Friday, January 29, 2010

The Messenger B-

2009, In theatres, Rated R
In Oren Moverman’s directorial debut, Iraq War movie The Messenger, he manages to line-up A- talent for his stars and supporting players and coaxes fine performances out of them all. Unfortunately the script he co-wrote is a mess, and the film, which starts off steadily enough, veers wildly off course at about the 45-minute mark. The remaining hour is a series of individually compelling scenes that seem to have no cohesion between them or little link to what’s gone before.

Ben Foster (the guy with the blue eyes in 3:10 to Yuma) stars as returning war hero Will Montgomery who is asked to serve out his time representing The Secretary of War to the next of kin for the Army’s dead. He’s met at the plane by his ex-girlfriend (Jena Malone), who’s got herself a new man in his absence, but still feels compelled to give him a welcome-home-bonk. Woody Harrelson’s Tony Stone is assigned to be his partner and to show him the ropes. Initially, the film consists of these notifications, with most families reacting violently or hysterically to the news. These scenes are gut-wrenching at first before becoming a bit formulaic. Stone has rules in place to keep himself emotionally and physically distant from the next of kin, which Montgomery follows for awhile, eventually electing a more personal approach. Samantha Morton is one such grieving widow Foster reaches out to. What begins as kindness quickly evolves into something more complex. Unfortunately, at about this juncture, the recovering alcoholic Stone falls off the wagon, as does the film. What follows is a seemingly endless set of alcohol-fueled scenes, from Foster’s ex-girlfriend’s engagement party, to a run-in with some frat boys at a lake, to Foster’s decision to seduce Morton, to a tearful coming-to-terms with the past for both soldiers.

A number of things about the film work. The decision to show war through the eyes of these messengers is novel and works well for awhile, mainly because Moverman resists the urge to blame the military for the deaths. Foster is a marvel, more then holding his own with Harrelson, who nicely walks the line between straight nuts and stressed-out soldier. Samantha Morton as a grieving widow gives the best performance of the film. Unfortunately, this is partially wasted because she is now 5 years and 20 pounds wrong for the role. It’s impossible to believe that Foster, a young, muscled-out war hero would fall hard for an over-weight, older mother. It pains me to write that in that I love Morton, but it’s simply not believable in the film. The issues explored, in particular the place of women and alcohol for returning soldiers and the inability of battle-scarred soldiers to form and keep meaningful relationships, are interesting if unevenly covered. Ultimately, though, this one feels like a good 45-minute short-film with another 60 minutes tacked on to get it in the theatre. Interesting but not must-watch territory. B-

2 comments:

Lawyer said...

I am surprised at your grade for this. Still looks interesting - you should rent Taking Chance (reviewed last year by Doc) to compare - very similar subject matter.

Priest said...

you probably ought to watch it. i thought B- was a bit generous.