Skip to main content

White nights getting to you?


(SPOILERS) I’ve never been mad keen on Insomnia. It’s well made, well-acted, the screenplay is solid and it fits in neatly with Christopher Nolan’s abiding thematic interests, but it’s… There’s something entirely adequateabout it. It isn’t pushing any kind of envelope. It’s happy to be the genre-bound crime study it is and nothing more, something emphasised by Pacino’s umpteenth turn as an under-pressure cop. 

Actually, it was only Al’s fifth cop (out of eight, by my count), but there’s a lot of frustration and stress packed into those previous four (most of it in Sea of Love, come to think of it). Which means that, even though he hasn’t actually played a weary, insomniac cop before, or one who shot his partner on purpose (and if it wasn’t on purpose, why did he so thoughtfully use his back-up weapon...?), there’s something a little too familiar about the whole arrangement. Harrison Ford was apparently considered – about the time he mulled a lot of less likely parts before inevitably opting to protect the brand – which might have been interesting… no, let’s face it, he’d given up caring by then.

Nolan wrote the final draft of Hillary Seitz’s screenplay, based on the 1997 Norwegian Stellan Skarsård starrer, and if this Clooney/Soderbergh production – as about as necessary as Soderbergh’s Solaris remake the same year – was one the director was pursued for, it’s easy to see why he agreed, aside from representing a reasonably sized Hollywood calling card. The themes of perception/deception, delusion/illusion, subjective reality and the blurred line between antagonist/protagonist are all present and correct.

Nolan even furnishes his own puzzler for audiences, something still debated two decades on and about the only element of the picture that succeeds in stirring a strong response (albeit a characteristically mental, rather than emotional one). My sense – from what’s onscreen – had always been that Pacino’s Will Dormer, in pursuit of a suspect (who turns out to be Robin Williams’ author Walter Finch), shoots his partner Hap Eckhart (Martin Donovan) on a fog-shrouded beach intentionally.

The precise circumstances aren’t explicit – we’re given a point of view that Dormer’s sight of the target is unclear – but I could see no other good reason why (a) he didn’t issue a warning and (b) as noted above, he opted to use his backup gun rather than the one he was carrying. Will had earlier taken exception to Hap informing him he would take a plea with Internal Affairs – in particular, relating to a case where Will planted evidence to gain a prosecution – and this appeared to confirm he’d do anything necessary in pursuit of his version of justice (his ultimate utilitarian take being that he does more good than harm, so taking Hap out is permitted to that end).

Others have interpreted the scene differently, with the Wiki synopsis even stating – I know, Wiki, right, bastion of truth – that Will shoots Hap accidentally. Some believe him to be out of bullets, while others assert we can hear clicking, indicating his main weapon has jammed, but there’s clearly no consensus (the last post in this thread seems as close as any I’ve seen to a thorough analysis, and beside the point about Hap clearly believing Will did it purposefully, there’s the thematic point of Walter arguing both he and Will committed their action “accidentally”; what Walter says is clearly positioned as untrue.

It’s untrue for Walter and it’s untrue for Will, and I don’t think Nolan is attempting to suggest only Walter is victim to self-deception (if nothing else, Walter proves remarkably perceptive of Will’s psychology throughout). Indeed, when it comes to Will’s confession (to Maura Tierney’s Rachel) regarding IA (“So the end justifies the means. Right?”) and then to Elli (“… he was... he was afraid of me. And the thought I meant to do it. So… maybe I did. I just don’t know anymore”), I read that as a mind covering its tracks in exactly the same way Walter’s has done, both of them having very purposefully covered things up and laid false trails in order to bury their accidents.

Maybe someone else could have made all this seem essential, but Nolan makes it merely serviceable. There’s just enough of everything to keep Insomnia ticking over and watchable. Just enough disorientation in the visuals and editing (of Will’s perception, of the lack of day and night), and narrative trickery (Walter isn’t seen until past the halfway mark). But for all the atypical culpability of the lead character, elsewhere the movie is awash with familiar tropes, particularly so Hilary Swank’s Ellie Burr, trotting out the Southern ingenue type that would get her a second Oscar for the following year’s Million Dollar Baby; Ellie’s the Will Dormer avid fan who has a rude awakening when her diligent detective work uncovers the truth about her idol.

