Monday, April 3, 2017

Seven, Directed by David Fincher

Starring: Morgan Freeman, Brad Pitt, and Gwyneth Paltrow



I remember watching Seven when it first came out. I don’t remember the where or the circumstances under which I saw it (was it at a theater? On VHS? HBO?), but I remember nearly every detail of every scene. It was a dark, violent movie then, and it’s a dark, somewhat tame by today’s standards film now. The idea seems slightly cliché now: A serial killer who chooses and displays his victims based on the Seven Deadly Sins. From Gluttony to Wrath, each sin was delivered in such a deliciously stylized way as to be both obvious and cryptic. If displayed on their own, without the accompanying text, would they immediately be seen for what they are?

And that’s my only true problem with the movie. Does John Doe hold such contempt for the world around him that he sees it as necessary to label each kill? I think the film and the crimes themselves would be far stronger without telling us what each murder is supposed to represent. Then again, would we figure it out after only two murders without that help? Perhaps we are the dullards John Doe suspects us to be.

Kevin Spacey’s performance as John Doe is very good. I can’t take that away from him. He delivers his lines well and is just creepy enough for us to know that he’s the killer, no need to look elsewhere. It’s as if his performance was built to make us not look anywhere else… especially in the box. “Look at me! Look at me!” It’s an obvious sleight of hand to allow the filmmakers an opportunity to deliver the unexpected.

And it works, of course. If you’ve never seen the movie, then the ending is just twisty enough to draw a gasp and a “Damn, I should’ve seen that coming.”

But it all plays into John Doe’s attempt to deliver a message. What message is that? That this world is drowning in sin. Doe sees himself as a messenger to help awaken the world to its plight. There’s a discussion in the car while our heroes, Detectives David Mills and William Somerset drive the recently surrendered Doe into the middle of nowhere to find the last two bodies. That discussion is about Doe’s sanity and the role he’s played. Is he a messenger from God, or is he just crazy? And will anybody remember him a couple of months down the road? Mills writes him off as insane, but Doe has a trick up his sleeve that will most likely keep the world talking long after the crimes have ended.

But that’s another problem with Doe’s MO. He’s probably correct in thinking he’ll be discussed for years to come, but in what regard? The world will see him as smart for his plan, but they’ll also see him as Mills does: a loony that just happened to win.

It’s an ending we probably should have seen coming for awhile. Gwyneth Paltrow has just enough screen time for us to kind of care about her. We know she doesn’t like the city, but she wants to support her husband. The amount of screen time she’s given is a balance between noticeable and invisible, so that when the film’s final minutes unwind we are both shocked but not really saddened. It’s as if Fincher wants us to care about her, but not enough to create an emotional impact that takes away from the genius of John Doe’s plan.

Spacey’s portrayal of John Doe is an uncanny homage to Anthony Hopkins’ turn as Hannibal Lecter. Spacey channels the cannibal, from his cool demeanor to the way he speaks, and it would probably be so noticeable as to be distracting if he made an appearance any earlier in the film (well, an appearance in which we can see him or in which he delivers lines).

I think I’d like to see a sequel or take on this movie in which the Seven Cardinal Virtues are the killer’s inspiration, and he’s not doing it to show the world the error of its ways, but instead to see if it tears itself apart.

But, overall, this was a great movie, and fell perfectly in line with other crime procedural and psychological thrillers of the mid-90s, of which there were many. This one managed to stand out on the merits of its stars and fun ending.

Well, fun unless you're Gwyneth Paltrow.

8 comments:

  1. I love this movie, and despite the fact that it may seem tame twenty-two years later (Chad, we are getting old!), it stood the test of time for me. The look and the feel of the movie are what really get me. It's aesthetically dark and gritty, and I see a twisted kind of beauty in the ambiance.
    Kevin Spacey is fantastic in his role as John Doe. I didn't draw the parallel between him and Lecter, but I can see it now that you mention it. He's so calm and collected. From the moment he's arrested, he makes an impression. I love the discussion in the car about whether or not he's crazy. It's kind of a classic discussion about serial killers in general, especially organized ones like Doe.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I think that John Doe outright saying what his victims symbolized the sin each victim was just as much as the way they died did. For instance, Sloth was written using grim. Gluttony was written using food. Lust was carved into the door much like the knife strap on that was used on the prostitute. The location and the way in which each word was written only served to further the symbolism.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I agree with you that the wording seemed unnecessary. Why go to all the trouble with the symbolism only to title your kill. No matter what he chose to write the words with, I think they were unnecessary and it is like speaking down to everyone. Using the seven deadly sins, you are already assuming you are speaking to a knowledgeable/intellectual crowd that would get it. If not, would your words even help? I don't think so. He is so enigmatic with everything else why make it easy?

    ReplyDelete
  4. I think he could have gone with something subtler, a passage from Dante or the bible, instead of something as obvious as the word itself. He was obviously smart enough to be that poetic.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And the more I think about, the angrier I get. I'm not too stupid to figure it out!

      Delete
  5. I figured he wrote the words to ensure the press spread his message to everyone. The detectives could have figured it out with subtler clues, but that doesn't mean those details would make it to the general public. Or at least not with the impact Doe wanted. Doe wasn't just preaching to the select people at the crime scenes; he wanted to make sure all society got the message. I believe he carefully planned out how to display each word and what substance he chose to write it with to ensure the names of the sins were strongly associated with each murder in the press.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I did watch this film for the first time and that ending completely blew me away because I didn't see it coming at all. I don't know the exact point in time that Doe decided that Mills would be his victim for wrath, but I just thought that his wife just served as a way to make us think "Hey Mills is a great guy!" so that we don't want John Doe to kill him after the chase. So I had no idea it was for the bigger finale.
    Also I think that it would make sense for him to leave those labels to each crime behind because he does want the recognition and he does want to get caught in the end. But after reading this I wonder if he maybe visited the first crime scene afterwards when the police didnt get it, and write it on the wall as a reporter.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I did watch this film for the first time and that ending completely blew me away because I didn't see it coming at all. I don't know the exact point in time that Doe decided that Mills would be his victim for wrath, but I just thought that his wife just served as a way to make us think "Hey Mills is a great guy!" so that we don't want John Doe to kill him after the chase. So I had no idea it was for the bigger finale.
    Also I think that it would make sense for him to leave those labels to each crime behind because he does want the recognition and he does want to get caught in the end. But after reading this I wonder if he maybe visited the first crime scene afterwards when the police didnt get it, and write it on the wall as a reporter.

    ReplyDelete