in appearance, Harry Brown reactionary film has everything that is quick to label the sordid movies gallery xenophobic tendencies. It is true that the plot of this film has something urban avenger feed logorrhea incendiary: a grandpa, a former soldier in the British army who officiated in Ulster, decided to eradicate terror with terror after the assassination of his best friend by a gang of youths.
avengers, the cinema has seen a gaggle. Charles Bronson Clint Eastwood Kevin Bacon through the characters of men who have battered confidence in the coercive institutions of the state have always had the blank stare of those who have nothing to lose. Also recently, it was the birthplace of the kind of vengeance fun and funny ... It will explain what is more "fun" in the discourse of reactionary Kick Ass that in this of him Inspector Harry ... Color tights may be ... Harry Brown, himself, has lost wife and friend. He is left with a knot in my stomach when he leaves his apartment and cry tears for those he loved. His memories as a soldier, he was buried, buried far in his head.
And unlike these terminators bone and flesh, the character played by Michael Caine is filled with painful indolence. His charisma is hiccuping, tainted by his age and illness. The crafty cockney interpreter also well with this old man who resembles him a bit. He who was gang member, then military in Korea, comes with a sentence seems sincere, a sad look at what happens to neighborhoods where he grew up.
Nobody will question the dignity of the character of Sir Michael Caine, even if all its flaws make it a true hero almost too innocent. This certainly shocking, this is highlighted deep as a notch, a generation gap that seems to have no substance. Papy trigger p'tits cons cons basically a moped. A song that everyone knows, we have often seen and which supplies the mainstay of sociological debates counter.
And Daniel Barber does not lace when he portrayed the youth at bay, who Crame, steals, kills without mercy or discernment, without emotion and without the slightest notion of good and evil. The opening scene is rather eloquent. The scenes of rioting in the city have a particular resonance. One thinks of Villiers le Bel, Sarcelles ... In this violent mobilization and ulcerated appears as incomprehensible when you do not have the codes and issues. Yet no question of making a parallel between here and there, the context does not really allow.
Harry Brown, despite his faults, is not simply vengeful movie liberator. Firstly because it appears more like a cry of urgency slump in the social and urban neighborhoods also experienced poor in Britain than as an insurance and violent desire to kill the young to restore calm. The film denounces this avalanche of violence worthy of an apocalyptic movie and sometimes a western, and questions on both the receipt of legitimate violence of the state as the latter's inability to offer a different future for these young English "ethnic". Because yes, it is not about ethnicity. Young people are what is more British in the name and facies (read an article by Rue89 on film), thus replacing the axiom "foreign poorly integrated / violence exacerbated" by a more subtle "social relegation / violent despair / crime and rejection of traditional values."
Secondly, because the beautiful sky that rises at the end of the film is a bitter blue and less hopeful than it appears. This revenge killing and the riots that have changed the neighborhood, certainly, but for how long? And that really served this bloodbath? If the climate seems more serene, the social status of residents has not changed and remains total destitution. Nearly Everything, remains to be done, Mister Brown.
0 comments:
Post a Comment