And if Walter seems like a departure for Williams, as a psycho, it’s more evident the same mannerisms that made him a frequently uncomfortable dramatic lead – a certain shifty nervousness and ill-at-ease, pained quality showing through whenever the motormouth subsided – are being called upon, so it isn’t actually much of a revelation. More interesting is seeing him as a character who is unintimidated in the face of Pacino’s fireworks.

We see enough of Will’s detective technique to make it clear he’s a more than capable cop, but also more than enough to underline – if killing his partner weren’t enough – that he isn’t a very nice one. Whether it’s haranguing the – also not very nice – boyfriend of the victim (“You’re just a little prick in a leather jacket!” exclaims the latter, quite accurately) or freaking out her slutty pal – also not very nice – in a high speed near collision, he succeeds in displaying behaviour that confirms his less than heroic acumen. Most revealing is his dislike of being dictated to by the killer or hoodwinked by the same, as borne out during an interrogation scene; rather than a shootout, the more interesting ending might have been Will’s turning himself in out of pride, refusing to allow Finch to maintain the upper hand in the only way he knows can succeed.

In terms of the Nolan-verse, though, Insomnia simply doesn’t offer a sufficiently colourful spin. What’s he asking here? What’s he imparting? Everything is a grey area, and it’s easy to be led. Even the noble and true Ellie is willing to bury the truth, convincing herself of an official version until Will, divested of any need to pretend any longer, dissuades her. There are no good guys, so don’t assume there are. Anyone, given the attenuating circumstances, will manipulate, deceive and self-justify. So too Nolan, carving himself out a niche in the version of the world Hollywood wants portrayed, where it’s easier to condone the unthinkable because the relatable protagonists – versions of “us” – are presented as flawed and culpable. This was the director’s post 9/11 movie, and it focuses on murder as a means to cover up evidence of wrongdoing, and further consequent actions in support of that, shifting the blame to innocent parties; the only part that doesn’t fit the analogy is the perpetrator coming clean, and willing the truth to come out.

Popular posts from this blog

Abandon selective targeting. Shoot everything.

28 Weeks Later (2007) (SPOILERS) The first five minutes of 28 Weeks Later are far and away the best part of this sequel, offering in quick succession a devastating moral quandary and a waking nightmare, immortalised on the screen. After that, while significantly more polished, Juan Carlos Fresnadillo reveals his concept to be altogether inferior to Danny Boyle and Alex Garland’s, falling back on the crutches of gore, nihilism, and disengaging and limiting shifts of focus between characters in whom one has little investment in the first place.

The Bible never said anything about amphetamines.

The Color of Money (1986) (SPOILERS) I tend to think it’s evident when Scorsese isn’t truly exercised by material. He can still invest every ounce of the technical acumen at his fingertips, and the results can dazzle on that level, but you don’t really feel the filmmaker in the film. Which, for one of his pictures to truly carry a wallop, you need to do. We’ve seen quite a few in such deficit in recent years, most often teaming with Leo. The Color of Money , however, is the first where it was out-and-out evident the subject matter wasn’t Marty’s bag. He needed it, desperately, to come off, but in the manner a tradesman who wants to keep getting jobs. This sequel to The Hustler doesn’t linger in the mind, however good it may be, moment by moment.

I said I had no family. I didn’t say I had an empty apartment.

The Apartment (1960) (SPOILERS) Billy Wilder’s romcom delivered the genre that rare Best Picture Oscar winner. Albeit, The Apartment amounts to a rather grim (now) PG-rated scenario, one rife with adultery, attempted suicide, prostitution of the soul and subjective thereof of the body. And yet, it’s also, finally, rather sweet, so salving the darker passages and evidencing the director’s expertly judged balancing act. Time Out ’s Tom Milne suggested the ending was a cop out (“ boy forgives girl and all’s well ”). But really, what other ending did the audience or central characters deserve?

If this were a hoax, would we have six dead men up on that mountain?

The X-Files 4.24: Gethsemane   Season Four is undoubtedly the point at which the duff arc episodes begin to amass, encroaching upon the decent ones for dominance. Fortunately, however, the season finale is a considerable improvement’s on Three’s, even if it’s a long way from the cliffhanger high of 2.25: Anasazi .

Your desecration of reality will not go unpunished.

