Film Analysis: Victim Film - Assignment Example

Film Analysis: Victim Film Introduction One of the essential traits of the victim subgenre is of an individual wronged by another individual or social institution (as in the case of Law Abiding Citizen) that seeks justice, or revenge, for the wrong. Indeed, the question of what constitutes justice and whether it is ultimately possible to inflict fair and equitable justice for an act of unspeakable atrocity become core elements of these subgeneric conventions. In an effort to chart the conventions of the victim subgenre, including questions of moral authority, omniscience, and supernatural elements, this essay examines three films that are characteristic of its conventions – Taken (2008), Law Abiding Citizen (2009), and Edge of Darkness (2010). Taken Pierre Morel’s Taken (2008) is an example of the victim sub-genre that has a long line of historical precedent. Indeed, many writers might group this film into the revenge film sub-genre. Historically the film is preceded by recent films such as Man on Fire, in which one man goes on a rampage in pursuit of a kidnapped girl. Such a one man against the world for revenge plot device has been implemented as far back as the classic Westerns, and is a seminal element of what have become now classic action thrillers, such as Rambo, or Die Hard. Finally, it’s not difficult to detect elements of the spy genre, notably the James Bond films, or even the A-Team, in the characterization of Bryan Mills (Liam Neeson) as a well-trained, secret government operative. In the instance of Taken, however, what seems the most scholastically intriguing element is its narrative exploration of victimhood and the subsequent revenge motive associated with it. The film begins in establishing the background of Mills. He is depicted as caring deeply about his daughter, yet having been distant from her in the past. The exact extent of Mills background is not explored in considerable depth, but through a subplot that demonstrates Mills saving a singer who has been attacked the viewer learns that he has considerable combat skills. Furthermore, the film establishes his relationship with a group of other individuals that formed a sort of government Special Forces collective. In these early scenes the film begins one of its central tropes, which is returned to in a number of characters, namely that of the anti-hero. While Mills is undeniably the film’s protagonist, his dark and hidden past, coupled with a subtle resentment on the part of his ex-wife for his inability to live up to his familial duties, functions to begin the characterization of him as not simply the ‘good’ guy. As will later be demonstrated, this traversing of the good vs. evil dichotomy into a sort of post-moral exploration of existence becomes a seminal element of the victim subgenre and is an element of not only the protagonists, but the antagonists as well. Despite his past distance as a parent, Mills is depicted as attempting to make up for lost time. He buys his daughter a karaoke machine for her birthday, and then when she needs his permission to go to Paris, he plays the role of the concerned and cautious parent, originally refusing to let her go. In this instance the film explores the theme of innocence, as Mill’s daughter Kim is depicted as sheltered from the true reality of existence to which only her father, through his exploration of the dark-side of life, knows the true meaning of. Indeed, after discovering that Kim is not merely going to Paris, but is touring with the rock group U2, he says to Kim’s mother Lenore, “You live in your little bubble here, with your maids and chauffeurs, you have no idea what the real world is like.” Kim responds, “Yes, and neither will she unless she goes out and experiences it.” The film’s characterization of Kim innocence and naiveté borders on kitsch at times; despite frequent declarations of her age as 17, at all instances she appears to be a much older woman almost parodying the concept of youth. She even receives a pony for her birthday. It’s also indicated the Kim is a virgin. While this seems a further element of her hyperbolic characterization as an innocent youth, it is later used a substantial plot element. Soon Kim and her friend Amanda are off to Paris where it comes as no surprise to the viewer that they are immediately kidnapped. As Kim is witnessing Amanda being taken she relays the events to her father and he tells her that they will take her next. While one can reasonably make an assumption that this will occur, his proclamation has an aura of omniscience to it. This becomes an element of characterization that not is implicit in Mills throughout the film, but is also characteristic of many individuals within the victim subgenre. At many instances throughout the film Mill’s is imbibed with this quality of omniscience. After confronting French Intelligence officer Jean-Claude, Mill’s has the forethought to remove the bullets from Jean-Claude’s gun. Even the act of Kim