Movies with Meaning, by Brent Marchant, TGMN Movie Correspondent

Beliefs Gone Wild

 

Some would say – and quite astutely at that – there’s plenty of madness to go around these days, and they’d be right. But where and when did this begin? Many would increasingly agree that a good place to start looking would be the COVID-19 Pandemic, a time when fear was ratcheted up, conspiracy theories ran amok, “protective” measures slid into excessive overreach, neighbors routinely spied on (and often made unsupported accusations about) neighbors, and people’s imaginations were let loose without restraint. What began as an alleged but widely legitimized public health crisis soon spilled over into myriad other areas of life as tempers, paranoia and disinformation flared to new heights. So why did this happen? Insights into this phenomenon vary, but some plausible explanations are raised – and quite credibly – in the wild new comedy-drama-modern day Western, “Eddington” (web site, trailer).

In May 2020, the world – along with the minds and imaginations of its inhabitants – were consumed by the global COVID-19 Pandemic. Fear was everywhere as everyone desperately sought guidance on how to cope with this ominous new virus. And, as officialdom handed down its recommendations – and, later, mandates – individuals dutifully began wearing their masks, getting vaccinated, sheltering in place and practicing social distancing when necessary. As time went by, however, those who stringently complied with these measures began adopting vigilante-like attitudes and taking matters to new levels of zealousness in their adherence to official policies. They began openly shaming others who failed to live up to these standards of behavior, even going so far as to document these failings with their cell phones. Paranoia and finger pointing grew, leading to public confrontations for even the slightest of infractions. And, given the stresses of being perpetually confined, tempers flared, spilling over into other areas of life, such as reactions to widely publicized events like the George Floyd killing in Minneapolis, inciting public demonstrations and riots, both locally and elsewhere.

No place was immune to these circumstances, either; even isolated, typically serene locales were affected. Such was the case in Eddington, New Mexico, the sleepy little fictional desert town depicted in this film. Incidents reflective of these conditions erupted with a ferocity that wasn’t known or previously seen here. The imaginations of residents were let loose to such a head-spinning degree that containment became a challenge for those in authority. What made matters worse was that it seemed as though logic and reason had been cast to the winds, with events spiraling ever more out of control. Indeed, the genie had been let loose from the bottle.

The film examines the reactions of Eddington residents from a variety of angles, not just in response to the pandemic, but also in connection with an array of other public and private scenarios, some of them new and others of which have been quietly simmering for some time. In doing this, writer-director Ari Aster provides a look into a world gone mad as all of these explosive issues emerged in a perfect storm of mass insanity. It’s a wonder how anyone could have survived conditions like these. And what made it worse was that these circumstances were all products of the residents’ own creations.

Numerous story threads run throughout this inspired release, all of them tied to the foregoing events. The main thrust of the narrative follows the growing feud between longtime, well-liked mayor Ted Garcia (Pedro Pascal), a by-the-book supporter of community welfare and official public health and safety policies, and sheriff Joe Cross (Joaquin Phoenix), a commonsense law enforcement professional who urges the public not to panic and to assess their circumstances realistically with an acute sense of discernment. When it comes to the COVID protocols, for example, Garcia believes in scrupulous compliance with official recommendations, no matter how rigorous they might be, while Cross encourages locals to analyze these policies with a sense of healthy skepticism, especially since the county where Eddington is located has had no reported cases of the illness. It’s the kind of standoff invariably found in virtually all classic Westerns.

But there’s more to the duo’s animosity than their differences of opinion on COVID policy; there are also longstanding personal issues between them that have been long asleep but have now been given license to awaken under the prevailing change in public temperament. The combined impact of all of the foregoing issues thus leads to a significant shift in their relationship: as matters grow increasingly heated and inherently more unpredictable, Cross challenges Garcia in the upcoming mayoral race in which the incumbent had been running unopposed, leading to growing political discord and factionalism. Those conditions are further exacerbated as the sheriff struggles to keep the peace in this once-sleepy little town, which has now been beset by protests mimicking those elsewhere over such controversies as unchecked police brutality, White privilege and outrage over the George Floyd killing, incidents far removed from rural New Mexico.

