|
 om Hanks, he of the scratchy voice and fine comedic
timing, playing a brooding hitman in 1931 Chicago? Impossible! But as it turns
out, not so unthinkable at all. It’s easy to forget that Hanks has played
dramatic roles before (“Philadelphia”) because most people (re: me) associate him
with popular romantic comedies like “Big” and “Sleepless
in Seattle.” Like Jim Carrey, no matter how many awards Hanks eventually wins
for his dramatic works, he'll never be able to escape the films that initially
made him famous. A romantic comedy this ain’t.
“Road to Perdition” stars Hanks as Michael Sullivan,
the ace enforcer for an Irish crime family led by John Rooney (Paul Newman).
Sullivan is forced to flee his second family after his oldest son, Michael Jr.
(Tyler Hoechlin), becomes an accidental witness to a mob execution that Sullivan
is a part of. Despite Sullivan’s assurance that Michael won’t tell anyone,
the impulsive Connor Rooney (Daniel Craig) takes it upon himself to set up
Sullivan and his family to be killed. Angry at the betrayal, Sullivan sets out
to kill Connor, but that means taking on old man Rooney -- a man who Sullivan
sees as a surrogate for his own missing father -- as well as the Chicago crime
syndicate presently headed by Frank Nitti. And in 1930s Chicago, that’s a tall
order!
“Road to Perdition” started life as a graphic novel (an
elaborate form of the comic book), which I have never read, so I have no
comparison to the movie version. But there must have been something special
about the novel for so many talented people to attach themselves to the project.
So why does “Road to Perdition” The Movie feel so…underwhelming?
Perhaps it’s because beyond the great performances by
Hanks, Newman, and Daniel Craig (as the scheming, swarming, and untrustworthy
Connor Rooney) the rest of the film fails to impress or generate much
enthusiasm. That includes the drive of the movie, which follows Sullivan as he
and his surviving son Michael Jr. goes about revenging their deceased family
members.
Of particular note is a middle section where Sullivan and
his son began robbing a series of banks in order to convince Nitti (a very bland
Stanley Tucci) that it’s not in his interest to side with the Rooneys. In that
long interlude, Mendes and writer David Self must have forgotten that Michaels
Jr. and Sr. have just lost the other half of their family in a particularly
vicious manner, that they are presently on the run from the mob, and that a
dangerous killer named the Reporter is still on their tail. How else could you
explain why Mendes would throw in a “comical” soundtrack along with some
supposedly “comedic” moments that turns the Sullivans’ bloody (and doomed)
quest for revenge into a series of airy moments?
A better (and probably more sensible) course of action
might have been to execute the film as a brooding crime drama from start to
finish, thus maintaining the grim and gritty aura from the film’s beginning.
But alas, “Perdition” suffers from an uninteresting storyline that has been
done before. The Japanese manga (comic book) series “Lone Wolf and Cub”
already told the tale of a former Shogun assassin who must flee with his son
after his employer, the Shogun, betrays him. There was even a series of movies
adapting the comic book. (One such movie called "Shogun
Assassin" appeared briefly in the States in the late ‘70s.)
The real (and for all intents and purposes, only) treat of
“Perdition” is the incredible performances by the leads. Hanks is superb as
the brooding hitman who still remembers that he’s just human underneath his
steel exterior. But the best performance belongs to Paul Newman, who plays the
conflicted John Rooney, the mob boss who knows he should side with Sullivan
against his murderous and selfish son, but is simply unable to because of his
blood ties to Connor. Rooney’s anguished soul is laid to bear and Newman’s
grizzled and aged face is nothing short of perfection.
British Jude Law, on the other hand, seems too preoccupied
with trying to maintain an American accent to pay attention to his role. You
could see him struggling with his dialogue, which might explain why his
assassin/reporter character is such a throwaway. Law is grossly out of place,
and although his character is interesting in concept design (besides being a
hired killer, the Reporter is also a credited crime photographer!), Law is not
very convincing. Which means the Reporter’s long pursuit of Sullivan and
Michael Jr. comes across as yet another uninteresting sidetrack from the
movie’s main focus.
Newman and Hanks, who brings a wide range of complexity and
internal angst to their respective roles, overpower the rest of the cast. Even
the usually reliable Stanley Tucci is not very good as the mob enforcer Frank
Nitti. Instead of looking like the assassin that he was in real life, Tucci
plays (and the character is written) as being nothing more than some kind of
bank manager. Mendes manages to coax some good scenes out of young Tyler
Hoechlin (Michael Jr.) but the young man is not up to the task most of the
times. (There is also a glorified cameo by Jennifer Jason Leigh as Sullivan’s
wife that is not worth mentioning.)
If not for the outstanding and burdened performances by
Hanks and Newman, “Road to Perdition” is too uneven to be a good film. The
1930s landscape is nice to look at, but pretty background is a required trait
for any Hollywood-backed movie worth its salt nowadays. Besides, the film’s
1930s backdrop could have been replaced by any number of eras, or countries for
that matter, and the film wouldn’t miss a beat.
It should also be said that besides a couple of gunfights
and a number of executions by gunfire, “Perdition” is not actually an action
movie. It’s violent, but not in the John Woo sense of the word. Actually,
“Perdition” is a pretty straightforward film. Gangster is betrayed, wants
revenge, and gets revenge. Any questions?
|
