| Product: |
Fracture (DVD) |
| Date: |
19.02.08 (63 review reads) |
| Rating: |
 |
Advantages: Well acted and intelligent
Disadvantages: Mired by its ending
(Review is reproduced at www.shaunmunro.co.uk)
Gregory Hoblit's "Fracture" is a thriller about how what initially appear to be inconsequent foibles can cause great problems - a collection of hairline fractures causing a serious fracture, if you will. The opening credits sequence of Fracture is a nice allegory of this concept, depicting marbles travelling along a metal contraption, and if the metal course were to break or, dare I say, fracture at all, then this marble will fall to the ground, as it does at one point in the film. Yes, I'm probably stretching the applications of the film's title, but you get the idea.
We are quickly introduced to Ted Crawford (Anthony Hopkins), a highly intelligent engineer, who returns home to discover his wife's infidelity, and soon enough makes a choice that many would undoubtedly fantasise about - he murders his unfaithful spouse. Ted, the intellectual that he is, is able to cover his tracks exceedingly well. Furthermore, his ability to do this never appears contrived, although perhaps that's a little of Hannibal Lecter spilling over.
Crawford would best be described as "uniformly strange" from his behaviours in a tense discourse with a hostage negotiator, confessing "I shot her, I know it was wrong", Hopkins maintaining a truly unsettling deadpan delivery. It becomes evident very quickly that he knows how to push people's buttons, lighting something of a raging fire under this negotiator with some carefully chosen verbiage.
Irritating hotshot lawyer William Beachum (Ryan Gosling) unwillingly lands as the prosecutor in Crawford's case, yet once Beachum arrive at court, he quickly finds himself intrigued by Crawford, and when faced with the chance to resign from the case, he ultimately decides not to. Crawford plays what is the start of a slight and nuanced series of mind-games with Beachum, almost confusing him perhaps, but ultimately arousing his curiosity to the point where he has to see this case through. As such, the character of Crawford is speedily established as manipulative, and whilst it's a comparison that the crew, and Hopkins especially, will dislike and refute, this behaviour is most Lecter-like.
Beachum is quickly warned that Crawford is a master manipulator, but Beachum, ever-ascending the career ladder as he is, in a bout of slight arrogance, thinks nothing of his case, that it's open and shut. Hopkins' Crawford, however, is testing him - he has confessed, but now wishes for the legal system to prove it, and has gone to great lengths to cover his hide to this effect - there were no fingerprints on the gun recovered, no powder residue about Crawford's person, and worse still, this gun has never been fired.
In their subsequent interactions, an understandably dumbfounded Beachum only becomes more confused, whilst Crawford seems to have discovered something which he can use to get under Beachum's skin, and rather than keep it to himself, he rather audaciously lets Beachum know this fact. It's refreshing to see a film that isn't entirely cerebral when exploring an individual who may or may be psychotic, and laying his game out on the table as he does is an interesting turn to that effect.
To anyone but himself, Crawford may appear insane, yet he has a meticulously-planned scheme with which he will ensnare anyone who attempts to bring him down. When Crawford executes part of his plan, it seems to shock everyone inside the courtroom, yet this scheme is disappointingly simplistic - it relies on a great deal of coincidence in regard to who was first to arrive at the crime scene, and this was too tenuous of a leap to convince me.
Nevertheless, Crawford's plan, to this point, has worked perfectly - Beachum himself has grown frustrated, and the higher-ups, such as DA Joe Lobruto (David Strathairn) only serve to bury his self-esteem further by reaffirming his own weakness - his need to win. Crawford's series of head games entice and taunt Beachum in an almost passive-aggressive fashion, to the point where Beachum feels compelled to find evidence to put this man away, even as threats towards his career are levelled against him. With pressure from one side begging him to drop the case, and another urging him to continue pursuing it, Beachum is in something of a rut - which ever decision he makes will essentially anger someone.
This pressure begins to weigh heavily on Beachum with ever-increasing force, and furthermore, his being a lawyer, and all of the values that this encompasses, proceed to stack up against, and enrage him. Hopkins' screen time rather regrettably decreases at this stage, giving way for the development of Gosling's character, when, considering how disinteresting Beachum is in comparison to Crawford, is both an unfortunate shame, and an astronomical mistake.
Even when all hope is lost, Beachum refuses to let this case lie - he has to know where Crawford's murder weapon is, and it seems to transform him into either a better person or a more adept lawyer - I'm still working that out. On the other hand, perhaps it does neither and simply demonstrates that Crawford has discovered Beachum's fracture and exploited it, leaving Beachum broken to a point, sending him even further headlong into Crawford's trap, obsessed with discovering the key to this case. This trap, and its resultant explanation, however, is devilishly simple - it's not as clever as you may have hoped for, but given how I was half-expecting a twist-fest, and considering how delightfully enigmatic the build-up was, the payoff isn't so bad.
The final moments of the film are discontenting to say the least - it, depending on your interpretation of events, relies on either the uncharacteristic idiocy of our villain, or what appears to be a gross misunderstanding of law. The fact that certain details are never explained, simply leaves one flustered rather than intrigued, and we're left unaware as to whether the writers (Daniel Pyne and Glenn Gers) truly threw us a befuddled legal interpretation or not. If we take away anything from this film by its end, it's that if you dig a hole for the next man, you may very well fall in yourself - a maxim applicable to both leads.
Fracture is a sedate (and occasionally straggling) legal thriller that is for the most part an engaging piece, complete with a bewildering enigma, but Gosling's character is something of a bore, and hardly someone I felt compelled to revere as a hero. Gosling's performance was decent (and decidedly more impressive than Rosamund Pike's stagey American accent), although nothing particularly exciting, which isn't surprising considering who he is acting opposite. Hopkins comfortably slips into his role, and is conspicuous by his absence when off screen, which unfortunately occurs far too often. Had it not been for some moments of incredulous coincidence and a wholly unsatisfying ending, Fracture would have been one of the more engrossing thrillers of 2007, yet becomes merely an entertaining, decidedly flawed piece.
Summary: Smart and well-acted but questionable moments near the end...
|
|
