May December Knows How to Implicate Its Audience

Watching a movie may feel like a passive act, but thanks to all those nasty, horny voyeurism movies, we know that the intent behind a pair of eyeballs means everything. In film, the perspective of the audience fuses with that of the camera—the lens anticipates where we should look and where we want to look, but can also deny us gratification in playful, calculated ways. Of course, certain types of stories are more likely to attract attentive eyes than others. Topics—often taboo ones that promise scandal—become hot-button attractions: Real crime, real murder, real victims. The ubiquity of this hunger means that a filmmaker, if they’re playful and calculating enough, can anticipate where their audience’s attention will be hungrily drawn. There may be no American filmmaker working today more playful and calculating than Todd Haynes. May December takes its subject matter—a suburban family living with the suppressed trauma of a mother becoming pregnant with their first child when she was a married housewife and he was a seventh grader—from real life. Or more accurately, it imagines the lived reality of a family who experienced what was widely reported in 1997: That a teacher, Mary Kay Letourneau, was having an affair with/sexually assaulting her 12-year-old student.
Here, Gracie (Julianne Moore) has three children with Joe (Charles Melton), and actress Elizabeth (Natalie Portman) visits their Savannah home in anticipation of playing Gracie in a film. With the inclusion of Elizabeth’s narcissistic, coquettish perspective, Haynes and screenwriter Samy Burch want to center something sharp and unsettling: That our attraction to other people’s scandals should be rigorously questioned.
Throughout May December, you get the sense that Elizabeth’s film won’t be very good, or at least that her fixation with unraveling Gracie and her family extends far beyond what the role demands of her. When she justifies her interest with, “It’s a very complex and human story,” it rings hollow; when she refers to Joe’s life as a “story” (after sleeping with him), she doesn’t understand what it is about her attitude that is so upsetting to him.
May December is a film about abuse, yes, but also about trying to assess abuse through a voyeuristic lens, and how limited the results will be. Just because Gracie is an abhorrent abuser doesn’t mean that Elizabeth, her audience, nor the eager audience of Haynes and Burch’s film are entitled to know every way she’s affected and traumatized those around her—nor does it give carte blanche to all attempts to figure it out. As becomes clear by the end of the film, the only person who remains psychologically consistent through Elizabeth’s visit is Gracie. Everyone else is dangerously in flux.
A film like May December, one that implicates its audience, isn’t just concerned with condemning, analyzing or satirizing recognizable human behaviors, but also the expectations held by those looking to have their judgements confirmed and validated. These are films that challenge the comfortable ideological distance we consume media with, turning the filmmaker’s gaze on us by questioning how or why we watch.
Martin Scorsese’s Killers of the Flower Moon centers this idea in a poignant and show-stopping final scene. After three-plus hours spent extrapolating the racist systems that contribute to Native American genocide, the story’s loose ends are wrapped up by cutting forward a decade to the recording of “The Lucky Strike Hour,” a cigarette-sponsored radio dramatization of the murders, with all the crass, clumsy sentiment that went with the medium. Scorsese doesn’t just posit that this story of Native trauma has been owned by the FBI since the case was closed, but—with every heightened sound effect and tasteless vocal impression—makes a striking parallel to the narrativization of crimes for popular ingestion.
Should the uncomfortable details, the urgent political context of crime procedurals, really be sanded off in order for easier consumption? It calls us to question what we consider most satisfying when it comes to crime—are we in fact happy to consume the most sanitized versions? As a storyteller who more often than not draws from real life, Scorsese implicates himself along with his audience.
Ten years ago, Scorsese took the polar opposite approach to implicating his audience, undermining the glee many took at seeing fraudster and financial criminal Jordan Belfort enact violence upon his victims. As the soundtrack pumps up, as the three-hour runtime bears on, as Belfort’s drug dependency, misogynistic behavior and general distaste for his fellow humans all intensify, you keep waiting for The Wolf of Wall Street to pull back and signal, clearly and distinctly, that these were horrid men abusing the powers allocated to them by a deathly sick America.