Jake Gyllenhaal in Zodiac
There’s something fascinating to me about film characters who are obsessed.
I find these characters to be admirable, even in a way worth emulating. They also remind me of my own addictive personality with their inability to control what they’re doing -- but of course for them it's not getting high but the pursuit of something important. They care deeply about something in a way that I find almost moving. It makes me want to find my own obsession but a good one — an obsession in pursuit of understanding. Thankfully many obsessive characters are depicted in some really good movies.
Let’s look at some of them.
Jake Gyllenhaal as Robert Graysmith in Zodiac. This is the best example of the obsessed character. He HAS to find out who the Zodiac killer is. This is particularly interesting because he’s not even a detective, no one is paying him to pursue the Zodiac. He gets lured into the case by a cipher the Zodiac has sent to the newspaper where he works. In trying to unlock it he finds he needs to learn more, this was his gateway drug to the unrelenting desire to find the serial killer. His obsession is so great that it ruins his personal life. Graysmith has papers related to the case everywhere. The case consumes him, he neglects family. He bugs the hell out various cops and reporters. He's a goddamned pest. It seems to be all that he can think about. He goes down rabbit holes, barks up the wrong trees. It’s compelling to watch because he’s constantly scratching at the truth, getting closer and closer but never there. Gyllenhaal’s performance is strengthened by the equally good turns by Robert Downey Jr. as the reporter Paul Avery and Mark Ruffalo as detective Dave Toschi. Both of them are interested in finding the Zodiac and pursue the case diligently. But for them it’s a case or a story, not the center of the universe.
Kevin Costner as Jim Garrison in JFK. I’ve gone through long periods of obsession about the Kennedy assassination so this one is easy to relate to. It’s a puzzle with all manner of clues floating around and many false leads. Digging into the Kennedy assassination, even for a regular bloke such as myself, feels IMPORTANT. After all this was the leader of the free world who was killed, and a popular one at that. It may have been a coup d’etat. In the aftermath of the assassination the government tried to sell the American public on a tome full of bald faced lies, half-truths and incredulities with another tome’s worth of glaring omissions. This is a case that demands our attention and needs a few obsessives digging into it. One can have issues with the real Jim Garrison and probably should but there can be no complaints about Costner’s performance. The need to know. The need to use anything/everything at your disposal to get to the truth. Family becomes secondary because everything is secondary to the just cause. You cannot trust anyone else to do it.
Joe Frady as played by Warren Beatty in The Parallax View. One thing that can really trigger an obsession is to have been initially skeptical. Once Frady starts to dig he can’t let go of the shovel. He’s pursuing a possible conspiracy and the mysterious deaths of witnesses to an assassination. He doesn’t just write and report. He gets involved, he becomes part of the story in a way no one normal would want to. He pays the ultimate price for his obsession.
Robert Redford and Dustin Hoffman as Woodward and Bernstein in All the President's Men. Woodstein, as they were called, were different in that they were “just doing their jobs.” It’s easy for a reporter to become obsessed with a story. When the story reaches the highest office in the land then that desire for the truth takes on a special importance. These are two obsessives who we admire and appreciate. They’re professionals who are exercising their skills. They are disciplined and are held to certain standards in their work. Obsessives with supervisors.
Gene Hackman’s Harry Caul in The Conversation. An obsession that culminates in a man tearing up his own apartment. Caul is an especially interesting variation because his obsession is partly defensive. He wants control. He wants privacy. He wants to believe that his responsibility ends with making a recording. Yet the more he tries to establish exactly what happened, the less control he has, culminating in that extraordinary image of him dismantling his own apartment.
Jack Nicholson as Jake Gittes in Chinatown. Jake is a pretty cool customer and evidently a damn good detective, if a somewhat cynical one. But he gets involved in a case that sucks him in. Deeper and deeper. It starts out as proving an extra marital affair and ends up being about graft on grand scale, the making of fortunes and the veritable building of Los Angeles. Gittes doggedly follows the clues. He ultimately learns the truth but also learns that there’s nothing he can do about it. As we’ve seen obsessions often don’t end with truth and justice prevailing.
Steve McQueen as Frank Bullit in Bullit. No one was cooler than Steve McQueen and Bullit might have been his coolest role. Even his obsession in solving a convoluted case (it never really made sense) doesn’t detract from that. He makes obsession look like cool professionalism. He’s clearly a good cop, mostly trying to stay within the rules but nailing the bad guys is a priority that is becoming and being an obsession.
Gene Hackman as Popeye Doyle in The French Connection. Another obsessive cop. Maybe the purest example of one. Doyle simply cannot let his target go. His obsession becomes reckless and morally compromising. The final title card makes the whole pursuit feel almost absurdly futile. Doyle's counterpart Buddy Russo isn't obsessed — which actually makes Doyle's obsession more visible. That's often an effective device in these films. Give the obsessive investigator a partner who knows when it's time to go home.
An interesting note about these characters: how many of them “got their man” or “uncovered the truth”? Other than Woodward and Bernstein, none of them did. However, they mostly got to some truths. Certainly Garrison and Graysmith. They paved the way for others. Gittes knew the truth but there was little he could do with it.
Why don’t obsessive characters enjoy more success? Is it because they’re chasing lost causes? Or do we only enjoy watching these stories if there’s no happily ever after ending? They’re often going up against extremely powerful forces, the odds are stacked against them. Maybe that what makes them so interesting. They’re Davids without a sling taking on Goliaths. You can uncover a lot about the Kennedy assassination but can you find the smoking gun?
I suppose it’s like a lot of things in life in which the journey is what’s most interesting. Especially if you took that trip because — damn it — you really cared.
No comments:
Post a Comment