Taking Lives (2004)

Cynthia Fuchs

In Taking Lives, the enigmatic Illeana (Angelina Jolie) is introduced indirectly.

Taking Lives

Director: D.J. Caruso
Cast: Angelina Jolie, Ethan Hawke, Kiefer Sutherland, Gena Rowlands, Olivier Martinez, Tchéky Karyo, Jean-Hughes Anglade
MPAA rating: R
Studio: Warner Bros.
First date: 2004
US Release Date: 2004-03-19

Special Agent Illeana Scott (Angelina Jolie) is what you might call "eccentric." Like so many brilliant detectives before her, this FBI investigator is aggressive and intuitive, prone to odd behavior and arrogance. Not so long ago, she would have been a male detective, but nowadays, it passes for "progress" to show women behaving as improbably as men. She first

In Taking Lives, the enigmatic Illeana is introduced indirectly. When it appears that a serial killer is loose in and around Montreal, Surete du Quebec Director Leclair (Tchéky Karyo) calls in the girl he observed at Quantico some years before, declaring her just the brainiac they need to break this case. (Why they need to import talent is not clear.) The previously assigned detectives have opposite reactions: scruffy Duval (Jean-Hugues Anglade) welcomes the assistance, but hotshot Paquette (Olivier Martinez) resents it. And so, as it turns out, the ultra-special Scott still needs to prove herself (again, like so many brilliant detectives before her).

With her reputation preceding her, Scott's first appearance needs to be wowza. And so, the camera starts close, passing over her neck, lips, and forehead, as she lies still, eyes closed. Cut to her fingers, gracefully fidgeting, and then to a longer shot, revealing that she is lying in a grave, caught in Duval's flashlight beam. Though she quickly scampers from hole without explanation, you're given to believe that she's been "feeling" what the killer's most recent victim endured. (How this will help her crack the case is also unclear.) Warmly greeted by Leclair, she is eager to get to work, which means feeling her way through crime scene photos, scraps of evidence, bodies on morgue slabs. When Scott stands over a corpse, her fingers playing the air while the morgue attendant is banished to a corner of the room and the detectives pace outside startlingly red doors, you start to get your own "feeling." This movie is long on style and short on sense.

You might also get the feeling that the makers of Taking Lives have watched Seven one too many times. Ordinarily, this wouldn't be a problem, as David Fincher's movie is not only evocative and darkly elegant, but also famously influential. Indeed, the skritchy opening credits sequence for Taking Lives is striking and smart, even if it is derivative. It's a good to name your sources upfront, so your audience can make comparisons without thinking you're ripping off dishonestly or worse, unintentionally.

The ensuing plot has no such integrity, though the clever aesthetics carry the action for a first hour or so (aided by Philip Glass' unusually modest score). Illeana and the dicks meet with a witness, a local art dealer named James Costa (Ethan Hawke, mostly unbelievable), who conveniently draws well enough to provide a decent sketch of the man he saw smashing another man's face with a big stone. Here Illeana demonstrates her ace detecting skills when she deftly drops the murder weapon (a bloody garrote, whomping onto the floor in close-up) in order to gauge Costa's reaction. Oh, cunning woman!

While Illeana is showing off (and Jolie does make the most of her character's tendency to seduce her various audiences), the men around her are: a) trying to outsmart her, and b) trying to keep up with her, usually at the same time. Their posturing tends to put them at odds with her, as when Paquette makes "bad titty jokes" in French, or Costa flirts with her to the point that she feels her own evolving feelings will "cloud my judgment" (that she's aware of the problem may be to her credit; that she plunges ahead anyway is surely not).

Jon Bokenkamp's script, based on Michael Pye's novel, goes on to provide Costa with too much screen time, as Illeana figures out that the killer is "taking lives" (in other words, adopting his victims' identities), and that Costa is next in line. (Again, the logic is unclear: why would the murderer would pick someone the cops know? Though Illeana describes Costa as "unfinished business," as the life-taking has been going on for some 20 years, this presumed move is patently silly.) And, this lack of sense is exacerbated when the detectives locate the killer's mother, Mrs. Asher (Gena Rowlands), who has recently seen him, just for an instant, identifying him by his apparently unmistakable eyes. Though Mom can likely provide DNA (even her own) by which to detect the killer, no one thinks to work this angle, instead sending Illeana (the self-described "headstrong FBI agent" who proposes to feign ignorance of Canadian law) to break into the woman's home in search of a "secret" room. As Mom has come to the police trying to get her evil son caught, this bit of deceit is not a little odd.

While Illeana dominates every shot she's in (Amir M. Mokri's camera loves her in every possible light or frame), the women (all two of them) in Taking Lives repeatedly get the short end of the stick. She concludes that the killer gets some indeterminate "sexual" thrill from the murders (as he typically strangles them "from behind"), which more or less makes all the suspects, including the late-arriving Hart (Kiefer Sutherland), look rather "gay," skulking in doorways and art galleries and fashioning little twisted-paper figures.

