Murder by Numbers (2002)
It is a real testament to the power and talent
of the young actors involved in this by the numbers
murder drama that the film has anything going for it
at all. The script is infantile and nearly homophobic.
The direction by Barbet Schroeder is careless and lethargic.
And the pacing is so obtuse as to deflate any tension
or interest that the actors have worked to create. Granted,
at times, it seems like star Sandra Bullock just gives
up. She looks bored as fuck in this movie.
The real stars of “Murder by Numbers” are Ryan
Gosling and Michael Pitt (“Hedwig,” “Bully”). Pitt is
one of America’s best new actors and his scenes with
Gosling crackle with electricity. Gosling may do most
of his acting with his nostrils, and it certainly doesn’t
hurt that he is hot as a jalepeno, but he still oozes
talent here.
This film is a rather lame and tired Leopold and
Loeb retelling and I’ll bet the first draft of the script
had the two teen boys as lovers. Whether it was Hollywood’s
homophobia or producer Bullock’s good sense that made
this idea subjugated to homoeroticism is anyone’s guess.
It could have even been the actor’s own insight (or,
I suppose, some scriptwriter’s). Regardless, the homosexual
element between Gosling and Pitt is subjugated here
and this makes their scenes bristle with goose-pimply
curiosity. (Hence the name Gosling? hehe…) The script,
wisely, gives Pitt a female love interest here to help
spin the plot into an almost bisexual love triangle.
The idea presented here is that the boy’s love
is a shared interest in crime (a distilling of the plot
in Hitchcock’s “Rope”). The murder they commit (and
it’s never hidden that they are the killers) is almost
an act of intellectual love posing as metaphoric sex.
The fact that they must hide their crime (i.e. their
love) after the fact only propels this metaphor. Gosling
and Pitt portray these characters with the finesse of
thespians three times their age. Their new millennium
take on this idea does make the film realistic and fresh
most of the time.
But poor Sandy. I don’t know whether she thinks
its proper to play her character as a frazzled and tired
bore or whether she simply gives up here. Her character’s
arc is flaccid and her final dramatic twist is contrived.
She seems to be playing her character from “Miss Congeniality,”
only older and more bored. Her scenes with the unattractive
and humdrum Ben Chaplin (he’s no Benjamin Bratt) are
as boring as the heterosexual love they portray. Perhaps
that’s what Bullock was going for here. The humdrum
boredom of heterosexuality contrasted against the vibrant
and tingly excitement of youthful homoeroticism!
Nah, probably not.
Director Barbet Schroeder doesn’t help matters
much. The director seems to be as bored as the star.
In addition to the elongated pacing, puffing the story
out to 2 hours, there is also the rather crappy matte
shots and obvious bluescreen effects. It’s as if no
one over 30 here really cares. In many ways, this makes
“Murder by Numbers” a real drag. But, if nothing else,
watching Pitt act and Gosling flare his nostrils is
worth the price of admission.
Note:
Also with Chris Penn.
Score by Clint Mansell.
During production, the film was known as “Foolproof.”
This is the third film since 1990 with the title “Murder
by Numbers.”
At one time, Rob Reiner was considered for the
director’s chair.
So far, this film gets my vote for worst poster
of the year.
|
Report
Card
Script:
B-
Acting: A-
Cinematography\Lighting: A+
Special Effects\Make Up: D+
Music: B+
Final
Grade: B
|
And
Help Support Filethirteen!
Get
Your "Murder by Numbers" Stuff...
|
More
of Lodger's reviews indexed alphabetically! Just
click your favorite letter to go there.
a
b c
d e
f g
h i
j k
l m
n o
p q
r s
t u
v w
x y
z
HOME
|
|
