Running Time: 1 hour, 44 minutes
Rating: R
Director: John Madden
Quick Impressions:
As the opening credits rolled, I found it fascinating that Matthew Vaugn wrote the screenplay because I wasn’t aware that he wrote things he didn’t direct. When I got home, I checked to make sure it was the same Matthew Vaugn (i.e. the director of Stardust, Kick Ass, and X-Men: First Class). Apparently, it is, and everything else he’s written, he’s directed. Cool. Jane Goldman and Peter Straughan also wrote the screenplay.
I knew little about the film going in, so I kept asking myself, Is this fiction or non-fiction? The interpersonal drama and fractured storyline felt very much like elements in a post-modern novel. Still, something seemed vaguely true about the story of three young Mossad agents in 1966 attempting to capture the Surgeon of Buchenwald in West Berlin to bring him to Israel to stand trial for war crimes. I really thought that I’d heard of a “Butcher of Buchenwald” before, but some light online research tells me that I was probably thinking of Dr. Hans Eisele who was actually brought to trial.
This story is fictional, and the movie is a remake of an earlier Israeli film, Ha-Hov. Doing all this “research,” I also discovered that the movie was originally supposed to be released last December but was delayed because of a complication with the distributor. That answers the question of why on earth a film of this quality was dumped into theaters at the very end of August (a strange time to see anything of real promise).
The Good:
Character driven, The Debt for the most part succeeds because of the strength of the performances by a talented group of actors, most notable among them Jesper Christensen who becomes a conduit for evil as the quietly monstrous Dieter Vogel and Jessica Chastain who appeared from nowhere to steal scenes in every movie of the late summer and early fall.
Of course, Helen Mirren, Tom Wilkinson, and Ciaran Hinds are magnificent in any movie, but they don’t have as much screen time as the younger actors. Despite being central to one genuinely shocking moment in the movie (the one that made the audience jump and gasp), Hinds has almost nothing to do but stand around and provoke a reaction from other actors (and vehicles).
Rachel is the most sympathetic figure in the film, the one through which the audience experiences most of the story, and Chastain creates such a strong character that we can easily transfer our investment in Chastain to Mirren when she takes over as the older Rachel. With Wilkinson and Hinds, it is not as easy. Mirren becomes the most successful member of the older cast simply because she has the most screen time and the best part.
Narrative breaks sometimes work to the film’s detriment, I think, since the energy comes from the momentum the movie builds during the uninterrupted sequences. The young cast and Christensen as Vogel are fascinating to watch, and I think the movie might not lose much if the story did not continue beyond the portion that occurs in the past. Of course, without the scenes set in 1997, the story would lack a kind of complexity. More importantly, it would lack Helen Mirren, and that would be a real shame.
Best Action Sequence:
It’s hard not to single out Rachel’s last visit to the gynecologist as the most riveting action scene in the film. Without exception, Rachel’s consultations with obstetrician “Dr. Bernhardt” are riveting and provide the most memorable and terrifying moments of the movie. Long before any “action” happens, suspense begins to build. The milieu of the office becomes increasingly creepy and saturated with horror with each new time Rachel sits in the chair and submits to the doctor’s treatment. I don’t know any woman who finds a gynecological exam a delightful treat. Getting probed by a doctor is bad enough! I don’t know how Rachel has the nerve to endure the examinations by a man she knows to be a Nazi war criminal who tortured innocent people in the name of science. Watching these scenes convinced me that I could never be a Mossad agent. My lack of Krav Maga skills aside, I do not have Rachel’s courage. I turn into a nervous wreck just trying to make it through a routine pap smear without screaming like a dolphin!
I really don’t know how she musters that kind of courage. Any future mis-steps should be forgiven in light of what Rachel endures in that doctor’s office for the sake of her country. Seeing the last visit end in the manner it does is enormously gratifying (though nerve-wracking enough in its own way).
Best Scene:
Since I’ve already raved about the particularly effective poignancy of the scenes set in Dr. Bernhardt’s office, I’ll single out the scene in which Vogel provokes David to violence. Jesper Christensen gives such an amazing performance as Vogel. Of course, he has the best part. Playing evil is such a rewarding challenge, and Christensen rises to it masterfully. The man’s eyes seem to radiate viciousness, even when he pretends to be kindly. Clearly even bound and disarmed, the doctor still finds a way to torture his victims and takes great delight in watching them suffer. His uncanny insights about David and his character flaws make Vogel a shrewd torturer who uses his demented cleverness to return himself to a position of power.
