Journal Entries
"The Road to Perdition"
Posted Aug 7, 2002
I just came home from the movies and, after some difficulty logging in, am finally sitting here attempting to write while the rest of my lovely thoughts have been scrambled and tossed to the wind.
Our family has a tradition, Movies on Tuesday night. Thought we normally see the same film together, this time my mother, brother and I split off to see "The Road to Perdition" starring Tom Hanks. We left together heading to the car, my brother now glancing suspiciously over his shoulder, dodging shadows. My mother clutching her stomach in nausea. And I? I left this paticular evening, fascinated, disgusted and perplexed.
I am an avid movie critic, nothing professional but I do rank films in my mind, according to script adaptation (if based on a book ect) Casting, costume, acting, sound, camera shots, reality of special effects, plot development, character development and so on ...
According to these criteria the film was absolutely flawless! Honestly I was astounded at the quality of work that was presented to me. Some of the most creative camera work since M. Night Shaymaylin (sorry if i got the spelling wrong) the costumes were absolutely beautiful, true to the time period (1931) Wonderful acting. Great casting. Some of the most realistic death scenes ever, and a beautiful twisted plot full of human suffering angst and death....therin lies the problem.
I am slowly growing concerned about the trends I see lately in the movies (so maybe its been years now) Slowly we, the audiences have been numbed to violence to suffering. Once Upon a Time Movies and stories had a clear antagonist and protagonist (does anyone remember Superman?) The audience usually knwe who they were cheering for--the good guy, or the bad guy, depending on your taste. One would win one would loose, and we would all go home satisfied that justice had been served. Not so in this film.
Basic plot, (if you want to see the film, do so before reading this, i will ruin the ending for you) Tom Hanks plays a bad guy, Michael a hit man basically, working for the guys who run the town. His kid witnesses a murder--which gets his mom and lil bro killed due to misteaken identity. Father and son go on a road trip--robbing banks of dirty money and planning their vengance on the mob while running from a hired killer. Throught this experiance father and son bond, cheat death and have some heart-warming moments.
And yet I'm disturbed. This father was a professional criminal, helping to controll the city and siphon money off the hard working man. He kept secrets, kept people quiet and killed on occasion--seemingly without remorse. Then the tables are turned. His family is killed--which is exactally what would have happened if he had been in that position and someone else had witnessed his murdering another. Suddenly bad guy is now good guy, trying to protect his son (who he wouldn't even hug prior to this incident) And he robs, decieves and kills to accomplish his goal. We are never sure if we should cheer or not, if his crimes are justified. He stole from a crime lord who iin turn stole from hard working men. Yet Our "hero" has a robin hood complex--giving money to a bank clerk and elderly couple...so is he right? I don't know
he caused the death of several people, directly, taking his Tommy Gun to an entire crime family--even the man he claimed to love as a father earlier in the film, but that's ok, cuz "daddy's" last words before hitting the pavement were "I'm glad it's you"--and of course it was all becaues our hero's family is dead. If you really want to look at it objectively a Vigalantie simply took out the baser elements from a "good" city.
In the final scenes dad (Tom) is shot by an assasin. Son pulls a gun, but can't shoot it. Dad with last bit of strength shoots assasin. Son holds dad as last breath is taken, crying.
The end of the movie has son moving in with elderly couple (whom Dad gave money to earlier) and musing wheather or not dad was a good man.
I believe the story is to be one of redemption, Father sacrificing for son--but Dad brought it upon himself. I guess I'm just a little confused. Was Tom Hanks really playing a "bad guy" or not? Was he a victim of circumstance?
And why, if i am so confused on that point, did I like the movie so much? I mean, aside from Splended acting, great makeup, accurate portrayal of the times....
Discuss this Journal entry [1]
Latest reply: Aug 7, 2002
"the future"
Posted Jul 11, 2002
The future tends to be a frightening thing to me. Here I sit, young, educated, loved. The whole world is supposed to be my oyster and I am totally paralyzed. What do I do? Do I persue further education and a nice 9 to 5 carreer complete with health plan, security, boredom? Or do I toss that all to the wind (or at least put it off till a later date) pick up and move to LA and persue a career in the film industry? No, not as a starving actress but a costume designer. There is nothing like working long hours under high stress, dealing with "the talent" and never knowing where (or even when) your next job will be. But the payoffs seem greater, succeding against all odds, seeing your work on the silver screen, making connections and living in the city...sigh...maybe I'll figure it out eventually.
Discuss this Journal entry [1]
Latest reply: Jul 11, 2002
CaliforniaGirl
Researcher U198176
Write an Entry
"The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy is a wholly remarkable book. It has been compiled and recompiled many times and under many different editorships. It contains contributions from countless numbers of travellers and researchers."