An Exercise In Bad Screenwriting Part II: Joe Bell — Or How To Get An Important Message Through To Your Audience By Abusing A Non-Linear Narrative To Manipulate The Piss Out Of Them
*WARNING — SPOILERS AND SHIT*
The 2021ish film Joe Bell has a funny way of telling a serious story. And with all of its good intentions and its heart in the right place, sorta — this film truly believes that the key to getting its anti-bullying agenda across most effectively, is to shove its unconventional, slack-jawed queer-tolerant hero through a narrative reveal that’s less like Boys Don’t Cry… and more like say, uh… Joker? Yeah. That one. The one with the stairs.
Unfortunately, Mark Wahlberg doesn’t talk to plants as Joe Bell. But he does talk to entire high school gymnasiums about the consequences of adolescent bullying — as Joe Bell, which is noble enough. Mark Wahlberg is playing a serious version of his character from Daddy’s Home.
So, I’m really not a big fan of labels and such but for the sake of this writing, I’m pansexual. I suppose that makes me unofficial LGBT,Q,+. I’ve heard for years now that they’re going to shove that “P” somewhere in there but it’s whatever — that’s good enough for now, I suppose. It also means that I have a special say on the subject matter of Joe Bell.
Joe Bell serves as a grim reminder that whatever progress society thinks it’s made when it comes to accepting people who are different — think again. We’re still a country of proud, hateful-tolerant Neanderthals. The kinds of people who would much rather die ignorant, bigoted pieces of shit, all sadly mistaken when we honestly believe that we stand for something of value — than affected by any one, single rational thought that’s been touched by the hand of Woke… or anything that involves an empathic shift of some sort. You know, “gay stuff.” Condescending tone: Have you ever lived amongst a society contaminated with people who have access to all the best tools for change AND are legitimately proud of their refusal as individuals to grow and adapt to the world around them — and where others are masking their pride, they’re over-compensating with their dramatic public displays of blatant insecurity…? Oh, You have…?
Well, then does Joe Bell have a screenplay for you. Because in this screenplay, gay people who die by suicide are allowed to serve as both a manipulative plot device, and as an entire catalytic entity. And — a sole, gay character is also the figment of a disgruntled straight character’s imagination.
The gay teenage son, Jadin, in Joe Bell truly is the main character for roughly the first half of this non-linear narrative. He’s a lot like Pascow from Pet Sematary, in the way the script handles him — but with a twist, of course. In Pet Sematary, you have a basic, linear narrative that features a dead character that we know from the beginning, is dead. He’s an imaginary-fictional character — to a different, living-fictional character… or is he? He could also be a ghost (he’s probably a ghost). And then in Joe Bell, you have a MAJOR supporting character (who the story makes very clear, upfront, is the central focus) in a non-linear narrative who’s existence during the present, turns out to be the figment of his father’s imagination… because (PSYCHE!) he’s fucking dead (but probably NOT a ghost). And dad’s got some guilt, as he should.
Bullied into submission by his classmates, and neglected by almost everyone he cares about, Jadin kills himself. Not only is it done in such a way that’s effectively tragic, but it’s also kinda devastating — even for a low-key Hollywood movie. So much so, that once it was revealed 40 minutes in that Jadin was dead, I didn’t even know what was going on anymore. It took a few entire scenes following the reveal for me to both accept and realize exactly what had happened. Because the film had done such a good job of getting me invested to the point of where I genuinely cared about this character, it didn’t seem rational to pull the rug out from underneath the audience in a film like this — and getting me to feel like, maybe I can’t trust this film from now on. Which is the absolute last thing that a competent drama should want its audience to feel. AND THAT IS 100% ENTIRELY THE FAULT(S) OF WHOEVER THOUGHT THAT THIS STORY SHOULD BE TOLD USING A FUCKING NON-LINEAR NARRATIVE — AND WHY YOU DON’T USE ONE AS A GIMMICK FOR A TRUE STORY ABOUT REAL PEOPLE THAT IS AS SERIOUS AS THIS ONE IS.
Most (if not all) of the credit for the immediate urge to get invested in the film has to be given to the young actor portraying Jadin (Reid Miller), who is giving one hell of a breakout performance if there ever was one. He IS the film. His performance is so good, it’s potentially the only thing keeping the rest of Joe Bell from becoming a complete dumpster fire. And we, the audience become so invested — so early on — in this character and his story, that we completely forget that the fucking movie isn’t even named after his character. It’s named after his father’s character. Joe Fucking Bell: Just Your Average, Rural 21st Century Dipshit That Still Believes In Defending Masculinity And Preventing Homosexuality By Taking His Boys Fishing And Other Misadventures.
