Tom Mullen (Mel Gibson) is a man who seems to have it all. He has a happy family with his wife Kate (Renee Russo) and son Sean (Brawley Nolte). And he runs an airline that is expanding rapidly.
But when Sean is kidnapped, everything that Tom holds dear begins to crumble.
When he realises how ruthless the kidnapper is, Tom is pushed to make a decision that could either save his family - or doom them all.
There is something wrong with Ransom - something in its DNA that keeps me from fully enjoying it.
Mel Gibson does not help. Gibson is an actor who is fascinating to watch in torment. His whole career circles around characters forced to go through immense physical and psychological torment. For over thirty years, that sadomasochistic undercurrent made him compelling.
But in recent years, as most of you will probably know, it turned out that the darkness Gibson brought to the screen was all too real.
Gibson is a man powered by rage. I know this because it is an emotion I know well. He carries the sam bottled fury I used to feel in my own father, a constant tension that made every day terrifying. I never noticed the connection between him and Gibson until 2010, when Gibson's recorded screaming rants and threats against his ex-wife reached the internet. Suddenly, I felt like I knew Gibson in a way that was all too familiar.
I have not watched too many of his movies since - I enjoyed Get The Gringo, but I think it was a case of Gibson matching with a role.
Going into this movie, I wondered how Gibson's present would affect my viewing.
What makes it interesting is that Ransom goes out of its way to complicate how we should feel about Tom). He has lied about his business activities, and he put a man in prison. In any other movie, Tom could be the villain - or played by Michael Douglas.
Gibson plays him with a sense of self-awareness, an underlying sense of dread that his past sins will come back to haunt him. He might be an up-and-coming millionaire, but he still has a conscience.
Once Sean is gone, Gibson is on more familiar territory as the grieving father. Gibson plays Tom like an open wound, unable to hold himself together. Tom is no tough guy. He is not even a wild man.
Yet the film circles around to provide an outlet for Mullen to enact righteous vengeance on the man who kidnapped his son. It is not a one-to-one comparison with Gibson's action hero roles - Gibson brings a weakness and clumsy physicality to the role that distinguishes him from the physical grace of Riggs and Mad Max - but the focus on violent retribution is clearly meant to act as a moral cleanse. By going through all this pain, Tom is able to redeem himself for his past failings.
It is such a strange experience watching this man who has so thoroughly destroyed his onscreen persona. Gibson delivers a great performance and is totally believable as a milquetoast. But there is always an edge to it - I am caught between recognising the power of the performance, and the offscreen history of the man performing him.
Renee Russo is a fine actress who always seems better than the roles she is in. Reuniting with Gibson after Lethal Weapon 3, they have good chemistry as a long-married couple. I do wish the movie was more of a character piece than a straight genre picture - Russo in particular feels like she is missing a couple more scenes. The emphasis is almost entirely on Gibson, with Russo relegated to reacting to his increasingly manic actions.
Delroy Lindo is terrific as the negotiator - calm and empathetic, he is the most compelling of the film's protagonists. He got all the plaudits on the film's release and he is still the most interesting character in the movie. In fact, he was so good in the role he ended up playing effectively the same character in the short-lived TV series Kidnapped in 2006.
Gary Sinise is also good as the bad guy, although his bite is not as bad as his bark. Part of the reason may be because the movie is so cookie-cutter and safe, Sinise’s visibility as a performer (Forrest Gump) feels conventional - here is a famous actor playing a bad guy.
The movie was directed by Ron Howard and I cannot help thinking this is the underlying issue. His natural safeness means this movie is way less visceral than it thinks it is.
Part of it is that aesthetically, the movie is far too bland. It never feels grimey or claustrophobic. Even the scenes of Sean with the kidnappers lack tension and atmosphere.
Howard shoots and stages the action competently. But I never felt that invested.The movie tries to play with the class dynamics of the kidnappers and the victim, but whatever commentary the filmmakers intended backfires because the movie is ultimately about a rich guy turning the ransom demand into a bounty for the kidnappers.In the end the only vaguely interesting point the movie makes is that being a policeman grants you power over ex-cons. Eveb then, the movie makes clear that Sinise is a unique evil who has taken advantage of the system.
The actors provide a lot of gravitas, but in the end Ransom is just too rote to stick in the mind.
You can subscribe on iTunes, or wherever you get your podcasts.
No comments:
Post a Comment