FILM: Moseying on through
The Life Of David Gale
I will freely admit to having entered the cinema on this occasion with buttocks clenched and a feeling of queasy uneasiness in my stomach. The Life Of David Gale is directed by preachy, "issue film", British director Alan Parker (The Commitments, Mississippi Burning). It stars the whiny, new Labour lovin’, right-on Kevin Spacey (American Beauty, L.A. Confidential) and uber-luvvie Kate Winslet (erm, Titanic . . .). Oh – and the subject matter is the death penalty. A glance at the surface of this film, then, and any right-minded individual would see cause for the concern. Upon digging a little deeper through the preachy liberal topsoil, however, it soon becomes apparent that this is actually a genuinely watchable 131 minutes of movie.
The film is apparently based on a true story. David Gale (Spacey) is an anti-death penalty campaigner who is sentenced to death for the rape and murder of his co-campaigner and best friend, Constance Harraway (a super-right on, ultra-feminist, well played by Laura Linney). We meet Gale in his prison cell, where he has summoned journalist Bitsy Bloom (Winslet) to give his final interview. The plot essentially involves a run-through in flashback of the crucial events in Gale’s life that led up to his conviction, and follows Bloom’s frantic investigation leading up to his scheduled execution day.
It is the level of acting on display that really carries this film. If the movie had been renamed "The Spacey and Winslet Show", it wouldn’t have been far off; the two eclipse every other actor here. Spacey is undoubtedly one of the greatest film actors ever – his range of emotion is magnificent; from once again unleashing his Kevin Spacey Monotone™ whilst Gale is in prison; to the clichéd handsome, charming philosophy professor, beloved by his students; to a down-trodden drunk; Spacey carries the part well without ever sinking to melodrama. The only flaw with his portrayal is inherent in the part itself: David Gale is a very, very annoying man. He causes his own initial downfall, and is promptly whiny and self-pitying about it up until the murder. One tends to wish that his friends would stop being so compassionate and just give the man a good slap. Still, that’s liberals for you.
Winslet is also excellent, even if her part’s role in the film does resemble one of the more obvious episodes of Columbo. And that is not to compare Winslet to Peter Falk; she does her gorgeous, huge-eyed Winslet emoting to her usual high standard and is generally entirely convincing. Again, her role’s inherent weakness in written into the part; watching her run aimlessly around Texas is rather like watching a fly bat against an ajar window without ever finding a way out. The whole plot is so transparently obvious that Bloom’s failure to work it out immediately is unfathomable.
And this is the weakness of the film overall: you could drive Texas through the holes in the plot, and furthermore, the director might as well have put a little man flashing semaphore at the bottom of the screen, so clearly signalled are the plot twists. Seriously, a half-wit could spot them coming a mile off. What the plot does do well, though, is avoid my much-feared anti-death penalty sanctimony. Despite the fact that I’m against the death penalty personally, I could not have sat through two hours of preaching about it. Fortunately, any points to be made are made subtly for the most part: visually rather than verbally. This is extremely welcome.
One slight criticism is that Parker makes the state overtly the "bad guy", rather than letting the viewer make up his own mind. The prison warders are big old meanies, and their uniforms hint towards dictatorship and jackboots, with the Texas flag frequently prominent. Most irritating is the portrayal of the governor of Texas, who goes up against Gale in a television debate; he’s a rootin’, tootin’, executin’ cliché, who bears an uncanny (and clearly entirely intended) resemblance to a Bush of some kind.
The director makes his point with a jackhammer on occasions, but the whole caboodle is generally tolerable enough. Indeed, the direction is decent; it is obvious that Parker is making an effort; this is no Citizen Kane, but some cute editing and unexpected camera angles are on show, which raise the level of direction above bog standard. That said, the cuts between flashback and present are pseudy in the extreme, and there are a few pointless (if pretty) shots of the Texas sky; these do not detract from the film as a whole, however. The film is well paced after a slightly slow start, and there is no real boredom at all once the main story line kicks in; so many films on release recently (Daredevil and Solaris, to name but two) have had me wanting to shout "Come ON! Hurry up! Get on with the damned plot and stop fannying around!" – the lack of this here is refreshing.
Overall, this is a bearable film, that is entirely carried by the two lead actors. Ignore the gaping plot holes and the occasional sink into sanctimony; ignore the right-on pretentiousness of the majority of characters; one merely has to sit back and enjoy the emoting. There will be no Oscar winners here, but Winslet and Spacey have surpassed themselves with the material available; they are both utterly convincing, and turn this from a slightly below average film into one that is slightly above average.
Andy Fox, March 19, 2003 11:04 AM