kidnapping is virtually predicted by Mill’s. This omniscience is used within the subgenre to create an sense of divine justification for Mill’s actions, as he has taken on nearly supernatural elements. As Mills informs Kim’s kidnappers of his intentions in tracking them down and killing them, the film’s main narrative is set into action. Upon discovering that Kim has been kidnapped Mills confronts her stepfather and asks about his past background. It’s made clear in this scene that not only the stepfather, but Mills as well, has participated in what have been deemed immoral acts. This further complicates the narrative and also further develops Mill’s anti-hero characterization. It’s not long before Mills is able to track down the man that originally kidnapped Kim and Amanda. There are a few things that are notable in this sequence of events. The first of which is that Amanda’s parents are never depicted as notified of the kidnapping. This seems an essential element of the film’s generic conventions which eschews substantial dramatic development for the advancement of the action narrative. Indeed, the film’s plot advances are all contingent on adhering to the taut conventions of the action thriller. While this certainly characteristic of Taken, one cannot rightly assume that the victim subgenre is entirely an element of the action genre. In films such as Edge of Darkness the narrative, while action centered, becomes much more reliant on the conventions of the mystery genre and as such is a more cerebral filmic experience. When Mills ultimately encounters the man who initially approached Kim and Amanda it’s notable that he does so without the aid of law enforcement. While it’s later indicated that the 96 hour window he has to find the girls is the reason for this occurrence, the viewer intuitively is led to believe that he chooses to do so because of an underlining distrust and enmity towards such modes of justice. Instead, Mills is depicted as living by a different moral code, one generated by his innate sense of good over a socially formulated construction of immorality. This is not only a crucial thematic element of the film’s narrative, but also a crucial thematic element of the victim subgenre. After encountering Kim’s original kidnapper the man attempts to escape on the freeway. During this time the taxi-driver and a police officer run to encounter Mills but he eludes them. In this instance, the viewer sees the direct confrontation of social morality (as evident in the police officer) and Mills morality. Rather than submitting to the officer, Mills evades the law and pursues the kidnapper. In other instances, the socially constructed law is demonstrated to be corrupted. After Mill’s contacts Jean-Claude, a member of French intelligence, he is given some information. The viewer later discovers that Jean-Claude is involved in nefarious business dealings with human traffickers. Furthermore, Jean-Claude refuses to fully aid Mills in retrieving his kidnapped daughter. In these instances, the socially established law is depicted as falling short in the ultimate and true pursuit of justice, and it is only through the extra-moral code that Mills has developed that true justice is ever able to be fully achieved. Indeed, Mill’s demonstrates this extra-moral sense in a number of instances, including his willingness to resort to torture to not only procure necessary information, but to inflict revenge While Mills is pursuing the kidnapper on the freeway, it’s not long before the kidnapper jumps off a platform and is swiftly struck and killed by a truck. This seems like an element of divine justice and, in a sense, is aligned with Mill’s moral quest. Throughout much of the film there are elements of divine justice, as Mill’s self-constructed moral structure is constantly reinforced by the narrative events. Another element of Mill of such divine justice occurs towards the end of the film when Mills has finally been captured and is handcuffed to a pipe. After struggling for a short period the pipe proves to be unsturdy, Mill’s miraculously escapes, and is able to destroy his captures. While such occurrences, including Mills superhuman ability to destroy countless numbers of armed individuals in combat, are typical of action films, in the context of this narrative it imbibes Mills character with an aura of invincibility that seems ultimately divinely inspired. It is this aura that also shields the viewer from Mills too stringently questioning Mill’s moral paradigm. Law Abiding Citizen F. Gary Gray’s film Law Abiding Citizen explores many of the same generic conventions as Taken, while also adding a number of intriguing elements to the victim subgenre. Even as the film is clearly aligned with action thriller generic conventions, its exploration of justice and the American legal system takes it into a philosophical contemplation on the true nature of crime and punishment. The film shares a number of undeniable similarities with Taken, but perhaps its dissimilarities