Skip to main content

No, I'm not them. And I'm not this.

The Drop
(2014)

(SPOILERS) The Drop is a very pleasant surprise. I had the impression it was rather tepidly received by critics (although the “arbiter” that is Rotten Tomatoes suggests otherwise), and I haven’t been overly impressed with past adaptations of Dennis Lehane material (even the best have been lacking something). This one is self-adapted from his short story and, while it’s not without its flaws, it is anchored by a powerfully magnetic performance from Tom Hardy, underplaying yet simultaneously sucking all the attention in the room his way. Director Michaël R Roskam complements him with deceptive sureness of tone, exerting a grip despite an unhurried, measured pace.


The film, originally known as Animal Rescue (an understandable title to change, but The Drop is so nondescript its no wonder it didn’t get much notice), went largely ignored by the public. It seems destined to be noteworthy only as James Gandolfini’s final role, rather than for its content. In respect of his performance, there isn’t anything very remarkable here; Gandolfini’s done this kind of thing many times before. He’s dependable and professional, but Marv, former owner of the Brooklyn bar that is now used as a money drop for the Chechen mob, is a familiar type; a low-level guy without the stones to make it bigger in the criminal world but the need for cash and a means to get some.


Bob (Hardy) is Marv’s cousin and the bar tender. He comes across as slightly slow and internalised, a man who dutifully does what he is told, lives in his deceased parents’ house and frets over having a dog because of the responsibility. Bob appears to be a bit of a soft touch, allowing a regular to run up a tab, giving out free rounds and at Marv’s beck and call. And for a long time it’s difficult to gauge where he’s coming from. Part of the fascination with The Drop is figuring Bob out.


When the bar is robbed, and the Chechens’ money taken, Bob’s response is not fearful. And when the arm of one of the robbers shows up in a bag full of money, Bob’s response is to carefully (obsessive compulsively?) wrap up the arm in cellophane before dropping it in the river. This contrasts with his reaction to Nadia (Noomi Rapace). After finding an abandoned puppy (Rocco) in her trash, he strikes up a tentative relationship based on her dog knowledge. But Bob is very backwards in coming forwards, shy and diffident. And her ex, menacing lowlife Eric (Matthias Schoenaerts), is given to showing up at his house and threatening him.


Lehane’s script only gradually reveals Bob, and even come the credits he leaves us to fill in the blanks. As we discover Marv was behind the robbery, so Bob’s light begins to seep from under the bushel  (“Are you doing something desperate? Again?” he asks Marv, who drops hints of Bob's concealed potential throughout). Is he really going to submit to Eric, give him ten grand to keep Rocco? The reveal of Bob’s steely resolve isn’t as in a flash, when all of a sudden we discover someone isn’t who they appeared to be. Bob kind of is who he appears to be.


Bob’s someone who allows himself to be what people think of or project on him. He’s unassuming because others think he’s unassuming, and because it means no one is looking his way. But he also inhabits the role he has fashioned for himself. He will only take what is readily within reach, and even then he is nervous of such attachments. This explains his curiously limited analysis of why he kills Eric (“He was going to hurt our dog”), which might suggest a morally unplugged or empathically disconnected inner life (but which is contrasted by his perceptiveness throughout, be it correcting Marv on the pronunciations of Chechens or revealing to Nadia why he never brought up her scars). He let Rocco become part of the tiny microcosm of things he cares about, and his personal code knows no limits under those circumstances (which is why he killed Richie Whelan for Marv all those years ago). It’s why he is more comfortable with Nadia running away from him; he rather expects her to confirm she wants him to “stay away” at the end.


Bob isn’t unveiled as your standard issue sociopath then, but he lives in a world where diminishing himself is protective. He doesn’t embrace his capacity for violence, which is why he doesn’t take communion and doubts there is forgiveness for what he has done, and it’s probably why he keeps Whelan’s body in the oil tank in the basement (to be mindful of what he has done, and what hangs over him). When he says to Nadia, “No, I’m not them. And I’m not this” he isn’t. But he has the capacity to be both.


