WORTH

US, 2020, 118 minutes, Colour.

Michael Keaton, Amy Ryan, Stanley Tucci, Tate Donovan, Shunori Ramanathan, Talia balsam, Laura Benanti, Chris Tardio, Ato Blankson- Wood.

Directed by Sarah Colangelo.

Worth is a good word, a solid word. It takes us into the realm of values. In fact, the original title for this film is What Is Life Worth. In fact, as we watch the film and its exploration of characters, we are continually being asked “What is a life worth?”. And how is this question to be answered? In monetary terms, a financial figure? Or beyond that?

The question was asked in the United States after 9/11 and this film is receiving its release, at the Sundance Film Festival and, then, on Netflix, on the 20^th anniversary of those planes crashing into the World Trade Centre and the Pentagon. At the time, the world was preoccupied with the immediate loss of life, the consequences, grief, amazement, continuing health problems, as well as the broader aspects of what became the war on terror and the invasion of Afghanistan (sadly and ironically coming to a close on the 20^th anniversary).

But, there were financial questions asked, issues of insurance, the air companies lobby, compensation by the American government, issues in Congress. With Worth, we are taken into this particular aspect of 9/11, a process from 2001 to 2003, the 9/11 Victim Compensation Fund, with prominent legal mediator, Kenneth Feinberg, accepting the role.

Soon into watching the film, it seemed a good idea to go to Wikipedia and find out something about Kenneth Feinberg, his background, his legal history, his role with the Compensation Fund, as principles. This exercise was enabling, for watching the film and appreciating what Feinberg hoped for, what he did, the challenges, his achievement (and, rather jaw-dropping, the final credits listing of situations in American history in the last 20 years, disasters, compensations, Catholic Church abuse cases… That he and his colleague, Camille Biros have been asked to mediate).

Michael Keaton, a wonderful comedian in the past, has been taking on more and more serious roles, men of integrity. Amy Ryan gives solid support as Camille. And a range of character actors takes on supporting roles convincingly. But, as the film progresses, there are numerous interview sequences, survivors telling their stories, some angry, some still grieving, some bewildered. These are so convincing – and, one hopes, that the short segments serve as audition material for future roles by these character actors.

The other chief character in the film is Charles Wolf, played by Stanley Tucci, an actual character, who lost his wife in the World Trade Centre collapse. Wolf was highly critical of Feinberg’s model for the fund, starting a counter-movement “Fix the Fund”, offering advice, offering a different perspective on contact with survivors and their relatives, meeting with Feinberg and his associates, influencing Feinberg and his approach, ultimately with the declaration, “The Fund is Fixed”, finally ensuring that the Victim Compensation Fund requirements for registration were filled in time for the project to go into action.

For those of a Jungian frame of mind, this is a powerfully dramatised presentation of objective structures for funding compensation relying on the letter of the law, accuracy and precision, setting limits, eschewing exceptions. Charles Wolf’s approach and, was highly personal, much more subjective in respect of and respect for those who grieved and suffered, listening to stories, realising that categories could be constricting and that there were interpretations to be made. Two particular stories come to the fore to illustrate this, a fireman killed and his loyal wife’s discovery that he had another family who are in financial need, a gay man who lost his partner (whose parents deny his sexual orientation),

It is rather saddening to read some bloggers dismissing the film as boring. Others declared that they were engrossed, moved, sharing an experience of realising what a life is worth. Yes.

1. The title? What is life worth? What is a life worth? In general, in the context of 9/11? The Victim Compensation Fund?
2. The period, 9/11, the impact, the event, tragedy, personal grief, issues of compensation?
3. Washington, legal offices, the compensation fund offices, Ken Feinberg and his home, the travelling by train? The feel of the period? The musical score?
4. The character of Kenneth Feinberg, legal experience, his age, public service-minded, his work with Camille over the years? His home life, with his wife, her support, a sounding board? The issue of the fund, the discussions with the attorney general, his accepting the task, his motivations? Camille and her agreeing? His lectures, students, the choice of Pryia and Daryl for the staff?
5. The setting up of the office, the discussions with the attorney general, the implications for legislation, for Congress, compensation, justice, issues of suing, the airline lobby? The role of Lee Quinn? The face of legislation, the face of deals? The many interactions between Ken and Lee? Differences, hostilities? The issue of coaching witnesses for interviews?
6. The setting up of the parameters for the fund, legal, letter of the law, no exceptions? The deadlines, the number of submissions required? 80%? The meetings, Ken and his manner of addressing the crowd, the hostility, questions, anger? In felicitous phrasing? Advice from Camille?
7. Charles Wolf, his background, local concerns, his explaining the history of campaigning for the retaining of the bridge, two years, his failure, his wife reminding him that he was not the bridge itself, he was still there? Her death? His different perceptions for the fund, his slogan that the Fund was a Fix? His meetings, drawing the relatives of the survivors? His going to see Ken Feinberg, courteous, the meeting, coming people down, yet the different perspective? The comment on the typos, criticism of the whole fund framework?
8. The effect of the interviews? The range of characters for the film? Only some minutes of performance yet their creating instant, strong characters, grief, reactions to 911? Each of the interviewers? Ken not interviewing, starting to listen in, his being challenged? Staying back over time to listen to Mrs Donato, previously meeting her brother-in-law? The film’s focus on Karen Donato, her devotion to her husband, her image of him, not wanting the money? Frank and his meetings with Ken? The later revelation about her husband’s double life, alternate family, Ken and his confrontation with Frank, Karen overhearing, her reaction, later coming to see him, wanting the other family to have some compensation? The gay man, the discussions, legislation about partnerships, going to see the partner’s parents, their denial?
9. The discussions with Charles Wolf, Priya going to see him, the discussions? His visit to Ken, an alternate approach to dealing with people? The shift from the objective and deviations to more subjective, personalised, exceptions? A new framework?
10. The change of heart, people becoming more confident, telling their stories, the deadlines coming, the percentages going up?
11. The discussion with Charles Wolf, his accepting the changes, that the Fund was Fixed? His urging his followers to go to Ken?
12. The deadlines, Lee Quinn and the compensation cases? The discussions with the attorney general? Congress issues?
13. The final rush, getting up to 95% at the time of the deadline?
14. The achievement for such a compensation fund with such a national tragedy? In the final information about can Feinberg, Camille, the vast number of cases they have taken up and mediated?