are what the most intriguing elements behind the film are ultimately. Similar to Taken, the anti-hero concept is explored. In Law Abiding Citizen (2009), however, this becomes a more centralized element of the plot, and even arguably the most central question of the film. Clyde Sheldon’s wife and daughter are murdered by two men at the beginning of the film. While the legal system is effective in sending one man to death row, the other man escapes serious punishment by enacting a plea deal. This sets Sheldon into a rage that sets forth the film’s main narrative thrust. From the beginning of the film the viewer is exposed to the ineffectiveness of socially constructed law, as embodied in prosecutor Nick Rice’s willingness to cop plea deals to better his own conviction rate, versus the nature of true and pure justice. As in Taken, which requires Mills to adhere to an extra-moral sense to achieve justice, the action in Law Abiding Citizen is motivated by Sheldon’s feeling that the socially constructed justice system is corrupt and ultimately incapable of bringing him adequate solace and closure. There is a cyclical appearance of a statue of a cowboy that overlooks that city that the director continually returns to. It seems that the statue comes to represent a symbol for the philosophical question at the core of the film – namely true justice. The western statue is a testament to the days of the Wild West, when justice was administered not through courts and tribunals, but through a more pure and innate sense of right and wrong. While in Taken Mill’s anti-hero elements are explored, they never become so fore-fronted that the viewer begins to question his moral authority. Conversely, in Law Abiding Citizen the film pushes Sheldon’s moral authority to the brink and then crosses the line of what is considered acceptable actions. It’s notable that towards the beginning of the film Sheldon is depicted as ghost-like and distanced from any substantial character development. It seems this is a device used by the filmmakers to encourage viewer identification with this character. He is the everyman that has been spurned by the justice system; just as anyone individual citizen could potentially be spurned. As the narrative advances the subgeneric conventions of the victim film come into play. Namely, a man who has been wronged (Sheldon) sets out to attain justice (or revenge) against those who have wronged him. Of course, the crucial twist on this generic cliché is that the film ultimately blurs the lines between good and evil, victim and perpetrator. Sheldon first demonstrates his vengeance by ensuring that the man who has been sent to death row (Ames) receives a more harsh death than merely lethal injection. When the viewer discovers that it was Sheldon behind the action they are still able to identify with his sense of moral authority. Not only has Ames killed Sheldon’s wife and daughter, but he has inflicted pain and torment on Sheldon as well. Darby, the other killer, is believed to be behind the murder, but instead is merely a ploy for Sheldon, who traps him and enacts a gruesome horror sequence. In this instance, the viewer comes to first slightly question Sheldon’s moral authority. The scene is interesting in that it requires the viewer to consider sympathizing with a double-murderer and to philosophically ask themselves at one point has revenge or justice gone too far. As the film advances, Sheldon continually pushes the boundary of acceptable moral justification. While he is congratulated by Rice at the beginning, it soon becomes apparent that his actions have crossed the invisible moral barrier. In this regards, it’s notable that the moral barrier is not established by law but by an intuitive sense of what is ‘good’. Not only in Sheldon’s actions, but in those of Rice, the Judge, and the Mayor, there is the thematic return to ‘bending laws’ or ‘finding obscure legal precedent’. Sheldon even openly mocks the legal system after convincing the judge to release him based on an obscure legal precedent. Furthermore, it is only when prosecutor Rice is willing to break Sheldon’s civil rights and enter his property without a search warrant that Rice is able to discover the true extent of Sheldon’s nefarious underground tunnels. In this sense, the film’s message seems to indicate that the law as strictly defined in legal rulebooks and court room proceedings is deficient in answering the true extent of justice, yet leaves the viewer to decide where that moral line should ultimately be drawn. This is ultimately the distinguishing element between Law Abiding Citizen and other films in the victim subgenre. The entertainment value and appeal of Law Abiding Citizen is more closely derived from the viewer being forced to question their own moral standards, whereas films such as Taken or Edge of Darkness, although pushing the boundary on that which is morally justifiable, ultimately are more concerned with the thrills derived from the visceral quality of revenge, than