As these events play out, viewers are introduced to an array of colorful supporting characters, such as the sheriff’s wife, Louise (Emma Stone), a long-withdrawn, emotionally troubled follower of conspiracy theories who spends her days creating singularly distinctive works of fabric art; Vernon Jefferson Peak (Austin Butler), an increasingly prominent proponent of fringe conspiracy theories to whom Louise seems increasingly drawn; Louise’s busybody mother, Dawn (Deirdre O’Connell), who moved in with the couple temporarily (or so it was assumed) at the start of the pandemic but now appears to be taking up permanent residence with them; the sheriff’s deputies, Michael Cooke (Michael Ward) and Guy Tooley (Luke Grimes), who have been involuntarily recruited into working on their boss’s mayoral campaign while struggling with how to handle the growing social antagonism in their community; Eric Garcia (Matt Gomez Hidaka), the mayor’s son, a rebellious wise-ass who frequently finds ways to stir up trouble, especially as concerns his alleged best friend, Brian (Cameron Mann), and his pal’s hoped-for activist romantic interest, Sarah (Amèlie Hoeferle); Officer Jiminez Butterfly (William Belieau), the head law enforcement official of the neighboring Native American land who often gets under the sheriff’s skin for his thorough but unwanted investigatory diligence into matters that stray out of his jurisdiction; and Lodge (Clifton Collins Jr.), a psychologically challenged local vagabond who has a habit of somehow always showing up in the middle of the mayhem, serving as a symbolic physical embodiment of the character that has come to typify the new Eddington.

As the film unfolds, all of these scenarios eventually reach a breaking point, at which time circumstances become unhinged, the growing madness having finally brought matters to the brink of collapse. How will events play out? That, of course, remains to be seen, but, considering the exaggerated, unrestrained beliefs that have been unleashed throughout the community, it’s not difficult to imagine what results. And that is important to bear in mind in light of the role our beliefs play in the manifestation of our existence. It’s unclear whether any of Eddington’s locals have ever heard of this school of thought, but, considering what’s at stake in this cautionary tale, it would behoove them to get a handle on it and its implications. That’s especially true given that they have collectively participated in this scenario’s materialization, one in which they have all leant their belief power to the creation’s unfortunate realization. And, given the power and persistence inherent in our beliefs, they represent a formidable force with which to be reckoned, one whose output may be difficult, if not impossible, to rectify going forward, a lesson from which we should all take heed.

The overall situation created here has many diverse components within it, but they all have one thing in common – they arose from beliefs run amok. Consequently, virtually all aspects of this existence have assumed an exaggerated form, driven by thoughts, beliefs and intents that have been allowed to be taken to a seemingly unimaginable level. Consider the specifics that have emerged: nearly every aspect of daily life has been saddled with excessive measures aimed at preventing the spread of an illness not even found in the community, practices that, consequently, have turned residents against one another. Neighbors now spy on neighbors, relentlessly recording their actions as proof of their failure to comply with onerous mandated dictates, such as when they fail to abide by social distancing and mask wearing protocols. Their home-based confinement has stressed them to the point where they’ve lost perspective, willingly losing self-control and eagerly embracing conspiracy theories of every kind, some perhaps justified but others that play like elements out of pulpy science fiction novels. And then there’s the overblown impact of national news stories and their well-intended but troubling sociological implications, events that prompt public protests, shrill demonstrations, and even riots and vandalism. And, whether or not individuals recognize it, they’ve all played a part in the materialization of this dubious collaboration.

It’s also intriguing to note how the filmmaker takes no prisoners in exploring this phenomenon. There’s plenty of blame to go around, from public officials to impassioned agenda-driven agitators to everyday citizens, and they represent all sectors of the social, political, economic and ethnic spectrums. Even those with supposedly noble ambitions aren’t spared for their excesses in this razor-sharp assessment. In short, no one’s been left out of this analysis, as everybody is seen as contributing to the emergence of such mass insanity. But then that’s not unexpected when everyone’s beliefs are simultaneously allowed to be let loose without restraint.