2021-22 Best-of, Worst-of and Everything Else Besides The movies might be the most visible example of attempts to cling onto cultural remnants as the previous societal template clatters down the drain. It takes something people really want – unlike a Bond movie where he kicks the can – to suggest the model of yesteryear, one where a billion-dollar grosser was like sneezing. You can argue Spider-Man: No Way Home is replete with agendas of one sort or another, and that’s undoubtedly the case (that’s Hollywood), but crowding out any such extraneous elements (and they often are) is simply a consummate crowd-pleaser that taps into tangible nostalgia through its multiverse take. Of course, nostalgia for a mere seven years ago, for something you didn’t like anyway, is a symptom of how fraught these times have become.

You have a very angry family, sir.

Eternals (2021) (SPOILERS) It would be overstating the case to suggest Eternals is a pleasant surprise, but given the adverse harbingers surrounding it, it’s a much more serviceable – if bloated – and thematically intriguing picture than I’d expected. The signature motifs of director and honestly-not-billionaire’s-progeny Chloé Zhao are present, mostly amounting to attempts at Malick-lite gauzy natural light and naturalism at odds with the rigidly unnatural material. There’s woke to spare too, since this is something of a Kevin Feige Phase Four flagship, one that rather floundered, showcasing his designs for a nu-MCU. Nevertheless, Eternals manages to maintain interest despite some very variable performances, effects, and the usual retreat into standard tropes, come the final big showdown.

Captain, he who walks in fire will burn his feet.

The Golden Voyage of Sinbad (1973) (SPOILERS) Ray Harryhausen returns to the kind of unadulterated fantasy material that made Jason and the Argonauts such a success – swords & stop motion, if you like. In between, there were a couple of less successful efforts, HG Wells adaptation First Men in the Moon and The Valley of the Gwangi (which I considered the best thing ever as a kid: dinosaur walks into a cowboy movie). Harryhausen’s special-effects supremacy – in a for-hire capacity – had also been consummately eclipsed by Raquel Welch’s fur bikini in One Million Years B.C . The Golden Voyage of Sinbad follows the expected Dynamation template – blank-slate hero, memorable creatures, McGuffin quest – but in its considerable favour, it also boasts a villainous performance by nobody-at-the-time, on-the-cusp-of-greatness Tom Baker.

Doctors make the worst patients.

Coma (1978) (SPOILERS) Michael Crichton’s sophomore big-screen feature, and by some distance his best. Perhaps it’s simply that this a milieu known to him, or perhaps it’s that it’s very much aligned to the there-and-now and present, but Coma , despite the occasional lapse in this adaptation of colleague Robin Cook’s novel, is an effective, creepy, resonant thriller and then some. Crichton knows his subject, and it shows – the picture is confident and verisimilitudinous in a way none of his other directorial efforts are – and his low-key – some might say clinical – approach pays dividends. You might also call it prescient, but that would be to suggest its subject matter wasn’t immediately relevant then too.

I think it’s wonderful the way things are changing.

Driving Miss Daisy (1989) (SPOILERS) The meticulous slightness of Driving Miss Daisy is precisely the reason it proved so lauded, and also why it presented a prime Best Picture pick: a feel-good, social-conscience-led flick for audiences who might not normally spare your standard Hollywood dross a glance. One for those who appreciate the typical Judi Dench feature, basically. While I’m hesitant to get behind anything Spike Lee, as Hollywood’s self-appointed race-relations arbiter, spouts, this was a year when he actually did deliver the goods, a genuinely decent movie – definitely a rarity for Lee – addressing the issues head-on that Driving Miss Daisy approaches in softly-softly fashion, reversing gingerly towards with the brake lights on. That doesn’t necessarily mean Do the Right Thing ought to have won Best Picture (or even that it should have been nominated for the same), but it does go to emphasise the Oscars’ tendency towards the self-congratulatory rather than the provocat

You’re the pattern and the prototype for a whole new age of biological exploration.

The Fly II (1989) (SPOILERS) David Cronenberg was not, it seems, a fan of the sequel to his hit 1986 remake, and while it’s quite possible he was just being snobby about a movie that put genre staples above theme or innovation, he wasn’t alone. Fox had realised, post- Aliens , that SF properties were ripe for hasty follow ups, and indiscriminately mined a number of popular pictures to immediately diminishing returns during the period ( Cocoon , Predator ). Neither critics nor audiences were impressed. In the case of The Fly II , though, it would be unfair to label the movie as outright bad. It simply lacks that *idea* that would justify the cash-in.