Kramer vs. Kramer (1979)

Most undeservingly overhyped movie of all time??

The performances transcend the film's tropes, grounding it in characters that feel more complete than this subgenre often produces.

if their story seems completely bonkers, almost like a feverish work of fiction, you ain't heard nothing yet.

It is an exhilarating, distressing, funny and profound film, with one of the more memorable film scores in years,

Kramer vs Kramer is definitely one for the ages. It is story of a workaholic husband (Dustin Hoffman) who is left carrying the 'baby' or his young son after his mother (Meryl Streep) leaves the home. She is unhappy with her life and seeks something else. We see a troubled and frustrated Hoffman try to take care of his son and be on top of a demanding job. The realism and ease which this is conveyed is effortless. Throughout the story we see the son and his father clash only to make up and become closer. Hoffman also befriends a female family friend in the building showing his growth. When we see Hoffman and Billy wake up and make breakfast together in silence we observe a great routine this family has developed. No talking is needed because it has become their way of life that the two easily carry out, watching this you will assume this has always been the state of affairs. Touching moments that resonate with the audience are when Hoffman teaches his son to ride a bike or takes him to his play and helps young Billy remember his lines. When Hoffman is fired and about hit another hurdle he is able to quickly secure another job in his field and shows off his office to his son. The bond between father and son is emotional but not overtly emotional which really works in the films favor as appealing to all audiences. He has been able to fulfill both roles as father and provider, he has made it work. The bond is threatened to be broken when the estranged mother returns and seeks custody of Billy. During the trial period one morning Billy looks up at his father, appreciative. When the two embrace and Billy starts crying no words are needed in the scene as it speaks volumes, a perfect scene. You can see both sides at the end. You are supportive and rally behind the heroic father who has managed to build a happy and balanced life for his son while holding down a decent job, he made it work. Yet you are also sympathetic towards the mother, who while she was selfish she may have been dealing with many issues. The film purposely left out these details to make you wonder and not make an objective assessment. So when it comes to the trial it may be difficult to completely decide which parent Billy should be with. Hence is the power and beautiful film making of Kramer vs Kramer because the audience can try and reach their own verdict which may not be so easy.The brilliance of this film also lies in its simplicity and the simple way the the story is told to its audience. You are easily taken on a journey, you understand it, you believe it and most importantly you feel it. The acting is first class. Dustin Hoffman is brilliant in his portrayal and very worthy of his Best Actor Oscar. Billy and Streep also give very good performances. The music also deserves praise, not only is it consistent it is quite beautiful. Kramer vs Kramer won 5 Oscars, including best film and director. I believe 7.8 is far too low for this simple and yet perfectly executed film. It definitely deserves a spot in the top 250 films as it is truly a classic and definitely one for the ages. 9.5/10

Reviewed October 2011Though it treads on a very familiar premise and stays predictable throughout, it is a movie that easily stands on it's own for it's terrific performances and a seamless screenplay filled with wonderful moments both joyous and otherwise. It is not for no reason this movie has catapulted two of the most critically successful actors of their generation. The story starts with an unhappy marriage between Ted Kramer (Dustin Hoffman) & Joanne Kramer (Meryl Streep) that ends to Ted's surprise and finds himself as the lone caretaker of his son right when he has taken additional responsibility at work. He finds himself inadequate as a father and in profession even while giving his best. He gets fired eventually but makes peace with it due to his unwavering love for his son. Just when things are getting saturated, Joanne comes back for custody of her son. Rest of it is Kramer vs. Kramer in court and how it is taken care of in the most mature and audience pleasing way.The plot isn't as hard-hitting as other marriage-on-the rocks movies like 'Revolutionary Road' or 'Blue Valentine', but it adds another dimension to it for it's practicality than blind emotions. It has a tight script that connects with the audience so frequently with plenty of terrific moments and apt performances. Evaluating the lead's performances is a futile experiment here, since all know what they are capable of. They give one of their best. Enough said. Not to forget the kid, who is terrific and the one who binds all the threads in this plot. If you don't feel for him, there isn't anything much the leads could've done to satisfy on the emotional level. This isn't the first time I have watched this movie and definitely not the last. Mind you, I don't normally repeat. So this is kind of special.

