Before the devil knows you’re dead
Pip recently has a tendency to find things he sees on screen unsettling. I agree, and I have been wondering why. I think it should be considered a strength of the film if it disturbs you – it means that it was able to captivate you emotionally.
Considering that this is an action-laden film which I expected to be some heist-thriller, I was surprised how much it was about devastating feelings. For a Sidney Lumet film, I should not have been too surprised. His films always have some humanity, exploring morals and such. But it is the morals of his film which are unsettling. I cannot get over the ending of the film in which you see one of the most disturbing, cold-blooded murders I have seen in a long time.
Of course the main reason for me to see this film was Philip Seymour Hoffman. As always, he delivers perfectly and makes the character of Andy more interesting than anyone else probably could have. I also have always liked Marisa Tomei and her willingness to casually show off her naked body on screen. Unlike most people, she appears professional and mature because she does not hide her age; it is those blemishes that make her hotter than most young girls’s bodies. But the biggest surprise was Ethan Hawke. Unlike PSH, I did not expect anything from him in this film, and he turned out to be a likable douchebag – I am quite impressed.
A discussion with Loris made me realize that the biggest strength of the film was not actually its characters (which was an positive aspect I remarked very quickly) but its storytelling. When I read prior to watching the film that it would have a non-chronological storyline, I was worried. Most of the times it means that a film is utterly confusing. In this case however, I can only applaud Lumet’s brilliance. The non-chronology contributes to the suspense because the crime in the film is revealed only slowly in small parts. Then the pieces are strung together by intertitles displaying the date and scenes which repeat for a few seconds such that you know what is happening when. People have compared the film to Miller’s Crossing, and when looking at their narrative elements, one can easily see why.
In comparison, Miller’s Crossing is definitely even more amazing at bringing strings of storyline together, but this film has no reason to hide. It is actually a rare gem of good storytelling, and an interesting film on filial piety, remorse and grief.
PS. I have been asked a few times why I do not write novels. The truth is that I believe it is one of my top 3 weaknesses (the other two being calculating things in my head and coming up with funny backacronyms), and when it comes to novels, I would never want to write a novel worse than, say, a Dostoevsky. My expectations would just be too high.