To Cry or Not to Cry?

by

Instead of wondering if an audience will cry during Chloé Zhao’s Hamnet, it’s more a question of when. During its Toronto International Film Festival premiere, I witnessed tears late in the movie as one character reaches out to another. The theatre was filled with sniffles and secret searches for tissues for quite some time, but that extended hand pushed at least one viewer several rows behind me over the edge of self-control. I distinctly heard a choked sob. While my eyes were misty enough that I had to take off my glasses, I kept my own sobs at bay until the first chance I had to talk to a friend following the screening.

The intense emotion and heartrending performances in the film ‘Hamnet’ have sparked deep conversations among festival audiences as it travels through Telluride and Toronto Film Festivals. Director Chloé Zhao’s poignant, beautiful adaptation of Maggie O’Farrell’s novel about William Shakespeare and his wife Agnes after the loss of their son Hamnet has emerged as one of this year’s standout films from fall festivals. Critics have been particularly struck by the film’s powerful emotional resonance. IndieWire’s headline exclaims that the film “tears your heart out,” while Bilge Ebiri calls it “the most devastating movie I’ve seen in years.” Even Zhao herself has been moved to tears during screenings, and young actor Jacobi Jupe, who plays Hamnet, has cried in interviews.

The emotionally impactful performance of Hamnet, as shown by its ability to stir audience tears, undoubtedly benefits both the film and its distributor, Focus Features, in their quest to secure a top Oscar nomination for Best Picture. To achieve this, they require a compelling selling point. Rarely can one win the Best Picture award without at least one notable factor. For Anora, it was its youthful allure, an independent distributor with tenacity (Neon), and director Sean Baker advocating for the significance of cinema in theaters. Oppenheimer benefited from its impressive box-office returns, as well as the belief that Christopher Nolan had finally created his masterpiece.

As a passionate movie aficionado, I’ve noticed a pattern when it comes to Oscar-winning films: they often have an emotional impact that leaves spectators in tears. This strategy has been successfully employed since the 80s, with movies like “Terms of Endearment” inviting audiences to laugh, cry, care, and reflect on life’s complexities.

Fast forward to modern times, and you’ll find other films following suit. Take “Titanic,” for instance – a grand, costly production about an unfortunate shipwreck. However, its heart-wrenching moments, particularly the tragic romance between Jack and Rose, and Rose’s poignant farewell to her family before disaster strikes, elevated it above mere spectacle.

Similarly, “Million Dollar Baby” may share some DNA with the legendary “Rocky,” but its heart-rending finale was what truly resonated with audiences, catapulting it onto the Oscar stage.

Lastly, let’s discuss “CODA.” This film wasn’t everyone’s top choice for best picture of the year, but its ability to tug at our heartstrings – telling a poignant story about family, dreams, and overcoming obstacles – was clearly what earned it a place among the Oscars.

At festivals, news spreads quickly, and in no time, a movie that guarantees profound emotional impact becomes the most sought-after film. It wouldn’t take much to attract crowds for A Star Is Born, given its star-studded cast with Lady Gaga and Bradley Cooper, but once screenings started, people who left sobbing shared the heartrending news. Movies with fewer famous musicians could really benefit from this tearful endorsement. Manchester by the Sea eventually earned Oscars for Casey Affleck and Kenneth Lonergan, and I’m not convinced it would have done so if the prevailing sentiment at Sundance that year wasn’t that the film was guaranteed to bring tears to your eyes.

As a film enthusiast, I can personally attest to the significance of audience reactions at Toronto, particularly during the Toronto International Film Festival (TIFF). The People’s Choice Award at TIFF serves as a strong predictor for Oscar contenders, with 15 out of the last 17 winners securing Best Picture nominations. Remarkably, these films often need just a few poignant, tear-jerking moments to capture the hearts of viewers – like Paula Patton’s emotional declaration in “Precious” or the heart-wrenching climax involving the grandfather in “Belfast”.

Taking the sentimental path might pose a risk, as it could undermine the true value of the movie, making it seem like nothing more than a tool for emotional manipulation. For instance, in Zhao’s exploration of personal grief and the barrier between life and death in “Hamnet”, the depth is far beyond just eliciting tears. Similarly, actors Jessie Buckley and Paul Mescal deliver performances that are more than mere tear-jerkers. Buckley’s portrayal embodies a raw, full-body emotion, while Mescal masterfully captures his character’s feelings hidden within a life of words. Their ability to depict such nuanced expressions of grief should be acknowledged irrespective of how the audience chooses to respond physically.

The potential exists for a letdown when anticipating an emotionally stirring experience in the film “Rental Family.” Much like horror movies, positive word-of-mouth is crucial for drawing audiences, but there’s also a sense that the film has to deliver on its promise. Initially, I believed that this critically acclaimed TIFF premiere and Academy Awards contender would offer a tear-jerking experience based on its plot: Brendan Fraser, an Oscar winner portraying an American actor living in Japan, takes on an unconventional role with an agency that places actors in real-life scenarios as surrogates. However, after the TIFF screening, Fraser jokingly asked if someone had brought tissues, hinting at a more subdued emotional response than expected.

Apart from the excessive sentimentality displayed in the “kiss beneath cherry blossoms” scene, the film Rental Family appears to aim for a tear-jerking narrative as portrayed by Fraser who plays the estranged father of a schoolgirl. However, throughout my viewing experience and despite my disagreements with the plot development (which I found to be both overly contrived and underdeveloped), I was unable to feel emotional. The storyline felt manipulated as it revolves around Fraser’s character leaving the girl, an event that is not only predictable but intentional. Yet, despite my stoic demeanor, I could sense sobs from nearby audience members. While it wasn’t on par with the emotional intensity of Hamnet, there were definitely several people in attendance wiping their eyes. This only heightened my frustration towards the film’s artificiality.

If “Rental Family” ranks among the top three in the People’s Choice vote, it seems I was wrong about its value, and Fraser’s suggestion of needing tissues was indeed accurate. However, if it fails to make the cut and is perceived as an insincere manipulation, the strategy will have misfired. In Oscar season, there’s a significant gap between heart-wrenching films that genuinely move audiences and those that aim to evoke emotion artificially. Aim for the former, not the latter.

Read More

2025-09-12 16:55