Can such madness be moderated? It’s possible, but several elements must fall into place to make it happen. To begin with, the participants in this scenario need to start by calming down and taking a long, deep breath, both literally and metaphorically. From there, they need to assess their beliefs to get a better handle on their validity. Indeed, just how realistic are they? Do they warrant support or scrutiny? Should they continue to be freely given energy, or should they be summarily scrapped in favor of more reasonable notions? This calls for employing a profound degree of discernment to determine just how compelling and meritorious these beliefs truly are and whether they should continue to be sanctioned. Sheriff Cross and his deputies try to follow such a course, at least initially, but maintaining such a level-headed degree of composure becomes increasingly difficult as conditions grow progressively unbalanced, irrational and emotionally charged. To be sure, considering how circumstances are unfolding, it would seem highly prudent that everyone should make an effort to tone things down before it’s too late.

One might legitimately wonder how and why conditions here were allowed to get so out of hand. And some might even believe that this satire is an overstatement of what really happened during that time, a fable that exaggerates “the truth.” But was it? In looking back at that time, many elements of that period uncannily resemble the events that take place in this film. Some may deny or conveniently fail to recall incidents like this, and perhaps they didn’t occur absolutely everywhere. But there’s plenty of on-the-record documentation depicting events like these, and it’s important that we own up to them, recognize how they emerged and consider how we might avoid their recurrence. Undergoing that kind of lunacy was bad enough once, let alone something we’d like to experience again. However, avoiding that depends on us and our beliefs – and whether or not we’ll allow them and us to let them get out of control again.

Itʼs been said that “hindsight is 20/20,” an expression the picture’s marketers have cleverly tweaked in its promotional tagline, that “hindsight is 2020.” But, contrary to the veracity usually accorded to this saying, how realistically are we to readily glean its wisdom? As this offering aptly illustrates, it may not happen as automatically – or even as often – as we might like to think. Thankfully, though, this is where writer-director Ari Aster has stepped in, gobsmacking us out of our indifference, denial and complacency with his fourth (and, arguably, best) feature outing. This no-holds-barred cinematic essay on that time in our recent past tells an epic saga that deftly blends elements of comedy, drama, modern-day Westerns and social satire, shoving its content squarely in our faces and forcing us to take a critical look at it, no matter how much many of us would rather not do so. The result is an incisive, insightful, incendiary multifaceted examination of what can happen when all sense of reason is abandoned.

The filmmaker’s even-handed approach in telling this story astutely examines the period’s prevailing conditions without judgment, pointedly depicting all of them with equal degrees of inspired and unfiltered skewering, employing a narrative style that in some ways reminds me of the work of director Yorgos Lanthimos. The picture maximizes its impact in this regard through skillful cinematography and film editing, bitingly scathing writing, and an excellent ensemble, including both leads and a host of colorful supporting performances. While the film’s final act is admittedly somewhat overlong and periodically scattered, the finished product overall nevertheless represents quite an accomplished work of filmmaking. This offering honestly won’t appeal to everyone and is likely to generate divisive (even heated) exchanges among both avid cinephiles and casual moviegoers depending on their individual sensitivities and viewpoints. But, for those unafraid of confronting issues that have largely been swept under the rug, this one is right up your alley.

As Mark Twain once shrewdly observed, “It’s easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled,” and Aster draws on that sentiment heavily and frequently throughout this work. No matter what one may believe about the events of five years ago, the director skillfully spotlights the chaos of that time and how it often manifested as an exercise in deception, control and a loss of common sense in so many areas of everyday life. Let’s sincerely hope we learn our lesson from this film so that we needn’t go through an experience like that ever again.

A complete review is available by clicking here. 

Courageously Exposing a Terrible Truth

As much as one would like to believe that humanity is capable of great things, we’ve also seen many instances where the opposite, unfortunately, is true. And, to make matters worse, many of those unsettling developments remain out of view, hidden in the shadows – that is, until someone comes along to courageously expose them. Those revelations often come at tremendous personal cost, too, but, when the world becomes aware of such horrors, opportunities for change, justice and healing begin to emerge. Such are the hopes offered up the gripping new fact-based historical drama, “Words of War” (web site, trailer).

