2 of 6

Phil Boatwright (Movie Reporter) asks, "Is this visual assault desensitizing us to the loss of life?" Yet he concludes, "As filmmaking goes, it's as good as it gets."

The same dichotomy is emphasized by Steven Isaac (Focus on the Family): "Perdition is a challenging, deep-thinking, gut-wrenching, soul-searching experience. But, of course, it can never be left there. A river of blood and a thorny patch of vulgarity have to be crossed before you can get there."

In a chat with critics at the Chiaroscuro Discussion Board, Darren Hughes criticizes the way Mendes aesthetically manipulates the viewer. "Perdition wants desperately to be a film that is recognized for complicating and questioning morality. But [it] never lets its audience wrestle with honest moral ambiguity. We're steered constantly by Thomas Newman's score … and by Mendes's heavy-handed, self-conscious direction, which combine to create exactly the opposite effect of a film like The Godfather. Instead of confronting us with the consequences of violence, Mendes aestheticizes it. We see a man shot point blank in the head, then watch as his body falls gracefully to the floor in super slow motion. We see Hanks tommy gun ten men, again in slow motion, in the rain, under lamplight, to the sound of beautiful music. Mendes takes every shortcut imaginable, apparently so that he won't alienate our affection for Hanks and his character."

After praising its "visual richness" and cast, Steven D. Greydanus (Decent Films) writes, "the central characters are inaccessible to me; the story left me emotionally detached throughout. In the end, I found the whole thing self-conscious and artificial—a collection of momentous themes and evocative images that somehow never transcends technique and craft to become a real film."

Greydanus is also displeased by the use of religious symbols in place of real spiritual exploration. "The movie's pervasive Catholic imagery was ripped from more integral themes of confession, forgiveness, and redemption that in the book are tied to a faith-affirming final revelation that provides a moral context for the whole story, but which is omitted from the film."

Michael Elliott (Movie Parables) agrees: "It … includes a fair amount of religious referencing although it never delves into the spiritual truths which are supposed to dwell behind the symbols and rituals," Still, he is impressed: "Mendes shows a level of artistry and craftsmanship which is truly enviable."

As I've thought over the film, I've become troubled by how Mendes portrays Sullivan's sufferings, but not those of other gangsters that Sullivan guns down. I must assume some of them were loving fathers and husbands as well. Such details would show us more clearly what kind of man Sullivan really is, what kind of damage revenge can do. In spite of some token words that say otherwise, he appears to be an admirable figure, sorely wronged, with every right to lash out at whomever gets in his way. Thus, Perdition never achieves the profound impact of Clint Eastwood's Unforgiven, in which the hero's revenge quest leads us to question if he is really so different from his enemies, or if the ends justify the means. And yet, like the recent Insomnia, Perdition affirms (just barely) the hero who refuses to start down the path of violence in the first place. (My full review is at Looking Closer.)

Mainstream critics compared the film to other famous gangster films—especially The Godfather saga and Miller's Crossing. Others even mentioned Shakespeare and Greek tragedy. But some were not so eager to sing its praises.

next page... |  2 of 6

share this page

July (Web-only) 2002, Vol. 46