'Hateship Loveship': Audience expectations are constantly upended

'Hateship Loveship' stars Kristen Wiig and Guy Pearce.

Jordan Strauss/Invision/AP
'Hateship Loveship' stars Kristen Wiig.

Kristen Wiig is such a gifted clown that seeing her play a repressed wallflower in “Hateship Loveship” comes as a shock. It took me a while to shake off the feeling that her performance was one big put-on – the ultimate deadpan comic turn.

She plays Johanna, an Iowa woman hired to look after the adolescent Sabitha (Hailee Steinfeld), who is living with her grandfather (Nick Nolte) since her mother died in an accident blamed on errant father Ken (Guy Pearce). Ken has been in prison and is a not-so-recovering drug addict, but he’s not a bad guy, really, just dissolute. He wants to fix up a motel he bought in Chicago, where he lives. When he leaves Johanna a thank-you note, it spurs a teenage prank in which she is mistakenly led to believe he loves her.

Directed by Liza Johnson from a screenplay by Mark Poirier based on a short story by Alice Munro, “Hateship Loveship” doesn’t quite work out the way you think it will (unless you’ve read the Munro story). Johanna is so straitlaced and dutiful that she’s practically robotic. You sense that nothing good will come of her infatuation with Ken, and yet this is a movie in which our worst pulp expectations are constantly being upended.

But they're not upended altogether successfully. The film comes across as a gentle and not entirely believable polemic for the good life, despite all the badness on view. And although the cast, which also includes Jennifer Jason Leigh and Christine Lahti in sharp cameos, is very good, Wiig’s performance is self-effacing to a fault. Like a lot of comic actors, she overcompensates in dramatic roles by wearing a very long face. Grade: B (Rated R for drug use, some sexuality and language.)

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.