[J Harker]

Originally Posted by MacBlayne

DEATH WISH

Charles Bronson is Paul Kersey, eradicator of street trash, upholder of traditional values, and… Oh, hang on. We haven’t got that far yet.

Death Wish is a film that carries a certain reputation, brought about by its many sequels. While those films wallowed in excess, the first entry is almost alien to them. It shares the same setup – some close to Kersey is brutalised, and Keysey goes on a rampage. However, where the opening acts of brutality in the sequels are the trigger for Kersey’s spree of vengeance, Death Wish's opening scenes of violence is a long fuse that has Keysey descend into madness. It's worth stressing that Death Wish is not a revenge film. Kersey never finds the monsters who beat his wife to death and raped his daughter, and this is a key factor that makes the film very different from others with the series and genre.

Death Wish is a very controversial film, not just for the still-shocking level of violence, but for its alleged support of vigilantism. Of course, many self-appointed moral guardians often throw such accusations at other films, and these accusations often fall apart when you apply some critical analysis to them. But I think it’s a fair point in regards to Death Wish, so much so that the original author was horrified when he saw the finished film, and even Charles Bronson was somewhat bothered by it at the time.

I don’t think Death Wish supports vigilantism, but I do agree that it thinks the solution to rising crime is stricter punishments. Michael Winner was admittedly right-wing, and never shied from expressing conservative opinions. He strikes me as the type who thinks flogging should be brought back. But this was the period when Winner was a rather intelligent filmmaker, and he focuses more on Kersey’s gradual adoption of violence. Kersey is man whose entire world is ripped away from him in breathtakingly cruel fashion, and falls into a spiral of fear and paranoia. These are the negative traits that has him lash out in violence, and become the vigilante. But rather than turn into Batman, Winner introduces something disturbing. Kersey becomes a hero to the people, and a thorn to the police, but Kersey isn’t continuing his killing spree because he wants to stop crime. He continues because he likes it. He targets genuinely reprehensible people, luring them, and murdering them with glee. And here is where Winner turns the film back onto us. If we’re still watching, then surely we are enjoying watching Kersey kill these bastards? And what exactly is it that is stopping us from following Kersey’s methods ourselves? Is it our morality, or a fear of legal repercussions?

Death Wish is a truly “problematic” film. It taps into the more fascist element of society, and it’s not exactly disagreeing with it. But it is aware. It raises moral and philosophical musings about violence in society, and within us. Charles Bronson always said he was miscast. and Dustin Hoffman should have been Kersey. I disagree. Hoffman was amazing in Straw Dogs, which is a better, and far more intelligent film that looks at the animal hiding within man. However, Death Wish already has let the animal out of the cage, and is looking at why that loose animal is so appealing. Bronson nails that animal. By the end of Straw Dogs, Hoffman has transformed. By the end of Death Wish, Bronson hasn’t transformed. He’s just honest.

Cracking review Mac.

Sent from my SM-G780G using Tapatalk