Pay It Forward

View Date: October 7th, 2000

Cast :

Writer: Catherine Ryan Hyde  (novel), Leslie Dixon  (screenplay)

Director: Mimi Leder 

If nothing else, Pay It Forward accomplishes one very refreshing thing. It shows that simplicity and faith in the human spirit can breed an invigorating originality that is so desperately missing in films lately. In a year, and era filled with guns, explosions, overblown scripts, overpaid actors, and underdeveloped plots, Director Mimi Leder cannot be faulted for her effort here. She makes a movie that borders on being overly sentimental, has a slightly confusing timeline, and seems to meander between stories. In the midst of it all though, she delivers some scenes and an ultimate message, which are powerful and effective, due to the delivery and patience to with its told. Based on the novel, and life experience of Catherine Ryan Hyde, the film plays off of the old Boy Scout motto of one good deed deserving another. Call it the Golden Rule movie, or just plain old courteous reaction, without expecting anything in return. Pay It Forward’s primary plot thrives off of an idea that is so simple in its origin, that it's a wonder that it hasn't been done before. Basically, it deals in the principal of giving, and making a better life or at least situation, for someone, then asking them to do the same for someone else, instead of paying it back.

The movie begins with an inexplicable hostage scenario, where a reporter, (Mohr) has his car wrecked into. In the midst of his anger, a kindly gentleman hands his brand new Jaguar to a disbelieving Mohr, who then follows up to find out why the man did this. Flashing back to four months earlier, we meet Eugene Simonet (Spacey) who is a very articulate Social Studies teacher. He challenges his students to think of a way to change the world, and act upon it. He states he does it to make a little change, but never expects anything major. Trevor (Osment) is one of his students with a less than desirable home life. His mother is a recovering alcoholic who works night jobs in order to support herself and Trevor. Their relationship is loving, yet strained. Trevor decides that he wants to do nice things for people, and in turn, have them pay it forward by doing something nice for three others, and so on, and so on. Never paying back, just paying forward. The film then bounds back and forth, confusingly sometimes, between the reporters search for the source of his goodwill, and the relationships, between Osment, Hunt and Spacey. The emotional aspects are sometimes overdone, but in three very powerful scenes, effective in their realism, and believability. The movie truly requires some patience, but is well worth the wait, because by the time the finale rolls around, the true power of the films message will be seen, and felt.

It’s hard to say whether the movies faults are a result of the screenplay or the story on which it is based. The curious ending, which worked for me in the grand scheme, may confuse and incite conversation, but I believe that the movie creates its own irony, which settles things effectively. The irony being that we cannot necessarily see the full impact of actions and emotions, until we look at the big picture. Also, the seeming loss of focus on the concept to instead deal with emotional personal issues was unnecessary, and seemed to be inserted to gain more of a Hollywood-style sentimental edge. This sugar coats, confuses, and at times steals away from the movies power. The scenes that do work, three in particular, do so because of the development of the characters involved, and lack of direction and dialogue, letting the few words, history, and previous actions deliver the blow.

Normally when a movie relies on its cast as well its story for drawing power, a sense of doubt prevails, due to past experience. Films like Pushing Tin, The January Man, and Gone in 60 Seconds have demonstrated that the presence of gold statues does not always translate into the selection of quality scripts (try reading your scripts with your eyes open from now on Mr Gooding) By choosing this project, winners Hunt and Spacey, and nominee (and deserving winner) Osment effectively pay forward Hollywood for recognizing them, and reap the benefits of the recognition. The best of the three comes from Hunt, showing that she can transition from TV, and into differing characters. Her character is similar to her award winning role in As Good As It Gets, a woman beaten by life and succumbing to it, rather than fighting, but she adds new dimension and levels so as to not carbon copy and become stereotyped. She ranges from jubilation, to frustration, to regret, to love, so easily and naturally, that most people who have been through what she goes through, can associate. Spacey and Osment each have their own moments, shining in the sun, showing flashes of the talent which got them each recognized. Spacey plays things fairly straight, and laid back, with flashes of emotion, while Osment shows that his nomination was no fluke, showing he can be a nerdy 12-year old with the wisdom and maturity of someone much older. He is no one-hit wonder, showing a range well beyond his physical years. I still believe that he has gold in his future, even if this role isn’t it, since his performance gets a little bogged down by the predictability and clichés of the screenplay.

Ultimately, Pay It Forward is a reflection of emotion personified, yet potential sugar coated and slightly wasted. It is a powerful character study with great performances that drowns in a small puddle of sentimentality and conventional audience pleasing scenarios. Leder’s still got a heavy handed emotional touch, as evidenced in Deep Impact as well, and she needs to lighten things up in her delivery. She must realize that she doesn’t have to beat her audience over the head to elicit sympathy or empathy. Let the story, the idea, and the characters and performances have the impact. Audiences enjoy having their tear ducts teased and incited, but not beaten into a saline induced submission. The film strikes some effective chords in no less than 3 scenes where it’s not just the dialogue (simple phrases like “I made a mistake” and “I forgive you”) but the context and power of the situation, which delivers the impact. More of that ideal, more focus on the principal idea, and less of the clichéd requirement scenes would have made this one to remember. Instead, it’s a teasing showcase of what could have been, featuring sparkling performances, and touching moments, but with amateur hands at the controls. Do your own good deed, see this film, then pass the word along to others. It will be a rewarding deed, even if you never see the results, because the true gift and joy lies in the film and its message. If it provokes even one person to follow the ideal, then its effects will be greater than Hollywood could have imagined, and will reestablish the cinema as the messenger and vision of the human soul.($$$ out of $$$$)

Agree? Disagree, Questions? Comments?

Tell Me Here

Also see my reviews at:

Cast information and links courtesy of

Go To Reel Rambling Page