Gods and Governors

A film review and analysis by
BlackEye

A Case for "David Gale"

Alan Parker puts his penchant for directing entertaining films, while also engaging in strong social and political commentary, to good use here. All sides of the death penalty issue are in for criticism, as is the media, politics-as-usual, and a generally under-informed public at large. Kevin Spacey provides a complex, flawed antagonist; a role that he has honed to perfection from "The Usual Suspects" to "American Beauty." Kate Winslet is an excellent choice as the take-no-prisoners journalist with old-fashioned, "protect-your-sources" principles. Laura Linney seems incapable of a less-than-perfect pitch performance, especially in this difficult role, as she takes more risks during this Texas twister than the irrepressible Kathy Bates did in 'About Schmidt.' The rest of the cast is well selected, with an especially creepy performance by Matt Craven and the perfunctory snake-like sothin' lawyer done with panache by Leon Rippy. The screenplay by Charles Randolf II, his first, has so much to say about so many things that it is to Mr. Parker's credit that he makes such a complex, multi-leveled script into such a fun ride. Exquisitely tight editing by Gerry Hambling helps with the twists and turns. Michael Seresin sets a first-rate tone with the cinematography. As usual, Mr. Parker puts together a soundtrack that works on every level, continuing his commitment to excellent music.

Going by the trailers, ads, and many error-prone film reviews, it would be a mistake to infer that this film is only about capital punishment. The issue is used as the backdrop for commenting, sometimes demonstrating a fabulously acerbic wit, on many other issues. There is a lot going on in this fast-paced mix of traditional narrative told in flashback and stream of consciousness onslaught. Some other political issues addressed: infighting within organizations, even those on the "liberal" side, faculty loyalties and ambition, faculty-student entrapments including a "Story Telling" moment, the small world of academia and political correctness on campus, blue states versus red states done in broad strokes, the manipulations within longtime friendships, the politics of marriage, divorce and child custody, and even the conflicts of Goth capitalism. Media controversies including: paying for big stories, protecting sources, even when the sources are "bad guys," the politics of which journalist "owns" the story, office gender politics, and the role media has in affecting social change. The film even touches on the right to control one's own destiny in choice of death.

Finally, it is a story of a proud man, putting himself in checkmate at the hands of checkers players and by the ravages of alcoholism. The film is a reminder that alcohol abuse is a stupid habit to get into, but not a pursuit practiced solely by the stupid. In a cruel irony though, president-select Bush still carries the scars of alcohol abuse and he has his shaky hand on the button. Yikes! In Gale's less star-crossed case, the way out is not an easy path and redemption can be an expensive ordeal in more ways than one. In the end, Gale is one Texas poker player forced to play the hand he dealt himself while choosing to call his own bluff. Unusual suspects, usual results. No matter what you bring into this film, you should still be provoked enough to reconsider some of your assumptions. If you don't, just remember, in Texas, that's a hangin' offense.

The Case Against David Gale

A TV is "borrowed" from a motel room that was on a lock shelf, rendering the scene implausible. It could have been fixed by simply having the resourceful intern, Zack (Gabriel Mann) pick the lock and smile "tricks of the trade." A cheap 20-second fixer.

Lance Armstrong, on a training ride, didn't swoop in and put Kate on the back of his Trek tandem while she was running down the road with a tape and fly into the scene in front of the prison at 62 kilometers per hour. Now that would have been a cool cameo!

A Case Agin' George W. Bush and Other Lackeys

While the story surrounding the death penalty case of 'David Gale' may seem absurd to the budding rationalist, naiveté must be surrendered when one considers how many equally or more absurd cases have occurred during any generation's lifetime and how many mistakes have landed people in prison for long sentences and, yes George, even wrongful death. The following is but the tip of the iceberg.

One clue to the disingenuous nature of prison systems was the sign on the wall that 'David Gale's' reporters pass on their way through the halls of death row: "Correctional Facility." Ask 'born-again,' rehabilitated Karla Fay Tucker about the validity of that moniker. If anyone was rehabilitated, it was she. But, she's dead. As governor, Bush, by law, was basically "powerless" to stay her execution, but he never once tried to influence the deadliest state to correct itself, and he vetoed a bi-partisan bill to establish a review board. Is there any word from the White house on the irrationality and revocation of the death penalty? He has bigger fish to fry. Iraqi enchiladas. Absurd.

The nominally conservative little Sunday throw-in "Parade" ran a story last week (Feb. 23, 2003) about one Ray Krone. He was sentenced to death for sexual assault and killing an acquaintance based on dental records, a discredited form of evidence in most jurisdictions. His community character was in far better social standing than David Gale's but he too was made to wear DR on the back of his jumpsuit. Set free 10 years later by DNA evidence, (after spending a lot of a rich cousin's cash) he is a prime example of "the system working," according to the likes of Bush and other ignoramuses, like his replacement Rick Perry. Absurd.

