The Brave One (Dvd) - Jennie

If someone is a bad person do they deserve to live? Can you kill a criminal without feeling guilt? Is it O.K. to murder someone who breaks our rules? Vigilantes – the romantic heroes that pervade justice and right without the hassle of jurist’s prudence can murder, but should we cheer for them? It seems there is some level of society that feels that vigilantism is fine and good, they do the policeman’s job when they legally can’t. This movie speaks to these individuals - a frightening concept in my mind, championing the murder of “bad guys”. Erica Bain’s (Jodie Foster) fiancé is beaten to death by minority stereotypes causing her to see the fear that she always overlooked in her beloved New York City. This fear envelopes her and shows her that it was always there, under the surface, she had previously ignored it. This is the impetus for murder. The movie then turns into the most unlucky series of contrived situations allowing Erica to murder without her looking like a “bad guy” herself.
A man runs into a bodega shoots his ex over a custody dispute, clearly a bad guy, so Erica murders him back. A Detective Mercer, played by Terrence Howard, is on the case. Then, while riding a subway, two minority stereotypes steal a guys iPod, call an old guy homosexual, and threaten to rape Erica with a knife, clearly bad guys, so Erica murders them. Detective Mercer is on the case. Then, while walking around central park and pimp propositions her to join is cadre and locks her in a car with another girl he has captured, clearly a bad guy, so Erica murders him. Detective Mercer is on the case.
I have many problems with this series of events that happen. As my wife pointed out, who gets into all these life threatening, bad guy revealing, situations in a life time, let alone in a span of four months or so? Also, were these bad guys worthy of murder? The subway goons only stole an iPod and threatened rape - no jury would sentence them to death. Dangerous, yes - justifiable murder, no. And Mercer would not have caught all those cases – ever (I know that it is a writer’s prerogative to suspend disbelief but – come on! Mercer starts piecing the puzzle together after the second murder. That would never happen). Logistically this movie was a mess.
The directing was marginable at best. I hate it when directors feel the only way to fully portray claustrophobia or panic is by tilting the camera this way and that in an attempt to disorient the viewer. I believe a good actor can portray this sort of emotion without rookie camera tricks, and Jodie Foster is a quality actor. Why choose this campy method? Jordan does allow Mercer and Erica to gradually realize one is on to the other in a series of beautiful scenes shot with the clarity and understanding. The two actors trade knowing glances as they reveal themselves through a mirror.
The ending could have given the movie a chance to justify itself by having Mercer turn in his now close friend as he has figured it all out. She is a murderer; admittedly, she shouldn’t get away with it. But, no, Mercer gives her a way out and lets her go since he cares for her. Wait, what? Meaning vigilantism is fine as long as there is an excuse? I guess bad guys deserve to die even without their day in court as long as they're bad guys.

4 out of 10: Allows for some interesting discussion on vigilantism/capitol punishment, but logistical nightmares and a disregard for society pollute the viewing experience.