Zach Braff traces a jagged line from New Jersey to Harold and Maude
Before filming Garden State, Zach Braff gave Natalie Portman a copy of Harold and Maude—”one of my favorite movies of all time,” he told Charlie Rose. In Hal Ashby’s 1971 odd-couple comedy, Ruth Gordon played a mischievous, vivacious septuagenarian who awakens a suicidal teen to the possibilities of love and life. Fast-talking, free-spirit Sam, played by Portman, might as well be “Maude Jr.,” the actress told Entertainment Weekly; she “has the same effect” on Andrew Largeman, played with saucer-eyed innocence by Braff.
Braff wants his film—which, like Harold and Maude, darts from graveyards to mansions with deliberate, art-school cinematography over a languid soundtrack—to be both an indie and Hollywood hit. It winds up in the middling ground between.
Everything that is simple and effective about Harold and Maude is overdone and muddled in Garden State. The causes of Harold’s depression are never quite obvious, but seem to be as much about society as his individual psyche; Andrew, on the other hand, has a faltering acting career, a paraplegic mother who drowned in the bathtub, and a psychiatrist father who’s fed him a whole cabinet of drugs since age 10, for reasons too contrived to disclose. About a half hour into Garden State, Sam turns to Andrew, and asks, “So you’re, like, really Jewish?” as though she just moved to New Jersey. Andrew says the Jews he knows only go to synagogue for Yom Kippur, but the movie’s not really about atonement either. Compare that to the moment in Harold and Maude when the camera zooms in on Maude’s arm just long enough to reveal a numbered tattoo, followed, with equal grace, by a reference to Alfred Dreyfus watching the seagulls on Devil’s Island. The Holocaust is never discussed, only suggested, earning the film’s final gravitas while grounding Maude’s character.
Daily rate: $2
Monthly rate: $18
Yearly rate: $180
WAIT, WHY DO I HAVE TO PAY TO COMMENT?
Tablet is committed to bringing you the best, smartest, most enlightening and entertaining reporting and writing on Jewish life, all free of charge. We take pride in our community of readers, and are thrilled that you choose to engage with us in a way that is both thoughtful and thought-provoking. But the Internet, for all of its wonders, poses challenges to civilized and constructive discussion, allowing vocal—and, often, anonymous—minorities to drag it down with invective (and worse). Starting today, then, we are asking people who'd like to post comments on the site to pay a nominal fee—less a paywall than a gesture of your own commitment to the cause of great conversation. All proceeds go to helping us bring you the ambitious journalism that brought you here in the first place.
I NEED TO BE HEARD! BUT I DONT WANT TO PAY.
Readers can still interact with us free of charge via Facebook, Twitter, and our other social media channels, or write to us at firstname.lastname@example.org. Each week, we’ll select the best letters and publish them in a new letters to the editor feature on the Scroll.
We hope this new largely symbolic measure will help us create a more pleasant and cultivated environment for all of our readers, and, as always, we thank you deeply for your support.