Before the barbaric invasion of Ukraine, President Vladimir Putin’s Russian Federation conducted an equally unspeakable campaign of brutality against the people of Chechnya during its attempt to become a breakaway independent state in the 1990s. However, the vicious, genocidal atrocities inflicted upon the Chechan population were not widely known at the time, especially amongst Russian citizens. As word began to leak out, though, the events unfolding in the rebel republic gradually caught the attention of the journalists at Novaya Gazeta, an independent newspaper founded by former Russian Head of State Mikhail Gorbachev with the funds he received after winning the Nobel Peace Prize. The mission of this publication in the new Russia was to report the truth as an alternative to official state propaganda, whose media outlets continued serving as a government mouthpiece, a practice established during the days of the Soviet Union. But, despite its audacious reporting efforts, Novaya Gazeta’s content was nevertheless squarely under the microscope of censorship authorities trying to keep a lid on the truth.

The publication’s coverage of the carnage in Chechnya took a big step up with the work of intrepid journalist Anna Politkovskaya (Maxine Peake). Her work on a story about Chechan war orphans who had been relocated to Moscow played a large role in launching these efforts. As a mother of two herself, Politkovskaya took a profound interest in the plight of the children. When she saw the pained, frightened and sometimes-hostile reactions of the youngsters toward her as a Russian – an unwitting but arguably damnable symbol of the people who were devastating their families and homeland – Politkovskaya knew that there was something deeper, more powerful and more menacing about the children’s experience that wasn’t being reported outside of Chechnya. Suddenly, this human interest story mushroomed into a bigger and more troubling subject than she had imagined – and that she simply couldn’t leave alone.

Upon assessing the gravity of what this story might entail, Politkovskya made a pitch to her editor, Dmitry Muratov (Ciarán Hinds), to pursue it in greater depth, an effort that included a proposal to travel to Chechnya to witness firsthand what was transpiring on the ground. Considering the potential danger involved for someone who had never acted in the capacity as a war correspondent, as well as cautions from Muratov’s associates about the fallout that might come from officialdom for launching such a daring and possibly inflammatory initiative, the editor was skeptical about the wisdom of Politkovskaya taking on such an assignment. However, when Muratov could see how impassioned she was about pursuing the story, and given the newspaper’s commitment to its mission statement, he agreed to let his reporter follow her instincts to see what was happening – and to uncover the truth.

This is not to suggest that Muratov wasn’t worried about his reporter’s safety; he was. And he wasn’t alone. Anna’s family had serious reservations, too. Her husband, Sasha (Jason Isaacs), a successful talk show host on Russian state television, was concerned that she was in way over her head. And her two adult children, Vera (Naomi Battrick) and, especially, Ilya (Harry Lawtey), couldn’t believe the dangerous task on which she was embarking. But, as much as she appreciated their concerns, Anna was committed to this venture, knowing she had to see it through.

As she departed for Chechnya, Politkovskaya was initially embedded with a troop convoy, a tense and often-unnerving experience that subjected her to the rigid, unfeeling and misogynistic ways of the Russian military. What’s more, her travels with the soldiers weren’t getting her especially close to those she most wanted to see – the Chechen people. How could she get her story if she had little to no opportunity to interact with them?

That changed, however, when the convoy came upon an exodus of despondent, beleaguered refugees wandering through a bombed out village in search of sanctuary. As they shuffled through the streets, they appeared to walk aimlessly, without hope, unsure of where to go or whether any safe place even existed for them. When Anna saw this, she knew she had found the people she needed to talk with. She separated from the convoy and immersed herself in the lives of those who, it quickly became apparent, had lost virtually everything at the hands of the Russian troops. She could now appreciate the meaning behind the expressions on the faces of those orphaned refugees back in Moscow.

As she sought to ingratiate herself and gain the trust of the refugees, Anna met a volunteer Chechan relief worker, Anzor (Fady Elsayad). He was curious about this courageous Russian woman who seemed unexpectedly willing to engage with a crowd of individuals who had come to so deeply despise her people. It prompted Anzor to speak with her, marking the beginning of a working relationship in which he became Anna’s driver and interpreter, even acting as a facilitator to introduce her to interview candidates, such as his mother, Fatima (Lujza Richter).

