Equilibrium

When: 2002, 25th film

Age/Genre: Yeah, we skipped a lot; however, once we reviewed Little Women, we'd tackled almost every genre that Bale went on to explore between the ages of 20 and 28—family, drama, book-related, Shakespeare, musicals (we're saving voice-animation for Howl’s Moving Castle). At this point, #25, Bale’s portfolio becomes more and more action-oriented. Equilibrium is, in fact, Bale's second straight action flick.

Kate says in the world of not-so-strange-coincidence, I’ve written a story, that hopefully will come out this summer, which is the exact mirror of this movie: in my story, future society is all about the over-expression of emotion; people get good grades, jobs, contracts, etc. by crying and shouting and otherwise acting hysterically. My heroine’s problem: the over-emotionalizing “programming” didn’t take.

Which proves (1) that there are only so many ideas out there; (2) I have a proclivity for this type of sci-fi.

I’ve always enjoyed “What if?” sci-fi that asks improbable questions: What if people had no emotion? What if people had too much emotion? What if people could only say the word “if”?

The problem with this type of sci-fi is that it is easy (and fun) to start but incredibly difficult to end. Star Trek: TNG and Star Trek: Voyager would just say, “Oh, our hour is up” which, actually, isn’t the worst way to end this type of narrative.

Which is all to say: the beginning of Equilibrium is fantastic, the middle is “eh” and the ending is, well, um, huh?

Talk about deus ex machinas! (Spoilers follow.) The leader of the underground just happens to be a Messianic figure living right next door? Preston, who has EVERY reason to put the woman first over vague revolutionary ideals, DOESN’T put her first? (I’m not usually in favor of characters betraying their countries for l-u-v but in this case, it totally would have made sense.) The kids suddenly turn out not to be taking the emotionless juice?

The last point bothered me more than the rest. All in all, plot-wise, this is a tidy film (and I’ll get to my absolute favorite part in just a moment). But I really think Preston should have had more investment in those kids. If he is going to start a revolution, what’s he doing it for? So he can feel isn’t enough—he can feel on his own without involving anyone else.

What makes Preston altruistic, what makes Preston willing to slaughter literally hundreds of people? I thought the irony of connecting Preston’s choices to his feelings was clever (and sold the theme that emotion is worth the price), but it isn't enough to explain the enormity of what he does.

Preston does what he is does for a PRINCIPLE—and, well, that’s a whole other problem and a whole other movie.

Anyway, even from a writing point of view, the kids’ behavior needed to be set up more.

My absolute favorite part: how feeling is connected to little things. I love the scene when Preston wakes after not taking his meds and sees the sunlight. I love his humorous response to the dog’s yapping (love that dog!). I love the snow globe. (Beethoven is great, but I really love the globe.) I love Partridge's worn copy of Yeats. I love the “sex scene” with Mary that involves touching fingers. I love Preston rearranging his desk—these minor, beautiful moments are touching and real and sell much (if not all) of the movie's point.

The movie is worth watching. In fact, it is one of the few movies that I’ve seen where I thought, “You know, this would make a really awesome book” (rather than the other way around). It would be fascinating to read Preston’s process of thought/what he is thinking as he changes.

As for the cast: Bale is all grown up and acting fierce. Though the movie is not as good as The Matrix (despite the blurb on the DVD I borrowed), Bale is definitely a better actor than Reeves (not that Reeves isn’t good at doing his thing). The scene where Bale watches his wife getting ready for work is a great example of Bale's ability to transmit emotion without under or overacting: without saying anything, Bale betrays Preston’s longing for his wife, even though at the time the character doesn't understand his own behavior.

And Bale does completely sell the idea that Preston is changing internally. (Not an easy thing to do in a role where the character hardly discusses anything with anyone.)

The rest of the cast is notable. I mean, any movie with Sean Bean . . . Taye Briggs is thoroughly stunning although his character, Brandt, is wretchedly under-utilized. (Agent Smith is paid-off much better.) Emily Watson is my favorite kind of heroine—she doesn’t do much, but everything she does has depth. And I have to give a shout-out to Sean Pertwee (the “face” of Father). I first encountered Pertwee when watching the Brother Cadfael mysteries (he plays Hugh in the first series). As Father, he really sells the intellectual ideas behind the culture.

Unfortunately, Angus MacFayden as Dupont is thoroughly dull; Fichtner would have made a better nut-job with delusions of grandeur; wait, he kind of does!

But, again, Bale is astonishing. After watching him sleep-walk (in a good way) through Little Women, I have to say, action movies really are his forte.

Although next week will change our focus yet again!

Mike says I know the plot has holes. I know that a society such as the one presented in the film would also be problematic and is difficult to represent accurately with actors who CAN feel emotion. The truth is the film is far from perfect, and yet I still enjoy it immensely.

As opposed to your run of the mill small release, Equilibrium tries very hard to be a thinking man’s action flick, making a philosophical argument a little more enjoyable with bad-ass martial arts. Whether or not the film succeeds in this is really up to the viewer

Bale’s performance is strong, moving, and genuine. For me, he really sold his transformation. The film is also a definitive move back to the physical roles he seems to prefer. The only problem with Bale’s performance is that he conveys his emotional discoveries so well that it’s hard to imagine no one picked up on his offense sooner. Fortunately, this is worked into the story itself, with just about everyone knowing what is going on, but each letting Preston get away with it in order to meet their own agendas.

The film really is a fusion between action flick and dystopian drama . . . and the action definitely feels a little shoe-horned in, but it plays enough of a role in the story that it does work. That the action is spectacular helps to hide the odd pairing. While the idea of a martial art based around guns sounds a bit silly at first, it does make a sort of sense: Martial arts are often based around a simple weapon that is easy to get a hold of. In the right society, it would make sense for such a thing to develop.

Between the action and the plot, the success of the entire movie really comes down to Bale. Despite some admittedly significant flaws in the script, Bale’s phenomenal handling of both elevates the entire film.

Bale’s moving portrayal of his emotional journey is masterful, but my favorite scene in the film uses both action and acting. Finally accepted into the sanctuary of Father, Bale is subjected to a polygraph that will reveal him as a sense offender. While hooked to the machine, the main villain’s entire plan, including the manipulation of Preston’s own emotions, is revealed and victory is declared as the villains claim they tricked the hero into surrendering “without incident.”

 Preston is overwhelmed with rage, despair, and sadness to the point of exploding. Instead, the polygraph, which has been recording severe emotion, suddenly deadlines to the horror of the doctors. “No. Not without incident.” And, of course, gratuitous violence ensues.

I really do love this film, despite its flaws. And, to be honest, I desperately needed something to cleanse my pallet of Little Women. Thank goodness for action flicks!