Perry thinks a fellow Republican's (former IL Gov. George Ryan) decision to put the death penalty on moratorium is a sign of a lack of leadership. According to Michael King, news editor of the Austin Chronicle, in a piece published in the Los Angeles Times on Feb. 25, 2003, Texas just executed a man after the case against him was debunked by a team of volunteers. Perry stands behind the state. King say's it's not just a Texas thing, it's a southern thing and a political thing. Red meat in the red states. But, since the lone star state leads the confederates in death sentences, it is where the battle over the death penalty is fought. By the way, the current Governor also thinks it's appropriate to execute the mentally retarded. That's absurd.

A few months ago, Frontline presented the case of Ralph Tortorici, a mentally ill man's tragic story of miscarried justice. Absurd. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/crime/ralph/

While watching 'David Gale,' some might conclude that brainless George is actually portrayed as smarter than he actually is, by a similarly arrogant smirking eel reveling in the revenge of the "lord." Arguing that no innocent executed person can be found, he ignores the fact that dead folks don't get retrials or Barry Scheck as an attorney. As long as the bible supersedes math and science, justice will not prevail. The reverend Bush and his acolyte John Ashcroft prove on a daily basis that it will be a cold day in hell before justice is given over to the rational minds in America. That's more than absurd.

The Case Against David Gale by Most Reviewers

The overwhelming majority of professional reviewers panned this film. While they all have their own reasons, there are some predominant predilections at work here.

Ever vigilant, many deduce the film must be a stinker because Universal pulled it from the holiday releases and relegated it to February. They knew something must smell foul. It tries to be noble, but in an ignoble way.

Thus warned, the main thrust of their disdain is aimed at Alan Parker, not the subject, followed by the writing. Most agreed that this was just another screed, in the manner of most of his previous films that trashed serious social issues. It was noted more than once that he was merely an ex-adman that hailed hyperbole as sacrosanct. He shamelessly proselytizes his point of view, from his soapbox, without subtlety, mostly to the choir. He condescends and has contempt for his audience. He's heavy-handed, smug, and obvious. It's dour and sour filmmaking. It's a glorified snuff film. It makes all activists look like crazed zealots. It's too rightwing. It's too liberal. It's too long.

The story was trashed for giving away the ending long before the finale, a rental car dying at a crucial moment, being preachy and moralizing, prejudicial and one-sided. It is accused of dissing Texas. It's a silly story, bullying, crude, facile, and unintentionally funny. It's convoluted, confounding, counterproductive, self-congratulatory, and confusing. It has too many red herrings. It's no "Dead Man Walking."

Many fault Spacey for making yet another poor choice in roles and that his act is getting on their nerves. In an interview, he wouldn't take a stand on the issue, which is disingenuous. He's still trying to be Jack Lemon. He's sanctimonious, smug and self-important. Some evidenced finding fault with the film was due to Kate Winslet's character being named "Bitsey." Others thought Laura Linney was over the top and inconsistent. She has cellulite and she's homely. How could any of these fine actors have gotten into this mess after reading the script? Maybe they need new agents.

Not much was said about the rest of the production except for the flashing words and graffiti, which were lambasted for artiness. It's horrible, dirty, disingenuous, unentertaining, time wasting and against all mankind. It's beneath contempt. Most of all, it's a polemic and unfair to Bush, Texas, and America itself.

A Case Against the Reviewers Case Against David Gale

Evidently, thus put on notice that the studio marketing mavens (who usually get lambasted) gave it a vote of no confidence, these protectors of film integrity were ready to write off this film before they saw it. Not a very objective way to view a film.

The story was not confusing to a reasonable viewer; you needed to pay attention and not be on your cell phone. Parker entertains and provokes. Who says a film can't take a point of view or 3 points of view. The intelligent story and execution is only an affront to the emotionally insecure. The so-called red herrings were actually non-linear, dimensional rants. Spacey's drunken sidewalk riffs were far better than anything Dennis Miller has done in a decade.

Who says you can't make fun of pompous, idiotic, illegitimate politicians? Heavy handed? Yeah, better to make a lightweight film about the death penalty? No debate? Yeah there was. But, intellectually this debate was over long ago. There is not much more to say to the evolved and the informed. Any stats thrown in were for the young.