Before long, Anna got a clear picture of the brutality being inflicted on the Chechan people, victims who were persecuted for their politics, their religion and their ethnicity, incidents that were “justified” as a means to curtail the “rising terrorist menace” within Chechnya’s borders that were allegedly threatening the republic and surrounding territories. She could see the genocide being indiscriminately carried out against an entire population, and she began writing about it in earnest. The film subsequently chronicles many of her harrowing experiences as she traveled throughout the wartorn republic, complemented by voiceover renditions of her reports from the field. Those accounts held nothing back, telling the Chechans’ story in painful detail, punctuated with scathing commentary against the actions of the Putin dictatorship. And, thanks to the solid support of her publishing colleagues back in Moscow, the word was at last getting out.

Politkovskaya’s fearless reporting from 1999 to 2006 made the world aware of the butchery in Chechnya. It earned her an invitation to testify before the United Nations Security Council about Putin’s dirty little secret and of the estimated 60,000 lives lost during the Chechan Revolt. Her activism also helped her garner accolades for her efforts, such as being named the winner of Amnesty International’s 2001 Award for Humanitarian Journalism. But her writings and advocacy came at a cost, too, including attempts on her life, the capture and torture of her Chechan liaison, strained relations with her children, and the ruining of her husband’s career. But, from Anna’s perspective, the agony and turmoil were worth it, especially given the magnitude of the ordeals the Chechan people had to endure, atrocities they desperately wanted humanity to know about.

It takes a special kind of individual to undertake the sort of work that Anna Politkovskaya tackled. Many of us probably can’t begin to imagine what she witnessed and endured, not to mention the lengths to which she had to go in getting the story and the courage required of her in writing what she did considering the stern opposition she faced from the Putin regime. But, with so much at stake, she could not in good conscience turn away from it. She was determined to inform the world – particularly her fellow Russians – about the unspeakable atrocities being perpetrated by her government. Most importantly, though, she believed that she could accomplish this task, and that, in the end, is what enabled her to successfully carry out her mission. And that element – a belief in oneself and one’s capabilities – is crucial in embarking on any kind of venture, no matter what it might be. It’s unknown whether Anna had ever heard of this way of thinking, but, in light of what she accomplished, it’s apparent that she knew how to successfully make use of its principles to realize her laudable ambitions, achievements for which the Chechans, newly enlightened Russians and the world at large should ultimately be grateful.

As this film so aptly illustrates, much of Anna’s success derives from who she is as an individual, a persona created out of her personal attributes, aspects of her true self that are borne out of her beliefs about herself. And, in shaping the nature of her character, she has come up with the precise combination of traits needed to fulfill what she sought to accomplish. For instance, her tenacity and determination are undeniable, qualities that are positively essential in attaining her goals, especially in light of the conditions under which she operated. Had they been absent or even present to a lesser degree, how likely is it that she would have been able to succeed under such daunting circumstances?

Then there’s Anna’s faith in herself, another trait that enables her to resolutely set about her work, regardless of what obstacles she might come upon. She knew that she could fulfill her objectives, even when others may have had their doubts. Indeed, many onlookers – including co-workers and members of her own family (theoretically those who should have known her best) – sincerely believed that this former housewife and doting mother lacked what it took to venture off into a war zone and cover a story under conditions as challenging as these, particularly with the peering eyes of the Russian military and government operatives constantly looking over her shoulder. Yet, as her on-the-ground experiences illustrate, she was undeterred, that she genuinely had what it took to get the job done.

Of course, her commitment to this cause is significantly bolstered by the tremendous reserves of courage she possesses. Not only does this allow her to adhere to her convictions, but it also enables her to vanquish whatever fears that stand in her way. That’s crucial, given that fears can become major impediments in attaining our objectives, keeping them from materializing in the manner we hope for – or even at all. Our belief in personal courage, however, can function like a mighty sword to slay the dragons that stand in our way, a valuable tool when we find ourselves surrounded by as many beasts as Anna no doubt encountered when reporting on what was unfolding in Chechnya.

