Shortly after the first
Molotov cocktail is lobbed, the city is engulfed in flames and fury.
By Ryan Gilbey
Near the end of Detroit,
Kathryn Bigelow’s dramatisation of the riots that tore through that city in
July 1967, a white cop tells the black prisoners he has beaten that they can go
free, as long as they promise never to say anything about what has been done to
them. The film amounts to a concentrated rejection of that demand. It is a
harrowing, relentless and intensely angry movie. As it should be.
After an animated prologue
explaining the clash between civil rights and socio-economic wrongs in America
in the 1960s, the film kicks off properly with heavy-handed white police
raiding an unlicensed late-night shindig celebrating the return of a black
Vietnam veteran. Continuing the hand-held, reportage-style film-making to which
she was first drawn in The Hurt Locker, Bigelow and her cinematographer Barry
Ackroyd (a longtime Ken Loach collaborator) offer a street-level view of how
the riot sparks into life, splicing actual footage from the era into their
bristling reconstructions.
Shortly after the first
Molotov cocktail is lobbed, the city is engulfed in flames and fury. Mark
Boal’s screenplay picks out figures from across Detroit who are caught up in
the violence. The twitchy, sadistic cop Krauss (Will Poulter) is reprimanded
for shooting dead a fleeing looter, then turned back out on the streets with a
loaded gun. Larry Reed (Algee Smith) and Fred Temple (Jacob Latimore), who were
due to perform in a soul revue, duck into the nearby Algiers Motel for safety;
the pink neon shimmering in the green pool promises a pocket of tranquility.
Trouble finds them, though, when cops arrive searching for an unidentified
gunman. Leading the raid is Krauss.
The film’s pivotal figure is
the African-American security guard Melvin Dismukes (John Boyega). His
placatory nature leads him to fall between two stools. The kid whose
persecution by police he helps to avert accuses him of being an Uncle Tom. The
National Guardsmen, to whom he takes a conciliatory pot of coffee, refer to him
as “boy” and ask: “When do you think the Negroes will quit?” He is present
throughout the long central section at the motel, during which the cops
threaten and torture the guests, and it is through his eyes that much of the
horror is filtered. If all you knew about Detroit was its poster image, which
shows Melvin flanked by cops in the melee, you might take him for its defiant
hero. In fact, it is his inactivity and helplessness that make the movie
traumatic.
Boyega’s performance amounts
to one long charged reaction shot with tremors of stifled panic. We look to him
for our emotional cues, and for some promise of intervention, but they don’t
come, which is what renders the film so frightening. Melvin realises too late
that he will pay for trying to play fairly a game that was rigged from the
start – a game in which white men own the board, and all the pieces.
That central section is so
gruelling and tightly-controlled that the remainder of the movie falls apart in
the aftermath. Its focus dissipates (there’s no indication of how or when the
rioting abated) and it limps on through a court case and an epilogue. The
script also falls prey to an overstated sense of irony: a sympathetic cop asks
a bleeding victim “Who could do this to someone?” hardly suspecting it was his
colleagues; a white nurse needlessly advises a black hospital visitor to “be
gentle” around his friend, who has just endured hours of torture.
These flaws can’t dilute the
film’s motivating sense of rage, or its portrayal of racism and machismo as a
kind of state-sanctioned performance. During the opening raid on the bar, a cop
feigns a violent interrogation in a locked room in order to intimidate the
revellers listening outside. That scene is played as nervous comedy but it
returns in monstrously multiplied form at the motel, where suspects are
subjected to mock executions and forced to participate in the frenzied
pantomime until no one knows any more what their roles are. Bigelow’s skill in
maintaining an analytical eye, no matter how inflamed the action becomes, is to
be commended. The film’s continuing, fiery topicality, however, is beyond her
control.
Ryan Gilbey is the New
Statesman's film critic. He is also the author of It
Don't Worry Me
(Faber), about 1970s US cinema, and a study of Groundhog Day
in the "Modern Classics" series (BFI Publishing). He was named
reviewer of the year in the 2007 Press Gazette awards.
No comments:
Post a Comment