[yasr_overall_rating]
A mute bartender goes up against his city’s gangsters in an effort to find out what happened to his missing partner.
As a purveyor of Duncan Jones’ work I stink. I’ve only seen “Warcraft” and I missed legendary pieces “Moon” and “Source Code.” Which is too bad because I love Sam Rockwell. Duncan Jones (a name that reminds me of Mike Jones the rapper for some reason) apparently carved a name for himself in the sci-fi and fantasy genre fare slowly, over time. His latest entry (a Netflix-hyped piece) into Sci-Fi minces together elements of “The Fifth Element” and the we-are-not-worthy “Blade Runner” with a tone eerily reminiscent of “Southland Tales.”
“Mute”’s plot follows an Amish man living in the Sci-Fi world of the not-so-distant future. After an accident when he’s a kid leaves him mute, he works in the world to build a better life for himself and the love of his life (played by Seyneb Saleh.) He wakes up one morning and she’s gone. Thus begins his search for her. Mute.
Meanwhile, Cactus Bill (Paul Rudd), an ornery American military defector, works alongside his doctor friend (in a relationship that’s two steps past bromance and one step away from a gay couple) to get new visas for him and his daughter to return to the States. Also, this whole thing is set in Sci-Fi Berlin (just Berlin but in the future.)
Look, the message of the film suffers from its split personalities. Alexander Skarsgård’s constantly-wounded Leo has to learn to navigate the world of technology and abandon his lifestyle by bits and pieces to find the love of his life. On the other hand, Paul Rudd’s character navigates the criminal world, letting his tension ratchet up, heading for a violent finale.
I found myself saddened by the gradual stripping away of Leo’s Amish culture. The more he searches for Naadirah (his love) the deeper he goes into the underworld of this sci-fi world until eventually the last major piece of his identity is taken from him. This theme reflects on multiple levels: the increased engagement Leo uses with technology (something the Amish have forsworn), his wardrobe changes. Slowly, scene by scene Leo becomes a modern man.
This movie is a great opportunity to talk about disability in film. The story of Leo, as a mute, presents nothing but obstacles he cannot overcome without interacting with the modern world. By that presentation, the film admits it is impossible to be both Amish and mute. Yes, he functioned well before, but he was always going to get dragged in. Multiple instances demonstrate futuristic impediments that Leo would easily overcome if he could speak (he can ask a librarian to find the phone books for him, or speak his phone number into a meal-order service.) The thing I find most ironic is that these impediments seem futuristic and intelligently made but they’re not that futuristic. As a person who’s worked with mute/deaf-mute people, I can safely say the inability to speak is misperceived as an obstacle. The reality I’ve found is that deaf-mute people may struggle but never in a way that compromises them morally. I’ve come to understand a disability is not truly a disability.
All that is to say you can understand my sadness at the end of the film. Maybe I shouldn’t give away too much on this one. People might want to see this and I don’t want to ruin it, but suffice to say Leo changes so much he is barely recognizable from the beginning.
Alexander Skarsgård leads the cast in a constantly wounded affection that crescendos into rage rarely. His demeanor and performance with a disability does not speak to my experience with actual deaf-mute people but for the sake of this film, he performs well. I want to shout out Paul Rudd for giving a performance that truly transcends his usual shtick. Instead of just goofy and playful he’s menacing, ornery, and downright prickly.
Awash in color the film’s aesthetic feels borderline cartoonish when it’s not intentionally aiming at mood. The neon colors leech their starburst flavors onto other characters equally as vibrant in costumes that remind me of Chris Rock from “The Fifth Element.” The film’s treatment of different sexualities also confused me. Given the protagonist is achingly heterosexual and rejects the touch of another man outright, and also that the antagonist has a vaguely homosexual relationship with his partner in crime, I left this movie feeling like a strange judgment on non-heteronormative sexuality had been passed.
Look, I’m reading too much into it. The film’s not enough for a search for there to be detective labels. Alexander Skarsgård’s character isn’t enough of a badass. Paul Rudd isn’t enough of a villain. Just when you think the plot’s climaxed, it keeps going. Also, the film borderline indulges on pedophilia at one point. I wanted to like this movie but so many moving parts left a bitter taste in my mouth. You can say I’m reading too much into it, but this movie left me feeling sad both because the plot is sad and because the theme saddened me even more. Maybe skip over this one and find something else more your speed on Netflix.
Now streaming on Netflix