Best Surprise:
I don’t think that the light plot twist that occurs at the end of the long flashback to 1966 is really much of a surprise to anyone paying attention at the beginning of the movie. But I will say that what happens to David (briefly played by Ciaran Hinds) just after Tom Wilkinson’s Stephan addresses him for the first time in the film seemed to take the entire audience by surprise.
Best Scene Visually:
Certainly the most effective use of images is the juxtaposition of Rachel’s viewing of the concentration camp photographs in the scene just before her first visit to Dr. Bernhardt.
The Performances:
Jesper Christensen is brilliant as Dieter Vogel. It’s as if the actor has scooped out all of his own personality and allowed himself to be filled with a flickering evil, the way candlelight illuminates the shell of a jack o’lantern. He’s wonderful and owns every scene he’s in.
Jessica Chastain is equally marvelous as Young Rachel. The scenes Christensen and Chastain share feel so real and yet so surreal, like a horrible nightmare you can’t will yourself to wake from. I haven’t seen The Tree of Life, and I look forward to Take Shelter, but based on the two performances I have seen—Celia Foote in The Help and Rachel in The Debt—Chastain has tremendous talent.
Helen Mirren has a real challenge playing the older Rachel. Chastain makes the character so real and so much her own that the audience becomes attached to Chastain’s version of Rachel. Mirren, however, is a wonderful actress, too, and her Rachel Singer is just as watchable, just as strong and as vulnerable as Chastain’s. The end of the story is a bit weak from a narrative point of view, but Mirren’s performance is strong and keeps the movie watchable right until the credits roll.
Martin Csokas is also very good as Young Stephan. He has a wonderful energy, a kind of savage determination that is more exciting to watch when it comes with the strength and youth that Csokas provides. Stephan is dangerous and driven, but these qualities make him a valuable ally as well as a threatening enemy.
Stephan’s dark side increasingly comes to define him, until he settles into a kind of corrupted ruthlessness by the time Tom Wilkinson takes over the character. Wilkinson won my heart and my loyalty forever when he so brilliantly portrayed Michael Clayton’s Arthur Edens, the bipolar lawyer who brings truth to the oft-quoted phrase “just because you’re paranoid doesn’t mean they’re not out to get you.” Wikinson’s performance here is very good, but the character has more to do when being portrayed by Csokas.
Sam Worthington is very compelling as Young David. Worthington has very emotive eyes and does a lot without saying much at all. Unfortunately, when he does speak, he often accidentally detracts from his moving silent performance because his accent keeps slipping very conspicuously. I kept wondering, Is Worthington’s accent noticeably less convincing than the others’ because when he slips, he slips into a very pronounced Australian accent? That’s entirely possible. Perhaps the others lose their accents just as often, but their ordinary speech patterns don’t distract me the way Worthington’s Australian accent does. It keeps creeping into his voice, especially when he’s speaking softly. Still, he gives a very good performance, making David a wonderfully sympathetic character.
Ciaran Hinds has very emotive eyes, too. Good thing. He doesn’t get much to say but still manages to give a solid (though brief) performance as the older David.
The Negatives:
I found the ending of the movie a bit less than satisfying. The Debt is definitely a film that makes you think about crime and punishment, sin and atonement, vengeance and justice. Sometimes evil leaves a blot on the past so indelible that no amount of justice can erase it. Goodness doesn’t really leave an impression, and neither does badness, because it’s always overshadowed by that great evil, reaching out and coloring the future with its horrific shadowy fingers.
When you begin with the kind of crimes against humanity that took place at Buchenwald, does it really matter if someone told a lie? Does it really matter who’s in love with whom or who’s pregnant with whose child or what? The character of Rachel seems like a woman forced to suffer again and again for evil that was not of her doing.
I think the interpersonal conflict between the characters is less interesting than the conflict between the Mossad agents and the genocidal Nazi torturer, so the last act of the film is sort of anti-climactic for me.
I kept wondering, Why is Rachel doomed to this life of torment? What has she done to deserve such feelings of guilt? David, who lacks agency, and Stephan, who lacks integrity, force Rachel take responsibility for Vogel. No one wins in such a scenario, and while I agree that crimes of such a colossal stature seem to demand a punishment, why is it Rachel who deserves to be punished, and how on earth has she come to the conclusion that she is the guilty party? And why must Rachel’s daughter be punished by extension? What has she done?
Overall:
The Debt is an engrossing and brilliantly acted thriller. I find the ending a bit less than satisfying, but the film is so enjoyable to watch because of strong performances by the entire cast that I would cheerfully watch The Debt again any time.