So — all the right ingredients are here. It’s almost perfect, certified Oscarbait in how effectively it’s (almost) carried out to satisfyingly well-intentioned dramatic results… so why the fuck does the movie think that it needs to fuck it all up by using a non-linear narrative — just to trick us into thinking that we’re watching two living characters (based on real people) having entire conversations with each other in this true story…? It’s completely unnecessary and hugely dishonest, in a film that ironically feels surprisingly genuine for the remainder of its runtime.
In A Beautiful Mind (another true story told in a way that has real-life people seeing shit) — another film with a basic, linear narrative — it’s revealed pretty late into the film that John Nash, played by Russell Crowe, is a paranoid schizophrenic. His numerous encounters with a few key supporting characters are entirely delusional. It isn’t revealed to the audience until it’s revealed to Nash. Is this manipulative to the audience…? Sorta. Kinda. Not really. It’s relevant to A Beautiful Mind and its story of an unconventional, antisocial hero’s lifelong battle with mental illness. Therefore, it helps the audience further understand and empathize with the central character… but Joe Bell is not about mental illness; it’s about the dangers of prolonged bullying, and the long-term consequences when enabled.
Going back to the comparison to Joker, we know in Joker that Arthur Fleck has a bit of a screw loose (for reals)… but what we don’t know (excluding all people who claim they knew before it was revealed, who then like to routinely pat themselves on the back for) is that Arthur fantasizes about a real person who is not his girlfriend — being his girlfriend, which… is already something all too relatable. Why the screenplay thinks that it needs to hold the audience’s hand so tightly — just to show us side-by-side comparisons of what we were shown prior vs. what was really happening during the big reveal — is anyone’s guess. I would suspect it’s the studio’s firm belief that people forget everything 15 minutes after it happens — even if they were already paying attention.
In Cast Away, we don’t need Wilson to grow a CGI face just so that it can tell THanks to kick a fucking field goal, or shove a coconut up his ass — We get it. Tom Hanks is having conversations with a generic volleyball, as a means to sustain whatever sanity he still has left. THIS actually could have worked had Joe Bell chosen to take its story in this direction (minus the volleyball). It wouldn’t have been less effective — it actually would have been more effective. WAY MORE effective. Because had all of the film’s flashbacks involving what really happened to Jadin that served throughout the non-linear narrative — just been placed in a basic, linear narrative, as the official first half of the film, it would’ve completely solved the film’s one big problem: fucking its own audience up the head in the most insulting way possible.
It would’ve also made the film significantly more powerful in that NOW, we would understand why the film’s narrative has been passed on to Jadin’s father, Joe I-Can’t-Believe-My-Son’s-A-Male-Cheerleader Bell. Because it would feel earned. We would vicariously experience through Joe, how to live with that regret — while still having to grieve at the same time— and what can be done to raise awareness and to help prevent it from happening to other families and their communities in the future. Had the film just been honest with the audience from the very beginning, we would completely understand that Joe’s imaginary conversations with Jadin are his way of coping with the unfathomable guilt — had he simply been a better father, his son wouldn’t have taken his own life.
One film that does this exact thing brilliantly, is one that unfortunatly no one ever talks about anymore, the 2001 film In The Bedroom. It’s a story with a linear narrative that’s just as straight-forward as any other. The central focus of the entire film is also the one character that is brutally murdered unexpectedly by the beginning of Act II in a way that feels so real, it’s horrifying. For the remainder of the film, the other major characters decide what they’re going to do about it. In The Bedroom is a masterpiece. You could see it once, and never forget it… even though I’m apparently the only one who remembers it?
The audience can be quite good at suspending disbelief. And all while still convincing ourselves that we’re enjoying whatever it is that we’re watching. The fact that Joe Bell stars, and is co-produced by Mark Wahlberg is a great thing because he isn’t like every other A-List A-hole in Hollywood. Wahlberg appeals to much more than your average punkass liberal audience. Now, the film seems destined to eventually reach an audience that actually needs to be told the difference between tolerance and acceptance — an audience of real degenerates.
What’s deeply conflicting about Joe Bell is that it actually harbors an important story with an even more important message — that will forever be relevant. But it’s all squandered by one fatal error: the way it reveals it. And why. And what’s even more frustrating and sorta downright infuriating — is that Joe Bell is one of those extremely rare films that truly could’ve been an All-American classic. It could have… It was definitely a better film than Daddy’s Home 2.
