Throughout the years there have been numerous films that try and capture the varying angles that embody war. With the Iraq war being one of the more defining moments for the world in the last decade, it should come to no one's surprise that we've see numerous Iraq based films, but very few that have resonated and found an audience. This in part because America just doesn't want to see a film about a war that is currently in progress. It just seems to be in bad taste, especially when you factor in the idea that many people don't think America should have gone to war in the first place. So now it's bearing some annoyance. But, I think another important factor that seems to have people skipping war (especially based on Iraq) films is that there have simply been very few films that have been good regarding the subject matter. Hell, most are preachy, liberal, and over handed films that rely more on convention than providing an introspective look at war on both the battle lines and home front. This is not say that the films regarding war that have been released over the last decade aren't good, but films like "Home of the Brave", "The Valley Elah", "Stop Loss", etc. don't elevate the material beyond sentimental soap boxing.
Yet, this year is different. With the release of a film like "The Hurt Locker", an adrenaline pumping film that looks at the final month of a bomb defusing squad, as well as the drug like effects war has on some soldiers, I can't help but feel there is a budding new perspective on war. This idea is further pushed by a film like "The Messenger" which gives us a perspective we've never seen on film: the life and times of an army messenger. These are the guys who go door to door delivering death notices to the family of a fallen soldier. It's a perspective that seems rather one dimensional. After all, the only thing these soldiers do is serve notice, but I would argue (as would the film) that this job is quite important and bears an emotional weight that could burden just about anyone. Personally speaking, I couldn't be that person. I couldn't go door to door, letting people know that their daughters, sons, husbands, or wives have just passed away in a land far, far away. I simply couldn't and such an emotional notion is well on display in "The Messenger". As both of our protagonists, SSgt Will Montgomery (Ben Foster) and Capt. Tony Stone (Woody Harrelson) wrestle with the emotional ramifications being a messenger has.
SSgt. Will Montgomery has just returned from Iraq (he's home due to an injury) and as a means to serve his last months in the army, he is placed in the Army's Casualty Notification service. Through this he is paired up with Capt. Tony Stone, a lifelong army man who sees no greater purpose than serving his country. Between the two men, they struggle to get on the same page in regards to how they should approach giving notification of the dead. Captain Stone feels their delivery should be based on a script and showing no emotion, while Montgomery feels a humanistic touch would be far better than the army's third person, robotic delivery. In either event, both men can't even pretend to know what to expect when they walk into a person's home and let them know that their family member has passed away in the line of duty. Yet, extracting sympathy isn't the film's main goal. At its heart, the film is a character study of Will Montgomery and the emotions he works through as his life reveals itself to be an empty shell. His girlfriend has left him, his body is injured, and most of all he has to continuously be a messenger of doom. Writer/Director Overman does a great job of not only establishing Montgomery, but also allows us to slowly invade his mind. This is also a testament to Ben Foster's performance which is fantastic as he forms a man filled with anxieties and disappointment. On par with Foster's performance, and if not even better, is the performance of Woody Harrelson, who delivers an intense, and thought provoking characterization.
When a film like this is so heavily based on its characters, it's essential for the actors to deliver great performances as a means to keep the audience engaged and connected. Needless to say this happens, as Foster and Harrelson play well off one an other's insecurities and carry much of the film on their backs with great ease. Yet, the problem I have with this film is the scenes that involve Foster's and Harrelson's characters delivering the casualty notifications. The first few scenes pack a punch and are emotionally wrought, but after that, they tend to become tedious and almost stale. Not to say that the scenes aren't relevant to the film or characters, but it just seemed like the same scenes were being repeated, except with different races and classes of characters. With just two or three scenes regarding the notifications, the delivery of such sad news would've been far more effective. My annoyance with the continuous occurrence of these scenes is still quite small, but it is matched with my slight disinterest in a subplot regarding Foster's character and that of a widowed wife played by Samantha Morton. This particular subplot ends up working somewhat well as a means to show Montgomery's arc, but it's lackluster in its conviction, and ultimately is underwritten. Samantha Morton does an admirable job of trying to lend this subplot some credibility, but for me it didn't gel completely. Yet, these are merely small negatives that stem from a film that offers a different vantage point on war; a vantage point we've never really scene in a film. Also, the crux of the film lies in the performances and without a doubt, "The Messenger" boasts terrific performances that not only carry the film, but will certainly carry you into the mindset war places upon it's soldiers and their kin.
No comments:
Post a Comment