Director Todd Field certainly knows how to get good performances out of actors but the thing that stands out about LITTLE CHILDREN is that it feels as though the director is watching all the action from the crow's nest far above. Watching the film I was reminded of domestic dramas such as American Beauty and even a bit of Donnie Darko. There is a dispassionate, objective cast over the material which is primarily an exploration of the loneliness and frustration of middle class suburban life.
LITTLE CHILDREN shows us bahavior (much of it narcissistic and immature) and lets the exposure of such behavior speak for itsself. The movie (rarely) stoops so low as to telegraph the emotional intent of a given scene. The experience is one of watching something and wondering when things will explode. Of course, when things finally do go bad it's in a way that you don't exactly expect, which is a tribuite to the material. The movie, though a bit conventional at times, is more artfully balanced and less heavy handed than the blend used in American Beauty and to some extent it defies labels.
The story is set against the internal (and external) struggles of a domestic suburban house wife (Kate Winslet), an emotionally inert stay at home dad (Patrick Wilson, whom local women call the prom king), and a convicted sex offender (Jackie Earle Haley) who has returned to live in the town. One of the stark and fascinating results of Field's casting is that in the case of Winslet and Wilson (who are stunning to look at) we see them initially as the ones to relate to. How could they not want to break out of their own constrictive and hypocritical suburban existences? Could these be counter cultural heroes in the making (like Spacey's character in American Beauty)? Contrast that against Haley who is shrunken and pallid, expressionless as he stares at the children he menaces from afar. You can see where a viewer might think this is all going.
However, in the dispassionate non-judgemental way that Field shows us the actions of his main characters he also lets the casting work for him in unexpected ways. As we become invested in the secret affair of Winslet and Wilson , we simultaneously wait to see if Haley's story will reveal either that he is monster or a mis-understood victim. In the end the film never stoops to judge Haley in either of those ways. Field hoodwinks us (and we hoodwink ourselves) into becoming invested in the pretty couple while Haley is really the one to watch. Only in retrospect however, after the movie is over, do we relate to him on a greater level than we do Winslet and Wilson.
We never do know quite what to think of the whole thing though. What conclusions can we draw? The lives of these people still feel tragic. I think what the film finally does say is that we can be the victims of our own narcissism, our own ill-advised self-important actions. In some cases, we can reverse our courses or perhaps redeem ourselves by apologizing or trying to make up for what we have done. Even if the only option for those in this suburban sideways hell is to go back to status quo, it's still perhaps the best choice. Such communities peacefully quiet down to go to sleep at night and no one ever really knows what is going on down the block, inside all those houses. One is never really sure if it's possible to change things anyway, or to make them better. Often in trying to improve our own existences we only serve to make things worse.