Review: The Ledge
Terrence Howard is a Catholic cop with marital troubles who is called
upon to talk down a possible suicide jumper (Charlie Hunnam) from a tall
building. Hunnam is a slick hotel manager and apparent atheist, and the
predicament he finds himself in has something to do with his fundamentalist
Christian neighbours (Patrick Wilson and Liv Tyler), as he spills his guts to
the admittedly distracted cop. Old Testament-loving Wilson apparently confuses
Hunnam and his gay roommate for a couple (and finds it disgusting), and wants
to pray for their souls. In reality, Hunnam actually has designs on shy and
sweet-natured Tyler (who seems far less judgemental than Wilson) and sets about
romancing her. Is he just trying to stick it to Wilson or is he genuinely hot
for her? And just how in the hell does any of this result in Hunnam wanting to
kill himself? You’ll have to watch to find out, but suffice to say, Hunnam
isn’t your average suicide jumper. In fact, he rather looks like he doesn’t
want to be up there at all.
Written and directed by Matthew Chapman (writer of “Consenting Adults”,
“Colour of Night” and “Runaway Jury”), this 2011 drama/thriller
has fine performances and brings up lots of potentially interesting ideas about
religion/faith, atheism, tolerance, infidelity etc. In particular it seemed to
suggest that neither atheists nor religious fundamentalists are necessarily
blessed with a happy existence. For instance, the characters played by Liv
Tyler and Patrick Wilson appear to be the types who have sought religion as a
means of getting over personal demons, and the interference in their lives and
marriage by cynical atheist Charlie Hunnam seems to disturb the peace and
stability that religious faith might well have brought this married couple. So
there’s the suggestion that they have sought religious enlightenment (and each
other, for that matter) for the wrong reasons, perhaps. Interesting stuff, on
paper. In actuality, the film is a complete botch-job, with no likeable
characters whatsoever (they’re all caricatures) and everything has been
entirely overblown to the point where even an atheist like me feels sorry for
fundamentalist Christians being portrayed as such rudely judgemental (not to
mention slightly psycho) people. I mean, Wilson’s character seems to genuinely
believe the world is an awful, evil and diseased place, surely not typical of
those with faith. That’s just not playing fair, and making the atheist
character a self-righteous jerk doesn’t make things ‘fair and balanced’,
either, just even more heavy-handed and caricatured (though it must be said, at
least Wilson does hospital visits and missionary work, he does have admirable qualities). I didn’t like Hunnam’s atheism
stemming from a personal tragedy, either. That’s too easy, and doesn’t speak
for all atheists, as I can attest to.
These characters aren’t characters, they’re mouthpieces for the
writer/director.
Although perhaps the most interesting characters in the film, the scenes
between Howard and Hunnam don’t even work. As fine as Hunnam is the rest of the
time, he doesn’t seem remotely stressed enough to be in his situation, and
Howard (who also produced) is burdened by stupid moments where he has to leave
Hunnam for a bit to take a phone call. He’s got a possible suicide jumper and
he leaves him periodically! How fucking lousy is he at his job? That was just
ridiculous and the whole framing device was hokey and unconvincing.
I’m not even sure what Chapman was really getting at here, ultimately. I
mean, a scene at the end with Howard and his family suggests Chapman is making
some kind of statement about the overall importance of the family unit, but I’m
not so sure about that. Maybe it’s about not playing with fire unless you want
to get burned, but then how does the Howard character tie into that? I’ve heard
Chapman is an atheist and the portrayal of the Wilson character might suggest a
bias, but again, I’m not sure what exact point he’s trying to make.
Furthermore, there’s at least one big plot contrivance revealed towards the end
that if brought up earlier, could’ve saved characters (and the audience) an
awful lot of trouble.
These social dramas (“Crash”, “Little Children”, etc.)
aren’t really my favourite kind of film, but this one’s pretty bad, despite
fine work by Hunnam and especially the sweet and charismatic Tyler (Wilson is
his usual vanilla self, and not helped by a one-dimensional character) who has
rarely seemed so vulnerable as she does here, especially the more you find out
about her character.
There’s the kernel of an inspired and fascinating idea here, but Chapman
has cocked it up. Then again, at least it’s better than his screenplay for “Colour
of Night”, so maybe I should look at things as glass half-full. Wait, no,
that movie had lesbians, and lesbians are awesome. Sorry, this one’s a mess.
Rating: C-
Comments
Post a Comment