What film school teaches that subtlety is required in any serious "message" film. Who says there was a message in this film? This movie didn't condescend, it laughed with the erudite audience at the absurdity of the death penalty and other inequities in life. In fact, it did the opposite of spoon feed the viewer; it was almost stream of consciousness in parts and the makers respected that the sophisticated viewer would stay with it.

ASSumptions of what the director and writer were trying to say??? The movie poked fun at the two traditional "sides" of the debate, but it also implied that there are plenty of delusional believers who muddy the debate with their inane religious tenets. The crowd scenes near the end rang true to all of the live televised scenes I've seen. Most activists tend to be a little out of the mainstream right or left. The fact that some reviewers complained that it was too one way and others too the other way means Parker probably got it just about right.

Figuring out the answer to "who dunnit" isn't the only dimension to this film. It's how, when, where and why as well. Consider that Gale was determining his own death. He was tired of his life and had basically given up. This was his chance at redemption. Bitsey wasn't supposed to get to the prison in time. The car breakdown only affected her version of the truth at the time. Gale was going down because Gale wanted to go down. He was a con and he played her. Bitsey wasn't ditsy. She did her job well, which is why Gale picked her. The fuss over the car trouble is beside the point. Even so, you might consider that we all have driven with a red light on the dash and have taken our sweet time to address it. Not all are immediate warnings. Her time was short. Besides, Dusty was lurking as they exited his "homestead" and could easily have sabotaged the car at that time. He even grinned when they got in the car. Anyone who thought giving the tape(s) to the authorities at that stage would have produced a different outcome doesn't know the Texas judicial system, including Bitsey.

As far as charges that this was a glorified snuff film, think again. It showed a death sentence being carried out, just not the one that was expected. This was simultaneously a riff on the right to assisted death of a terminal patient. Oh my, another red herring…

Irony in Gale being charged with the rape and murder of Hallaway? It wasn't to the astute viewer because the story was clear about his innocence; the "irony" is that the prosecutors (unvisited in the film) didn't see the inanity. Consider the prosecutors on the Tortorici case if you don't think it's about winning instead of justice.

The bogus charge of making all Texans look like rednecks? Uh, Gale, and Hallaway were Texans. Hello? People on both sides during this film were Texans. The Goth girl was Texan. Barbara Jordan was Texan. Lance Armstrong is Texan. I think the audience is smart enough to know which Texans were revulsive. The Prison liaison was bright and witty. Bitseys' Starbucks complaint put big city folks and corporations in a dim light, not Texas. The treatment of Texas was fair and balanced.

Criticizing Spacey for being too intelligent, for looking down on the name "Bitsey," and complaining about Linney's cellulite about sums up the quality of the criticisms. Sounds like churlish, childish, insecurity.

While the case of cash in the hands of the intern might seem absurd, consider the amount paid to Michael Jackson for his "story." Isn't it possible, that one of his demands may have been to have the payola delivered by 11 year-old triplets? In a world of Rupert Murdoch journalism, oddities like these aren't just possible, they're probable.

The bottom line: this was a fun romp. It was intellectual, not emotional. Just because the characters cry, doesn't mean the audience is supposed to as well. I must have missed the opening titles where it said "Dead Man Walking II, the Sequel." The fact that so many intelligent reviewers reacted so strongly to the film is evidence in of itself that it is thought provoking and relevant.

A Case Against the Reviewers

I am sure it's no picnic to see more than a hundred-fifty films a year, year in and year out, while having to take notes and dissect them. But, to reduce the process of film review to emotional diatribes instead of rational discourse is a disservice to the filmgoer. Taking biases into a film, and then frothing, 'I knew it!' is not fair either. If a reviewer really dislikes a director, or writer, or actor, maybe they should recuse themselves from reviewing that film. There are always plenty of films that need reviewing.

What school teaches a film reviewer to use the terms "we're", or "us" when discussing the reviewer's own reaction to parts of films??? Sounds psychotic to me.

It's one thing to tell a reader/listener how the critic felt about a film and give references to like experiences, but to prattle on about what happens and whether it's smart when the reviewer doesn't get the story is arrogant.

Complaining that the filmmaker is cramming their point of view down the viewer's throat while the reviewers are telling the reader/listener how to think about a film seems a bit disingenuous and hypocritical.

That said, most of the time, when an overwhelming majority of reviewers agree on a film, good or bad, they are right. Unfortunately, this is one of those "other" times, when a film seemed to go beyond their intellect or pushed too many emotional buttons, rendering them analytically inept. For whatever reason, they collectively dropped the ball. Texans take their football very seriously and don't think right well of sloppy fundamentals.

Remember, after all of the reviewers' histrionics, it's only a movie! The best one released so far this year.

Copyright by T R Black 2003