This is a fascinating, riveting performance from Hardy, and primary evidence, if any were needed, of why he’s one of the best actors working today. When Detective Torres (John Ortiz) says “No one ever sees you coming, do they Bob?” it’s a "cool" moment, but one that is a little over-conflating. Bob isn’t a Keyzer Soze-like mastermind leading a double life and retreating to the shadows. The fade to black before Nadia returns (we hear her footsteps) isn’t a “Will she or won’t she?” so much asking if Bob can adapt to her presence in his life or will he ultimately be compelled to retreat from this involvement and confronting himself through her.


Hardy is so consummate, it’s a shame some of the surrounding elements aren’t so well handled. Rapace is fine, but her role is barely there. The Torres subplot expounds every dogged cop cliché going. And having Chechen gangsters, in the same year as The Equalizer, The November Man and John Wick (another picture that revolves around a faithful pooch) seems like everyone has the same go-to Eastern European gangster locale. Schoenaerts is suitably slimy as Eric, though, a believably intimidating presence even up against Hardy, while Ann Dowd has a couple of scenes as Marv’s sister and makes the most of them.


There appears to be a subtext about lost causes here; it’s notable that Marv’s choice is, on the surface at least, motivated by a wish to do the right thing. He needs to pay his father’s care bills. Yet his father is in a vegetative state, and his sister is able to face the reality that it’s time to take him off life support. Marv’s inability to do likewise, in the same way that he can’t accept that he no longer has any street cred, is his undoing. In contrast, the more perceptive Bob sees the battles he cannot win, and is even reluctant to put himself out there with ones he can (a discarded dog, a possible relationship).


As I say, I’ve been less than effusive over other Lehane movies. I found Mystic River obvious and manipulative, Gone Baby Gone fundamentally miscast and ultimately contrived, and Shutter Island barely had enough material to sustain a Twilight Zone let alone a two and a quarter hour movie. Yet The Drop, easily his least recognised picture, is by far his most thought provoking and resonant. And coming hot on the heels of Locke, The Drop is further evidence not only of Hardy’s mesmerising screen presence, but also how accomplished an accent actor he is.



Comments

Popular posts from this blog

No matter how innocent you are, or how hard you try, they’ll find you guilty.

The Wrong Man (1956) (SPOILERS) I hate to say it, but old Truffaut called it right on this one. More often than not showing obeisance to the might of Hitchcock during his career-spanning interview, the French critic turned director was surprisingly blunt when it came to The Wrong Man . He told Hitch “ your style, which has found its perfection in the fiction area, happens to be in total conflict with the aesthetics of the documentary and that contradiction is apparent throughout the picture ”. There’s also another, connected issue with this, one Hitch acknowledged: too much fidelity to the true story upon which the film is based.

He’s so persistent! He always gets his man.

Speed (1994) (SPOILERS) It must have been a couple of decades since I last viewed Speed all the way through, so it’s pleasing to confirm that it holds up. Sure, Jan de Bont’s debut as a director can’t compete with the work of John McTiernan, for whom he acted as cinematographer and who recommended de Bont when he passed on the picture, but he nevertheless does a more than competent work. Which makes his later turkeys all the more tragic. And Keanu and Sandra Bullock display the kind of effortless chemistry you can’t put a price tag on. And then there’s Dennis Hopper, having a great old sober-but-still-looning time.

Another case of the screaming oopizootics.

Doctor Who Season 14 – Worst to Best The best Doctor Who season? In terms of general recognition and unadulterated celebration, there’s certainly a strong case to be made for Fourteen. The zenith of Robert Holmes and Philip Hinchcliffe’s plans for the series finds it relinquishing the cosy rapport of the Doctor and Sarah in favour of the less-trodden terrain of a solo adventure and underlying conflict with new companion Leela. More especially, it finds the production team finally stretching themselves conceptually after thoroughly exploring their “gothic horror” template over the course of the previous two seasons (well, mostly the previous one).

He is a brigand and a lout. Pay him no serious mention.

