The early 80s in Soviet Russia. Policemen stumble upon a number of corpses in
the woods. Most of the dead are children and teenagers, who have been stabbed,
mutilated and raped before and after death. Nobody seems to care too much, but
newly appointed forensics scientist Viktor Burakov doesn’t just care, he is
convinced these are the victims of a serial killer (Jeffrey DeMunn) who picks
out his victims from the young and the destitute in railway stations. He is even
be able to convince his direct superior, Colonel Fetisov (Donald Sutherland) of
the truth of his conclusion, so Fetisov makes Burakov an actual policeman and
gives the case to him. However, this being the Soviet bureaucracy in its worst
phase, Fetisov has other bureaucrats to appease. It doesn’t help that Burakov
has somehow managed not to learn some basic techniques of survival, like never
saying what one truly thinks to hard-line bureaucrats, so he early on actively
antagonizes exactly the sort of people who’ll go out of their way to put stones
in his way for the next decade, a mounting pile of bodies be damned.
Then there’s the little problem that serial killers are obviously a product
of the decadent Western lifestyle and just don’t exist in the USSR, so there’s
no infrastructure at all to deal with a case like this, even if the bureaucracy
were able to accept it. Instead, Burakov is ordered to round up “known
homosexuals” and has to listen to complaints about investigating party members
in good standing. Despite a heavy psychological and personal toll, the hatred of
his superiors except Fetisov - who increasingly becomes his ally and friend -
and little resources, Burakov keeps on the case over years, until the dawning of
perestroika makes it possible for him to take steps that can lead to the
apprehension of the killer.
(Freely) based on the actual case of the serial killer Andrei Chikatilo and
the men who tried to catch him, Chris Gerolmo’s HBO TV movie is an exceptional
film. Well, except for the absurd – and given the high standards of the rest of
the production patently ridiculous – decision to have the actors play their
roles with fake Russian accents, the sort of thing that’s okay – yet still
stupid – in a pulp fantasy context but that’s tonally completely out of whack
with a film like this.
For the film plays out as a dark, earnest, character-based police procedural
without action scenes and little on-screen violence, with the wrinkle that in
its historical context, quite a bit of the procedural aspect is political in
nature and concerned with Burakov’s first surprised, then angry and later
depressed attempts to get the Soviet bureaucracy to see reason, something no
bureaucracy tends to be well equipped for at the best of times and in the best
of places – and the USSR in the 80s certainly was not the best of much. Through
Burakov’s eyes, the film paints a picture of the USSR of the time as a place of
quiet desperation where the greyness of the surroundings seems to wash into the
minds of people who mostly seem beaten and bruised far before the end of the
Soviet Union, living as they do in a country that seems a lot like a corpse that
just hasn’t realized it is dead. Obviously, this isn’t a phenomenon exclusive to
a specific time and place, and it is therefor not difficult at all to also apply
the film’s view to other times and places – and not just under strictly
totalitarian systems – where a culture of not seeing, not speaking, and
scapegoating dominates; not always as obviously and heavily as in the film, but
“not as bad as a utopian dream gone bad” isn’t much of a compliment.
However, despite its bleak portrayal of Soviet life, Citizen X isn’t
a hopeless film. It also shows how Burakov’s tenacity and passion (and how
Communist is the idea of this guy spending his whole life to improve that of his
community?) slowly burns through Fetisov’s detached cynicism and turns that
effective functionary into a human being again; and in the end, it also shows
them catching Chikatilo.
Its treatment of Chikatilo – with whom we spend a few scenes from time to
time during the investigation – is very typical of the film. Instead of going
through melodramatic contortions and portraying him as a monster with the usual
eye-rolling and “quid pro quo, Clarice”-ing, the film and DeMunn characterize
him in a much more disturbing way: as a small, sad, pathetic man committing
monstrous acts for reasons he clearly can’t fully comprehend, inadvertently
enabled by a time and place that can’t even find enough passion to care about
dozens of murdered children.
The acting is generally excellent, with half a dozen brilliant performances,
all lacking in showiness yet full of nuance and a feeling of human veracity so
strong, after twenty minutes or so I didn’t even hear the stupid accents anymore
because I was too engrossed in what the characters were saying, what they could
only express through their body languages, and why.
Wednesday, August 23, 2017
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment