Alternate Best Actor 2009: Hal Holbrook in That Evening Sun

Hal Holbrook did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying Abner Meecham in That Evening Sun. 

That Evening Sun follows an old man who escapes from his retirement home and comes into conflict with the father of a family that took over his old farm. 

The always reliable character actor of Hal Holbrook is given the rare opportunity to take the leading role here within the "old codger" genre, of a man of a bygone era who is our protagonist lashing out at something current. As a film in this genre, this film isn't particularly good, as there are too many things missing in the script to really create a captivating central conflict, which I will get to, or any sort of thematic exploration of who exactly the character of Abner is or what his struggle means even. Holbrook is a great actor and he is the one thing I will readily praise about this film. From the opening scene, he brings a reality to the potential cliches of Abner, as he even goes about looking for his watch and dismissing the local man who becomes quickly exasperated by the quest. Holbrook's work just tears through the scene and you instantly get a sense of the years of this man living his life his way and not taking a moment to suffer fools. Holbrook exudes that far more than the film really sets it up in any meaningful way, and creates a striking figure through his performance. He is worth watching from the first frame because you do believe Abner as a man because Holbrook is so convincing as this man regardless. When he speaks there is the weight of years of seeming wisdom in there, even as the film progresses in a way that isn't exactly the most captivating. 

Holbrook's Abner returns to his home which he finds is now lived in by the Choat family, including Lonzo Choat (Ray McKinnon), whom Abner views as the lowest of the low. Holbrook's performance excels in being the old "coot" who bluntly states his views without exception. And with that, Holbrook does create nuance within the character. We have his moments with the daughter (early Mia Wasikowska), where Holbrook makes no bones about his beliefs and even states directly about her use of language, though there is a seeded bit of warmth in Holbrook's performance. Just enough warmth really as even when correcting bluntly, and making his views about her father clear, Holbrook doesn't hesitate or hide a single sentiment about it. And in that Holbrook grants a bit more depth within the character of Abner, perhaps even as written as it would've been very easy to make these lines just as onery as the rest of him, but Holbrook brings a bit more life to them suggesting a more paternal figure than we will see the rest of the time. With Choat's wife, Holbrook is straightforward, though in a somewhat more amiable way in that he doesn't emphasize anything more than what he sees as the truth and just tells her what he thinks he needs to know. This is in stark contrast to how he interacts with Choat himself, where Holbrook is just exuding venom towards the man, and delivers every word to the man as curtly and without any empathy as possible. 

The progression of the conflict is very weak because it stakes the deck so heavily. As much as Abner is grumpy and set in his ways, he is automatically a saint compared to Lonzo, who despite one action near the end of the film that feels frankly false compared to his portrayal throughout, is a completely wretched human being in every sense of the word. There could've been something more here if say Lonzo was flawed in some ways, but being straight-up horrible really makes the conflict rather dull. Instead, basically, we get the beef we see as Abner is himself, which again is a great man compared to Lonzo, compared to Lonzo who is horrible to everyone (emphasized by Ray McKinnon's nuance-less performance, which is rare for him). We see him set up some ways to "make his moves" but they really are honestly rather uninteresting. The only thing interesting is Hal Holbrook's acting of them, just because he is a compelling performer who always knows how to emphasize a bit more history to every moment, even when the history really is barely there in the script. I think this is most evident with his son (Walton Goggins in a thankless role), who placed him in the home, to begin with, and doesn't want him in this conflict. Holbrook's directness again is different, he is blunt, callous at times, but without the venom like with Choat. Rather he presents a father, but a very tough father, who wants his son to be an honest man and doesn't care for his dishonest ways at times. Of course from the son we get how he was apparently a terrible father, and what does this all add up to? Not much, because the film likes to ask questions, but doesn't really like to answer them, or at least not answer them particularly well. Instead, we get what just the actors are giving us, which thanks to Holbrook is more than something, but he's asked a bit too much of it all. I think this is most evident in the climax of the conflict which is an extremely desperate moment, that really comes along too quickly, without proper buildup with the characters, and has a resolution that just feels dishonest compared to everything else we've seen up until this point. The only thing not dishonest is Holbrook's portrayal of the moment as he mixes this desperation with a somber nostalgia, and manages to be moving in the scene, even while the moment seems more than a little rushed. Speaking of rushed, there is a quick resolution and reconciliation with his son. Again Holbrook gives it his all and does produce something but it is all from him, with the writing helping so little he can only do so much. Still, as just a showcase for the talents of Holbrook, this is still a very good performance, even if still a missed opportunity in some ways due to lackluster material.