"Someone is playing God out there..."
There is a commonplace idea: if you lose somebody who is important to you, you lose a part from yourself, too. You become a different personality. This is the origo of Neil Jordan's (The Crying Game, Michael Collins, Breakfast on Pluto) new film. Not the most original idea, which means the film should have extra values to explain this simplicity.
I won't sell any spoilers to uncover the start of the diegetic situation. Erica (Jodie Foster) and David (Sayid, I mean Naveen Andrews) are the happiest couple in New York (I hope my irony is coming through. just imagine them:)), until one night they stuck in a brutal gang. After some squabble they were beaten by the cruel hooligans. David dies, Erica becomes the most charlesbronsonian "vigilante supercunt" (not my words..), some champion of justice who cleans the dirt from the city. Wow, that's all. I haven't seen such an original plot before..
So where are then the cinematic excuses to use such a simple story? Maybe the embarrassingly obtrusive "background meaning" with all the American frustration (9/11 indirectly and Iraq literally), maybe Foster's acting (ok, it was a joke), maybe the style of the movie (the wobbling, spirally moving, slowed down camera doesn't create art, rather boredom), maybe the tiresome Hollywood-criticism (while the gang is recording their deadly attack they shout "Hollywooood")?
I don't know. One thing is sure: if you're interested into these topics, this kind of mixture of style, meanings and interests you better watch any Spike Lee's joints (the most relevant is the 25th Hour).
Because what you can do with Foster's "T-shirt-message" (from bee to eagle) or with such a conversation:
"You shouldn't smoke. It will kill you."
"I don't care"
Pff, come on, it's 2007...
By the way to criticize Hollywood is your choice, but then please don't give an end of your movie like this. It meant to be a happy end, but I wasn't at all...
6/10
Posts