The Wind and the Lion (1975) (SPOILERS) John Milius called his second feature a boy’s-own adventure, on the basis of the not-so-terrified responses of one of those kidnapped by Sean Connery’s Arab Raisuli. Really, he could have been referring to himself, in all his cigar-chomping, gun-toting reactionary glory, dreaming of the days of real heroes. The Wind and the Lion rather had its thunder stolen by Jaws on release, and it’s easy to see why. As polished as the picture is, and simultaneously broad-stroke and self-aware in its politics, it’s very definitely a throwback to the pictures of yesteryear. Only without the finger-on-the-pulse contemporaneity of execution that would make Spielberg and Lucas’ genre dives so memorable in a few short years’ time.

But everything is wonderful. We are in Paris.

Cold War (2018) (SPOILERS) Pawel Pawlikowski’s elliptical tale – you can’t discuss Cold War without saying “elliptical” at least once – of frustrated love charts a course that almost seems to be a caricature of a certain brand of self-congratulatorily tragic European cinema. It was, it seems “ loosely inspired ” by his parents (I suspect I see where the looseness comes in), but there’s a sense of calculation to the progression of this love story against an inescapable political backdrop that rather diminishes it.

The game is rigged, and it does not reward people who play by the rules.

Hustlers (2019) (SPOILERS) Sold as a female Goodfellas – to the extent that the producers had Scorsese in mind – this strippers-and-crime tale is actually a big, glossy puff piece, closer to Todd Phillips as fashioned by Lorene Scarfia. There are some attractive performances in Hustlers, notably from Constance Wu, but for all its “progressive” women work male objectification to their advantage posturing, it’s incredibly traditional and conservative deep down.

What do they do, sing madrigals?

The Singing Detective (2003) Icon’s remake of the 1986 BBC serial, from a screenplay by Dennis Potter himself. The Singing Detective fares less well than Icon’s later adaptation of Edge of Darkness , even though it’s probably more faithful to Potter’s original. Perhaps the fault lies in the compression of six episodes into a feature running a quarter of that time, but the noir fantasy and childhood flashbacks fail to engage, and if the hospital reality scans better, it too suffers eventually.

They literally call themselves “Decepticons”. That doesn’t set off any red flags?

Bumblebee  (2018) (SPOILERS) Bumblebee is by some distance the best Transformers movie, simply by dint of having a smattering of heart (one might argue the first Shia LaBeouf one also does, and it’s certainly significantly better than the others, but it’s still a soulless Michael Bay “machine”). Laika VP and director Travis Knight brings personality to a series that has traditionally consisted of shamelessly selling product, by way of a nostalgia piece that nods to the likes of Herbie (the original), The Iron Giant and even Robocop .

How would Horatio Alger have handled this situation?

Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas (1998) (SPOILERS) Gilliam’s last great movie – The Zero Theorem (2013) is definitely underrated, but I don’t think it’s that underrated – Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas could easily have been too much. At times it is, but in such instances, intentionally so. The combination of a visual stylist and Hunter S Thompson’s embellished, propulsive turn of phrase turns out, for the most part, to be a cosmically aligned affair, embracing the anarchic abandon of Raoul Duke and Doctor Gonzo’s Las Vegas debauch while contriving to pull back at crucial junctures in order to engender a perspective on all this hedonism. Would Alex Cox, who exited stage left, making way for the Python, have produced something interesting? I suspect, ironically, he would have diluted Thompson in favour of whatever commentary preoccupied him at the time (indeed, Johnny Depp said as much: “ Cox had this great material to work with and he took it and he added his own stuff to it ”). Plus

That’s what people call necromancer’s weather.

The Changes (1975) This adaptation of Peter Dickinson’s novel trilogy carries a degree of cult nostalgia cachet due to it being one of those more “adult” 1970s children’s serials (see also The Children of the Stones , The Owl Service ). I was too young to see it on its initial screening – or at any rate, too young to remember it – but it’s easy to see why it lingered in the minds of those who did. Well, the first episode, anyway. Not for nothing is The Changes seen as a precursor to The Survivors in the rural apocalypse sub-genre – see also the decidedly nastier No Blade of Grass – as following a fairly gripping opener, it drifts off into the realm of plodding travelogue.