Initially apprehensive about how the narrative structure of Barney’s Version would translate to the screen, I was presently surprised. The film mixes flashbacks with events occurring in the present day, jumping forwards years and months at a time without jarring the audience. Brief moments of forgetfulness and showing the protagonist through mirrors or translucent surfaces illustrates the onset of Alzheimer’s Disease before Barney is completely stricken in the final quarter of the film.
On the other hand, I thought that the book included more of a Rashomon-type vibe than what was featured by the film. The work was entertaining – a pleasant mix of drama and comedy – but it refused to dig deeper and discuss some of the themes of moral relativity and the search for the truth over thirty years later. Even the film’s poster encapsulated these issues in greater depth than the film.
To me, the literary Barney Panofsky was disliked by almost everyone who knew him. He seemed incapable of having a relationship with anyone without destroying it with his selfishness. However, his version, the book edited by his son, shows that he’s not a bad person. In fact, he may actually have some positive attributes.
The film removes all of this doubt. Barney – played excellently by Paul Giamatti – is a charming man (the book would be portrayed as the story of a charmless man) is the victim of circumstance. Like everyone else, he’s a good person but he couldn’t do as well as he wanted to because of others. This work ignores the suggestion that he might have had a large role in his ultimate destiny.
In Richler’s work, there are a number of footnotes written by Barney’s son Michael – who edited his father’s book after his memory failed him – meant to set the record straight but were the details. The reader never knows whether the facts were incorrect because Barney’s memory was foggy or because he chose to alter them to suit himself. The film chooses not to explore this area, which is a key part of Richler’s commentary.
The film was filmed in Montreal and does not hide this fact although New York City replaced Toronto as the “media and cultural centre” frequented by the characters. Inexplicably, Rome was inserted in place of Paris as the key European city. Nevertheless, the film feels very authentic and like Chloe, it is good to have more Canadian films in wide release.
The cast is very enthusiastic and some characters go to great lengths to create the type of believable caricatures which are found in the book. Dustin Hoffman shines as Izzy Panofsky and Saul Rubinek embraces the role of Clara’s father although he is only onscreen for a few minutes. Given the amount of time that he is featured, the film must sink or swim based on the title character. Giamatti brings Barney to life and is very close to the character who I envisioned while reading the work. ***