Sorkin Strikes Again with the Inexhaustibly Witty 'Molly's Game'
The American Crime Drama is a uniquely elusive genre in the 21st century for critically acclaimed filmography. Outside of the 1990s practically exhausting all possible plots of the category, from the cut and dry Cop Land to the ridiculous Con Air, the particular vein of film requires a wholly unique aesthetic, a captivating voice and enough entertainment value to appeal to a wide audience while still finding room for the critics. It is a demanding task for filmmakers, and finding that cinematic voice has proven most challenging as the last two decades have transitioned the genre to a much more action-based assortment, where the names of the performers involved wholly eclipse any and all recognition of directors, producers and perhaps most significantly, writers. This voice must have wit, charisma, drive, humor and some degree of apathy. Say that aloud and you’ve just described the collective work of Aaron Sorkin.
In his latest project and directorial debut, Molly’s Game, Sorkin rockets his audience at light speed through the inescapably clever and cold tale of real-life Poker Princess Molly Bloom, a former Olympic-class athlete who ran some of the most exclusive high-end poker games in the country. The film is a rush of unadulterated dialogue and witticisms, producing, as Sorkin so often does, a universe in which even the drunks know exactly what to say. The film follows multiple timelines dictating the winding and complex history of Molly’s introduction to and rapid departure from the world of poker. The non-chronological nature of the narrative ensures that the viewer needs to be two steps ahead of the characters onscreen because the film is always three. Indeed, the viewer may very well find themselves in need of a dose of one of Molly’s many recreational indulgences to keep up with ‘the game.’
All of this is inevitably an extension of Sorkin, who’s new hand in directing, while clearly inexperienced, lends itself immensely to the rhythm of rising action. In fact, nearly every performance in the film, paired with each comeback, question and too-good-to-be-spontaneous response feels like an extension of its creator. Not to downplay the actors; Jessica Chastain shines in the titular role, as does Idris Elba as attorney Charlie Gaffey, but for Molly’s Game’s two and a half-hour run time, the writing takes total precedence over its cinematic qualities and realistic integrity. This is most apparent in Molly’s frequent narration that is not so much sprinkled as doused throughout the story. It is always an effective tool in keeping the viewer engaged and assisting them in navigating each poker match. However, the near-constant interruption not only seems to cheapen each tense moral conflict but devalue Molly’s voice. In David Fincher’s The Social Network (2010), Sorkin cements three distinct timelines for the narrative to weave in between. Every voiceover in the film is fixed to one of those timelines. In Molly’s Game, the timelines are still present, but the incessant narration is detached from any of them. This difference makes the plot inherently more difficult for the viewer to follow.
The central fault of the film, as is no surprise to those familiar with Sorkin's other projects, is the emotional aspect of the narrative. For Molly, the emotional conflict takes the form of her father, Larry Bloom, played by Kevin Costner. Though Sorkin makes deliberate care to ensure that the wild success of a seemingly fierce and independent woman is decidedly not due to any residual ‘daddy problems,’ the emotional arc of the narrative is resolved by a clever if not wholly inconsequential deus ex machina. It is, unfortunately, a recurring issue that has plagued Sorkin’s writing through several films and ultimately delegitimizes his characters and detracts from the rising stakes. That being said, nuanced emotive exploration is nowhere near the purpose nor the focus of the film. Molly’s Game functions impeccably well as a fast-paced American Crime Drama through every snappy exchange and wisecracking somebody.