint that I had while watching this film was that this whole was a bit overwhelming at times. The long-shot cinematography kept us both in real time while at the same time jumping into future moments like our own minds sometimes do within our attention-spans. I found myself wishing for a cut to a different perspective, a different location, anything to escape the monotony of the situations that so closely mirrored the wish to jump scenes in my own life. But like my life, the film kept playing on in the same location, the same frantic but steady pace. It acted like a reminder of the constancy of actual observation for the world with which we actually habituate. In short, it was an experience as fantastical and familiar as life. And for that if for no other reason, it was a brilliant show of movie making talent.