As is usually the case, there are no winners in divorce. Usually, there is no fault as people who are driven often make choices that send the other reeling. Dustin Hoffmann is a high powered executive. He is married to Meryl Streep, but even more, he is married to his work and its schedule. Streep runs off, leaving Hoffmann with their son. The majority of the movie involves the boding between the two men which is extremely bumpy at first. Hoffmann really has no clue how to raise a son he barely knows. The little boy longs to be with his mother, his primary parent in his life. But time helps heal. And then Mom comes back. What happens now? This is such a realistic portrayal of the pain of divorce and how it affects the defenseless. One of the best movies of the year.

Kramer vs. Kramer begins with the picking up of the ashes of an eight year marriage. We are left trying to assemble the broken pieces of the Kramer household in the period where we would be conventionally just being introduced and warming up to the characters. So it is a mystery, in a sense, working backwards - clues are laid out in front of us and we must try to decipher them and answer the question of why Joanna Kramer might want to walk out on her husband, but more importantly, her seven year old son. For a moment there is the suggestion that there may be a disability in play, but soon we realise that he is just another clumsy seven year old who wants ice cream instead of dinner. What Benton does here is use Joanna's absence as actual narrative. The wide swathes of the motherhood experience missing from the household tell us all that we need to know about her previous role. Billy is well-drilled; he knows exactly what brand of cereal and detergent is the best, has memorised where all the kitchen utensils are, and from rubbing of his mother's shoulders seems to be the better cook too. Ted knows none of this. He doesn't even know what grade his son is in. These early sequences of him struggling to reconcile his new duties as a father and handling a major account at his work are the easy, sentimental stuff that must inevitably occur when we are dealing with stories of parenthood. Yes, Billy may be a little brat at times, but he is also only seven, and Ted must re-learn this again and again. Until they are finally bonding, and must bide their time before it is ripped away from them. It is not so hard to get through this familiar material because Hoffman is such a natural at the role - the moment where he sees Billy wobbly take off on his bicycle and his face creases up the widest smile you have ever seen is so believable and such a relief because we too have been taken on this journey and we know the baggage that lies heavy in his heart. The early, chaotic french toast breakfast is later masterfully contrasted with another breakfast; again it is french toast, and this time they have mastered the routine, but there is a deafening silence because of what is to come, and they are trying to enjoy every last moment of it, but also trying to pretend like it isn't coming. Many have labelled this a court-room drama. I think this is the wrong tag. It comes with the assumptions that the dialogue comes thick and fast and there are pre-determined moments where we gasp and the lawyers strike dramatic poses and swap steely gazes. This is nothing as flashy and surface-level. The lawyers themselves are still snappy and ruthless. Joanna's in particular has completely rid himself of any heart and narrowed his sights on not only getting Billy back but also destroying all constructs that Ted's fatherhood might have erected. He repeatedly cuts off Margaret because he is not interested in the backstory but only getting his conviction soundbites that paint a much different story than what is really happening. No, the meat of the story is here, but it is not within the court system and the way it strips down everything to nothing but cold, hard facts and twists their intentions cruelly. As each side pleads their case both Joanna and Ted begin to realise that their battle is a fruitless one if Billy is to suffer for it, and start to turn back on their own arguments. The clear cuts and divides in the law are revealed to be not adequately equipped to handle such delicate and emotionally jumbled issues. If this wanted to fill seats it would have had young Billy himself take the stand and somehow magically see things clearer than the adults and repair the broken marriage. But he is only seven. Rarely can a film be so impartial. It asks nothing of its characters but complete honesty. Are their egos worth ripping apart the life of their young son? In the end, they make the right decision.