In the synopsis from the bombastic press release I received for this film the PR company optimistically ally a quotation from its ambiguous hero, Nick Rice (Jamie Foxx; Ray), with aphorisms from both Benjamin Disraeli and, perhaps even more ridiculously, Aristotle. Not points of reference I would usually associate with a Hollywood blockbuster. This, to me, demonstrates one of the major problems of the film: it is a fast paced thriller, complete with extensive body count, masquerading as a serious meditation on the American legal system and, at its most ambitious, the concept of Justice itself. That is not to say that big themes and bigger action is a recipe Hollywood can’t cook (see The Dark Knight), but director F. Gary Gray (Friday; The Italian Job), on this evidence, does not have the measurements quite right, over-seasoning here smothering the flavour.

If the film had not tried to take itself so seriously, wantonly tossing in transparent judicial imagery and unconvincing polemic, and stuck to what Gerard Butler later described at the Press Conference as ‘popcorn moments’ it might have fared slightly better. However, in attempting to blend the two together, what could have been a promising exercise in character development instead becomes a confused representation of two men both equally unable to formulate and stick to one ideology. The insistence on action, violence and sharp twists undercuts the principles both characters profess to be working from and the moral touchstones the film sporadically offers: Clyde Shelton (Gerard Butler; 300) goes from being wronged family man to (quite literal) one man crime wave, whilst Rice is introduced as a dubious careerist lawyer but ends the film as a kind of superhero vigilante district attorney, ignoring his constitutional oath. Judge Dredd, however, he is not.

During the development process, Foxx and Butler swapped roles; with Butler having initially intended to play the Nick Rice character and early negotiations with Foxx focusing on Clyde. The ease with which these roles were reversed is perhaps an indictment of the confounded nature of these characters although I’m sure the makers would argue that it reveals their complex moral interiors. Butler explains the decision thus: ‘As the development process went on I became more and more fascinated by this character and how I would react in his situation. I also perhaps wanted to move away from the more straightforward, heroic roles I’ve done in the past and really get my teeth into the character’s psychology. So I put it to the team that we should swap roles. Then they said yes, and I thought “Oh shit, now I’ve actually got to do this!” But ultimately I think it was the right decision.’ I think there may also be a marketability element in the somewhere, Gerry, as Foxx is the more bankable star on this picture.

Some of the film’s deficiencies can possibly be attributed to its rookie producers: it represents the first outing for Butler and Alan Siegel’s (the star’s long-time manager and friend) production company Evil Twins, and the newly found role of producer was something Butler was eager to talk about at the Q&A session that followed the film. He was keen to stress a desire to be heavily involved in the production process: ‘The financing company offered us the role of Executive Producers, but we said that was a deal breaker. We wanted to be hands on and have an involvement in the actual making of the movie. There have been times when I’ve made movies in the past when I’ve made suggestions about how certain parts could be worked only to be overruled. Here I wanted to back my own judgements and see where that took the movie.’ He also made clear that producing was not a job he had found particularly easy, but one he wanted to continue with, and I’m sure this movie will represent something of a learning curve for the Scot: ‘I don’t think I was in a good space when we were making this movie: one, because of the character, but also because I was producing for the first time. There were about three weeks to a month after we finished filming where I was in a very funky place. I returned to Scotland to clear my head and then took some time out in India.’

All of this is very negative, but I feel compelled to say something encouraging about this movie: I only looked at my watch once, towards the end of the screening, and so clearly wasn’t bored, and I have been racking my brain ever since to discover why this was. Jonathon Sela’s (Director of Photography) realisation of Gray’s vision for a ‘neo-noir’  Philadelphia is actually subtly effective, and the film is an umberous visual spectacle if nothing else. The scenes of violence (and this is a very violent movie) are a tough, physical viewing experience and for me this is only a good thing, although others may object that it is gratuitous.

Overall, I would not urge you to go out and pay for a cinema admittance for this film. But if, say, in a year or so when it has found its way onto Sky Movies there are worse ways in which one could spend two hours in front of the television.

4 Responses to “Let’s kick some Butler”