Still, by film's end, these amorphous anxieties about homosexuality are forgotten, or maybe just repressed, in favor of increasing fears of the maternal body. Yes, these concerns would be related, if Taking Lives developed any of its rudimentary scares into actual themes. But no. The scares remain superficial (if well lit). Worse, in order to set them in motion, the film falls back on the oldest trick in the book, placing the girl -- that would be the supposedly brilliant profiler Illeana -- in dire jeopardy. And so, she is reduced to abject stupidity, along with the rest of the plot.

So far J. J. Abrams and Rian Johnson resemble children at play, remaking the films they fell in love with. As an audience, however, we desire a fuller experience.

As recently as the lackluster episodes I-III of the Star Wars saga, the embossed gold logo followed by scrolling prologue text was cause for excitement. In the approach to the release of any of the then new prequel installments, the Twentieth Century Fox fanfare, followed by the Lucas Film logo, teased one's impulsive excitement at a glimpse into the next installment's narrative. Then sat in the movie theatre on the anticipated day of release, the sight and sound of the Twentieth Century Fox fanfare signalled the end of fevered anticipation. Whatever happened to those times? For some of us, is it a product of youth in which age now denies us the ability to lose ourselves within such adolescent pleasure? There's no answer to this question -- only the realisation that this sensation is missing and it has been since the summer of 2005. Star Wars is now a movie to tick off your to-watch list, no longer a spark in the dreary reality of the everyday. The magic has disappeared… Star Wars is spiritually dead.

Keep reading... Show less

This has been a remarkable year for shoegaze. If it were only for the re-raising of two central pillars of the initial scene it would still have been enough, but that wasn't even the half of it.

It hardly needs to be said that the last 12 months haven't been everyone's favorite, but it does deserve to be noted that 2017 has been a remarkable year for shoegaze. If it were only for the re-raising of two central pillars of the initial scene it would still have been enough, but that wasn't even the half of it. Other longtime dreamers either reappeared or kept up their recent hot streaks, and a number of relative newcomers established their place in what has become one of the more robust rock subgenre subcultures out there.

Keep reading... Show less

​'The Ferryman': Ephemeral Ideas, Eternal Tragedies

The current cast of The Ferryman in London's West End. Photo by Johan Persson. (Courtesy of The Corner Shop)

Staggeringly multi-layered, dangerously fast-paced and rich in characterizations, dialogue and context, Jez Butterworth's new hit about a family during the time of Ireland's the Troubles leaves the audience breathless, sweaty and tearful, in a nightmarish, dry-heaving haze.

"Vanishing. It's a powerful word, that"

Northern Ireland, Rural Derry, 1981, nighttime. The local ringleader of the Irish Republican Army gun-toting comrades ambushes a priest and tells him that the body of one Seamus Carney has been recovered. It is said that the man had spent a full ten years rotting in a bog. The IRA gunslinger, Muldoon, orders the priest to arrange for the Carney family not to utter a word of what had happened to the wretched man.

Keep reading... Show less

Aaron Sorkin's real-life twister about Molly Bloom, an Olympic skier turned high-stakes poker wrangler, is scorchingly fun but never takes its heroine as seriously as the men.

Chances are, we will never see a heartwarming Aaron Sorkin movie about somebody with a learning disability or severe handicap they had to overcome. This is for the best. The most caffeinated major American screenwriter, Sorkin only seems to find his voice when inhabiting a frantically energetic persona whose thoughts outrun their ability to verbalize and emote them. The start of his latest movie, Molly's Game, is so resolutely Sorkin-esque that it's almost a self-parody. Only this time, like most of his better work, it's based on a true story.

Keep reading... Show less

There's something characteristically English about the Royal Society, whereby strangers gather under the aegis of some shared interest to read, study, and form friendships and in which they are implicitly agreed to exist insulated and apart from political differences.

There is an amusing detail in The Curious World of Samuel Pepys and John Evelyn that is emblematic of the kind of intellectual passions that animated the educated elite of late 17th-century England. We learn that Henry Oldenburg, the first secretary of the Royal Society, had for many years carried on a bitter dispute with Robert Hooke, one of the great polymaths of the era whose name still appears to students of physics and biology. Was the root of their quarrel a personality clash, was it over money or property, over love, ego, values? Something simple and recognizable? The precise source of their conflict was none of the above exactly but is nevertheless revealing of a specific early modern English context: They were in dispute, Margaret Willes writes, "over the development of the balance-spring regulator watch mechanism."

Keep reading... Show less
Pop Ten
Mixed Media
PM Picks

© 1999-2017 All rights reserved.
Popmatters is wholly independently owned and operated.