Co-directed by Lucky McKee and Trygve Diesen (which is slang for McKee got fired for reasons unknown and shooting was completed by someone else....good god will this guy EVER catch a break?) , "Red" couldn't be any more different from the "Death Wish" clone it… More
Co-directed by Lucky McKee and Trygve Diesen (which is slang for McKee got fired for reasons unknown and shooting was completed by someone else....good god will this guy EVER catch a break?) , "Red" couldn't be any more different from the "Death Wish" clone it has been unfairly advertised as being.
To my surprise, the catalyzing event happens very early on in the film. We never get to spend much time with Red, nor do we get much insight into his relationship with his caregiver. Instead, the film very quickly becomes the story of an old man's pursuit for moral justice. He has no desire whatsoever to hurt anyone, he simply wants the perpetrators to apologize and make amends. He isn't even particularly angry so much as he is wounded, hurt. He tries to do the right thing each step of the way, opting to talk to the boys' parents first and foremost, but as each of his attempts is met with ridicule and scorn he is left with precious few courses of action to choose from. Beaten, demoralized and with nowhere to turn he eventually stakes everything on one final, desperate nonviolent plea which he hopes will shock the boys into seeing the error of their ways. The way this scene plays out and everything that follows, for the next 20 minutes, however, are probably the film's biggest weaknesses.
The screenplay is decidedly uneven, combining some strong writing with lazy resources (relying heavily on monologues, including one by Brian Cox that, however well delivered, brings the film to a screeching standstill, giving useless characters like the reporter much bigger roles than they deserve, falling back on genre clichés on occasion to appeal to a target audience) and never more so than during the last 20 minutes. The scenes of violence, however minimalist, are completely out of sorts with the rest of the movie. The epilogue, despite one small, revealing exchange, is far too neat and circular, seeking to provide artificial and unnecessary closure.
Brian Cox delivers a nuanced, understated performance, easily one of his best. There is a sadness in his eyes, and he never fully allows himself to grieve or even express just how much Red meant to him. A single flash of rage, perfectly timed and chosen by Cox at a specific point in the film, allows us a glimpse into the depths of his pain. The fact it is the only such glimpse we get reveals multitudes about the character. It is unquestionably his film and he carries it beautifully.
The rest of the cast is a mixed bag. Tom Sizemore was well cast, but the fact his character, who has an extremely interesting background that is only mentioned in passing, is never developed might be the film's biggest missed opportunity. Everyone else is strong at best and serviceable at worst.
While this isn't 100% Lucky McKee (what percentage he is responsible for I have no idea), he is 3 for 3 thus far. Each of his features have been notable and, most importantly, completely different from one another. Despite his affinity and talent for the genre (and the fact it would very likely get him more contracts), McKee has yet to repeat himself. His position as perhaps the most interesting up and coming genre director only solidifies with each new endeavor and I wish studios would just get out of his way once and for all and let the man work.
*note*
The film is peppered with staple actors from both horror and independent cinema, many of them favorites of mine. I gleefully counted Robert Englund, Amanda Plummer, Kim Dickens, Kyle Gallner (who was so good in Veronica Mars), and an unrecognizable Ashley Lawrence, but no Angela Bettis :( .