By Brett Blake Great mysteries, mysteries that hold up under total scrutiny, are extremely hard to come by, particularly in cinematic form. The best ones typically present a puzzle of a plot, line up some possible explanations and potential red herrings, and then deliver a solution that makes sense not just “in the moment” as you’re watching the film, but also after the fact, when you’ve gone home and continue to mull over the plot. PRISONERS doesn’t quite cleanly pull this off, but it comes very close, and it’s one of the year’s best thrillers. The bare-bones version of the labyrinthine plot involves the abduction of two young girls, their parents’ (Hugh Jackman & Maria Bello, and Terrence Howard & Viola Davis, respectively) attempts to deal with the situation, and the ensuing investigation by the dogged detective assigned to the case (Jake Gyllenhaal). As I often say in these reviews, I don’t really want to get into much more than that, and that’s especially true for this film. DO NOT go looking for additional information about this movie if you plan on seeing it, because it would be criminal for the film’s secrets to be prematurely revealed. Suffice it to say some pretty dark, upsetting things transpire before the end credits roll. Director Denis Villeneuve (he of the Oscar-nominated foreign film INCENDIES) creates a stunningly taut mood for the film; it’s a tightly-wound coil of tension, and Villeneuve never eases up, piling on the sense of dread and unease, and ratcheting up the suspense to nearly unbearable levels at times. There are at least two sequences that are as “edge-of-your-seat” tense as anything I’ve seen in recent years, and are pitch perfect examples of suspense filmmaking, from the shot compositions, to the editing, to the musical score. Speaking of shot compositions, I’ve got to single out this movie’s director of photography, the great Roger Deakins, for his beautiful work. There’s nobody in the industry as dependable as Deakins; when you hire him, you know your film is going to look superb, and PRISONERS is not an exception. It’s gorgeously shot, taking a rain-soaked and snow-swept suburban/rural setting (which in lesser hands could have looked downright ugly) and lensing it in a truly atmospheric and textured way. It’s one of the best-looking movies of 2013 so far. The mystery plot of the story itself - the question of what happened to these girls - takes off in several different, seemingly unconnected directions, and it’s a real pleasure to watch as the mysteries get deeper, weirder, and more complex. On a purely narrative level, the script (by Aaron Guzikowski) is totally absorbing and compelling, and while it might sound like a cliche to say it, the plot really does keep you guessing. Even deep into the third act (well past the two-hour mark of this 148 minute film), I still had no idea exactly where things were going to lead. That is not to say the screenplay is perfect, however. If I had anything negative to say about it, it would be that it feels stuck between two different kinds of stories: the police procedural and the somewhat more flamboyant serial killer-ish thriller. Most all of Gyllenhaal’s material falls into the procedural vein; films like ZODIAC are certainly recalled as we watch his character struggle to put the pieces together. However, the collection of weirdos and creeps who come to make up the suspect list would be right at home in movies such as SEVEN, or even SILENCE OF THE LAMBS. They feel, frankly, unrealistic when looked at against the backdrop of the procedural elements. Luckily, director Villeneuve straddles this line as well as could be hoped, so it’s not that big of a deal. Also, the ultimate resolution of the mystery, while perfectly acceptable and enjoyable on a “movie logic” level (as a yarn, if you will), is ultimately completely preposterous and implausible if viewed through the kind of realistic prism most procedurals strive for. For some, this will be a major problem; for others, such as myself, it’s nothing that can’t be overlooked because the movie is so interesting and engrossing. The final pieces of the puzzle are the actors, and Villeneuve has assembled a pretty incredible cast to bring the story to life. Howard, Bello, and Davis deliver naturalistic, completely believable performances that really help to ground the anguish their families are undergoing, and even people like Paul Dano and Melissa Leo do a lot with characters that - on the page - could have seemed a bit flat. Dano, particularly, is on the receiving end of some of the story’s more brutal moments, and he sells them completely. All that being said, the film really belongs to Jackman and Gyllenhaal. For Jackman, this is certainly one of the more unique roles he’s tackled, and he’s great; his character is constantly on edge, seething with pent-up rage and frustration that are just waiting below the surface. It’s a demanding role, one requiring its actor to go to many different emotional areas, and Jackman pulls them all off. Gyllenhaal, at least on paper, seems to be a more one-dimensional character (the dedicated detective doing everything he can to crack the case), but he brings all kinds of little character ticks and unconventional choices to the part that really flesh out an inner life; it’s some of his finest work. Also, while the movie is almost entirely humorless, Gyllenhaal does have a few personal asides that supply a couple well-needed chuckles in what could have been an otherwise totally oppressive experience. PRISONERS is the kind of intelligent, mainstream, adult thriller that Hollywood used to make all the time - good scripts with interesting directors starring fine actors. Somewhere along the line, this type of film has grown more and more scarce, so when one does come along, it does feel like a pleasure to be able to revisit this sort of genre. It’s not a perfect film, but as a neat mystery and an atmospheric mood piece, it’s first class.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Archives
January 2023
Categories
All
|