BEFORE: I'm almost done with the serial killer chain, so I'm looking forward to sleeping without a light on...
This time Angelina Jolie carries over from "Taking Lives". Yes, before she settled down and started adopting kids, she took down serial killers - who knew? More thoughts on her in a bit.
THE PLOT: A quadriplegic homicide detective and his female partner track down a serial killer.
AFTER: Without giving anything away, this film features what I've come to call a "Hollywood" serial killer, and that is one who 1) has devised some kind of pattern to his killings and cannot, under any circumstances alter this pattern and 2) feels the need to leave "clues" to his identity, so that some intelligent counterpart in the police department or crime lab can spot the pattern or piece together the clues. I have a feeling that most serial killers would rather NOT be caught, so why leave intentional clues? Sure, the Unabomber had his manifesto, but I have a feeling that was mostly his opinions on things, and not a coded message that would lead the ATF right to his door.
Now, as to the first part - the pattern to the killings, the unchangeable M.O. Again, I feel this is perhaps mostly a cinematic convention. The audience needs to know the identity of the killer in the third reel, so there's enough time for a final showdown and a wrap-up. This means that a path toward catching the killer needs to be laid down from the start, and in a lot of cases, that involves a killer who's locked in to a system. I'm on board up to a point, after all this is how the police first figure out they're dealing with a serial, by identifying similarities in crime scenes within a particular radius or time-frame. But the compulsion to kill often seems to be portrayed as an advanced form of O.C.D. - as if the killer is somehow organizing people by making them more dead.
I can see it if a killer has a "type", killing only blonde women or targeting people of a certain race, but I honestly haven't heard of O.C.D. getting so bad that people kill to maintain a pattern. Most people with O.C.D. just end up as hoarders, or people who have to wash their hands 50 times a day or click a light switch 17 times before leaving the room. Then again, the word "collector" is in the title of the film, maybe they should have played up that angle a bit more - I mean, where was his collection of bones?
I also want to talk about the "fake-out" - this is another Hollywood convention where we are led to believe the killer might be one person, and SURPRISE - it's someone you didn't expect. Unless you've seen a number of these, and you know to expect the most likely person. And unless the filmmakers know you're likely to expect the most likely person, so they pull a double-fake-out and make it the person that you WOULD expect. (I'm like the Sicilian in "The Princess Bride" - trying to reason out which goblet has the poison in it...)
I watched "Law & Order" and its spin-offs for years, and at some point they started to fall into a pattern. Whoever the biggest guest-star in the opening credits was, logically that person would be playing the killer or biggest criminal. Because why would someone like Jeremy Irons or Robin Williams be slumming on a TV show, unless they were looking to stretch their acting by playing a diabolical killer? And for a while, that formula worked - until the producers realized they had fallen into a predictable pattern, and for a couple years the twist was that the big guest star DIDN'T do it, and then they could revert to form again.
And now I've put both possibilities out there, so that doesn't spoil this film. The only way you can learn the killer's identity is to watch the film - or look it up online, I guess.
Now my thoughts on Angelina Jolie, who's gotten a lot of press this week by undergoing a pre-emptive double mastectomy, despite being in perfect health, because she's determined that she's carrying the gene which makes her susceptible to breast cancer. Her actions are being heralded as "brave" and "courageous", but I'm not so sure. There's a character in this film who's quadriplegic and prone to seizures - and he's making plans to end his own life. Part of the message of the film is that that's not the right way to handle things, and I think if assisted suicide is wrong, then by extension, so is pre-emptive mastectomy. Should I cut off my finger so I never get a paper cut?
(Besides, Angelina, what about MY needs? What about America's?) Again I refer to "The Princess Bride": "There's a shortage of perfect breasts in this world. It would be a pity to damage yours."
Also starring Denzel Washington (last seen in "Courage Under Fire"), Queen Latifah (last seen in "The Dilemma"), Michael Rooker (last seen in "Days of Thunder"), Ed O'Neill (last seen in "Blue Chips"), Luis Guzman (last seen in "Guilty As Sin"), Michael McGlone, Leland Orser (last seen in "Twisted"), Bobby Cannavale (last seen in "Win Win").
RATING: 6 out of 10 subway tunnels
No comments:
Post a Comment