the cerebral quality of questioning its justification. The sequence of events in which Sheldon is able to trap Darby is also notable as it introduces the trope of omniscience. Similar to Taken, Sheldon is imbibed with an extra-sensory ability to understand reality. While the film notes that this is because of his superior engineering abilities, the explanation is weak at best and Sheldon is more closely aligned with a god or devil figure. There are even specific instances in which Sheldon demonstrates these supernatural abilities without the aid of any engineering contraption. For instance, when Rice refuses to accept Sheldon’s deal for a confession and is shown in conversation with another man watching Sheldon on a monitor, Sheldon raises his head and interjects into the conversation. Throughout the remainder of the film, Sheldon is depicted as possessing such super-human abilities and a significant plot element becomes the question of who Sheldon’s accomplice is. When the viewer finally discovers that Sheldon has accomplished his actions through the use of an elaborate tunnel system, the explanation is hardly satisfying. Rather, the explanation that Sheldon is a sort of devil figure is much more accurate. When Sheldon ultimately sets off the suitcase bomb and destroys himself, the film dwells on the fire surrounding him for a considerable period. He doesn’t appear to die, but rather to bask in the hellish flames. Whether this is meant to indicate that Sheldon should be morally condemned for his actions (sins) is unclear, but the symbol of the flames is clearly imbued with more than merely cursory significance. Edge of Darkness Martin Campbell’s Edge of Darkness (2010) contains many of the core elements of the victim subgenre. As evidenced in both Taken and Law Abiding Citizen, these elements include an innocent victim is unjustly kidnapped or murdered which sets into motion the revenge quest of the deceased victim’s father (or family member). While Taken relies on wall to wall action for its narrative value, and Law Abiding Citizen includes the moral quandary of just how far revenge can go before it is unjustified, Edge of Darkness is differentiated from these films in that it is much more closely aligned with the mystery genre; indeed, its primary plot twists are not as overtly action thriller oriented as they are cerebral elements that are gradually uncovered by the protagonist – Thomas Craven. Characteristic of the other films Craven demonstrates a number of omniscient qualities, as well as a slight connection to the supernatural. While Sheldon in Law Abiding Citizen takes on a sort of devil force, Craven’s moral authority can be linked to the frequent reappearances of his dead daughter as a sort of angel figure. This can be interpreted as subtly reminding Craven that her death should not occur in vain and he must seek justice for the murder. While the film ultimately reveals these sightings to be elements of poisoning that Craven has received, the explanation is unsatisfying and Craven is ultimately visited by his daughter’s apparition when he is passed out on his death bed. In these regards the films’, and victim subgenre’s, moral justifications are characteristically out of the regularly established order of law and justice and aligned with a biblical or perhaps Nietzschean sense of extra-moral sensibility. Another factor linking the films is the questioning of regularly established power structures. In Taken this is seen to be evident in Mill’s disregard for law enforcement and the revelation of Jean-Claude’s corruption and collusion with the human traffickers. Similarly, in Law Abiding Citizen the very justice system is shown to have failed and its inability to answer for unspeakable acts of atrocity is explored. Finally, in Edge of Darkness, the viewer sees that the political spectrum of social order as evident in the Senator’s corruption, as well as the media, in the effort of the evildoers to attempt manipulate the press, is ultimately faulty. As the overarching structure of these social institutions is corrupt, it is only through the extra-moral authority of the protagonist that the victim can be avenged and the film completed. Conclusion As can be seen all three films demonstrate an archetypical concern with victimization and the quest for revenge. Within this trope there is great room for experimentation; as Law Abiding Citizen demonstrates the extent that the protagonist is morally justified is his quest for justice is not always an agreed upon concept. However, in all films there is the acknowledgement that only in going outside established social institutions and adhering to an intuitive, or perhaps biblically inspired moral authority, can a true and pure of what is just be attained. Indeed, these are the core and essential elements of the victim film. References Campbell, Martin. (2010) Edge of Darkness. Warner Brothers. Gary Gray, F. (2009) Law Abiding Citizen. Overture Films. Morel, Pierre (2008) Taken. 20th Century Fox. Read More