Freedom Writers

Hilary Swank tries to get through.

OK, let’s get this out of the way right up front: “Freedom Writers” is just like all the other movies about teachers inspiring kids (movies like “Dangerous Minds, “To Sir With Love,” and “Coach Carter.”) That may be all some of you need to know.

If you’re still reading this review, then it probably doesn’t matter to you that the movie is formulaic. Sometimes we want our movies to follow a familiar formula; sometimes it’s comforting to know what’s coming and who it’s all going to work out. And, given the recent rash of movies that have taken the inspiring-school-teacher-meets-troubled-kids formula and tweaked it in often disturbing, depressing, and cynical ways (“Half Nelson,” “The History Boys,” “Notes on a Scandal,”) it’s kind of refreshing to see one that stays the course. The twist is that there isn’t a twist.

“Freedom Writers” is based on a true story. Funny how true stories always make the most predictable movies. Hilary Swank plays Erin Gruwell, as a rookie teacher determined to make a difference in kids’ lives, and by golly, she does. She works hard is endearingly earnest, and has a knack for connecting traditional materials (they were using Anne Frank and Comp books in Freshman English when I was in school) with the students very untraditional lives. The students write letters to Miep Gies, the woman who hid Anne Frank, and the movie climaxes with Ms. Gies’ visit to the classroom. One student stands up and tells her she’s his hero.

Well-trodden ground, certainly. But a few things make this movie a little better than it ought to be: for one, it takes time to get to know the students, to hear their voices and identify with their struggles. This is probably because the students’ journals were actually published, giving the screenwriter access to their lives in a way he couldn’t dream up on his own. It is also due to excellent performances by a few of the students, notably April L. Hernandez and Mario, which give the students’ concerns real gravity. The quality of this movie is directly porportional to the quantity of screen time these kids are given. Too bad Hilary Swank had to receive top billing.

The second thing that makes it stand out, curiously, is just how un-hip Hillary Swank plays Ms. Gruwell. She looks like a Mary Kay lady on the first day of class, and on the last day of class. Her efforts to learn the students’ lingo are terrible and laughed at, including her attempt to teach Tupac Shakur lyrics in class as poetry (a clear dig at “Dangerous Minds.”) But somehow, the fact that she stays so cheery, so dorky, so indelibly white, both endears her to her students and to her audience. It works.

Warning: this clip contains language teachers aren’t supposed to use.

I’m going to venture a guess that it was Hilary Swank’s instincts that took her down this path of dorkiness to success. Swank has done great work as an actress in the past; I think she’s doing the best she can with a weak script here. The screenwriter, Richard LaGravenese, who is also the director, never even hints at a possible fault in Ms. Gruwell’s character. Every other adult in the movie, from her underachieving husband (Patrick Dempsey) to her cynical and bitter department head (Imelda Staunton) are evil caricatures put there only to make her life more difficult, and thus make her look more saintly when she doesn’t let them prevail.

In “Sex, Drugs, and Cocoa Puffs,” Chuck Klosterman wonders whether we would rather watch a movie about our lives that is glossed over and inspirational, or one that is brutal and honest. I have to wonder what it must be like to be the supporting character in someone else’s movie: if Erin Gruwell’s real, than so are her husband and department head. What does it feel like to see yourself portrayed onscreen as evil, bitter, and only ever determined to keep anyone else from making you look bad? Hopefully, most of us will never have that experience.

Recommended

• if you liked all the movies listed in the first paragraph;
• if you need a movie that makes you feel good without making you think;
• if you think the characters in movies ought to be more inspirational/entertaining than the people you meet in real life. That’s why they’re called ENTERTAINMENT, idiot.

Not Recommended

• if you liked all the movies listed in the second paragraph;
• if you hate movies that feel familiar;
• if you think movies ought to portray, artistically, real life. That’s why they’re called ART, idiot.