Together, these attributes combine to produce a force truly to be reckoned with. And, considering how Anna succeeded in managing these qualities, she was able to fulfill her destiny, her reason for being. Considering our capacities for manifesting our aspirations, it’s truly tragic when we come up short in doing so. By contrast, though, it’s genuinely inspiring and truly gratifying when we’re able to blend the elements needed to achieve that for which we strive, especially undertakings that represent our value fulfillment, the attainment of being our best, truest selves for the betterment of ourselves and those around us. Anna achieved that, even if it came at a great personal cost, but she gave us a tremendous gift in doing so, one that ultimately benefitted so many and allowed those who sacrificed so much to rest in peace more easily.

What’s more, the example Anna set through her work is uplifting and undeniable. This becomes apparent in the film through her association with fellow journalist Elena Milashina (Ellie Bamber), one of Politkovskaya’s peers at Novaya Gazeta. Anna mentored her associate, inspiring Elena to follow in her colleague’s footsteps and eventually to carry on the work that Politkovskaya started. And that is one of the most significant takeaways that viewers should get out of this film – that we need journalists like Anna and Elena, who courageously sacrifice much in pursuing the gut-wrenching stories that come out of troubled locales like Chechnya and Ukraine, among other global hotspots. But, if that’s to happen, we need individuals who are willing and able to cultivate the qualities – and the beliefs that underlie them – to make such work possible. This release pays a fitting tribute to Anna, as well as so many others around the world, who have taken up the cause to tell these stories, especially when there are so many factions out there that would just as soon squelch them to prevent them from seeing the light of day.

Director James Strong’s fact-based biographical feature tells a compelling, if at times troubling, tale examining the tremendous impact of the protagonist’s work, as well as the triumphant yet devastating impact it had on her and her kindreds. This is effectively brought to life by the positively fierce performances of its superb ensemble, particularly Hinds, Isaacs, and, especially, Peake, all of whom deliver outstanding portrayals worthy of well-deserved awards season consideration. Admittedly, this offering can be somewhat formulaic and episodic at times, with character development that’s occasionally a little one-dimensional. That aside, however, “Words of War” makes clear that, no matter what issues we may have with today’s media, we still need reporters who are willing to put themselves on the line to tell the stories that we may not know about – or may not want to hear – if we ever hope to make this planet a better place to live for us all.

This superb offering recalls many excellent and revealing predecessor releases that tell comparable stories, such as the narrative biographies “The Killing Fields” (1984), “A Private War” (2018) and “Lee” (2024); the fictional features “Civil War” (2024) and “Viper Club” (2018); and the documentaries “20 Days in Mariupol” and “Slava Ukraini” (“Glory to Ukraine”). And, for its accomplishments, “Words of War” rightfully belongs beside these offerings, poignantly reminding us all – and not just journalists – to remain vigilant in the face of what is or could be unfolding around us.

Sadly, this release played fleetingly in theaters and has largely flown below the radar, and it’s likely to be overlooked when this year’s cinematic accolades are handed out. But, for my money, this is truly must-see viewing, now accessible for streaming on multiple online platforms. Don’t miss this one.

Journalists – especially those who run the risk of placing themselves in peril – are often a highly misunderstood bunch. Many onlookers gaze upon what they do and wonder how they could possibly engage in such dicey activities. But these examinations frequently provide only a small portion of the overall picture of what’s transpiring. In many cases, it’s not until their work is done when the complete picture comes into view, a perspective that provides an enlarged and more detailed look at their respective missions. And it’s at that point when the full value, meaning and impact of their accomplishments become apparent, realizations among observers that generally take on new levels of appreciation for their outcomes, commitment and intrepidity. Thankfully, those courageous souls could sense what many of the rest of us couldn’t and were willing to place their own well-being on the line to see their hunches revealed. Anna Politkovskaya was clearly one such individual, and we have much to be grateful for in carrying out her efforts. We need more like her these days to uncover what’s hidden but needs to be seen – and who firmly believe that they can accomplish these tasks for the betterment of us all.

A complete review is available by clicking here.

Coping Under Fire

When one lives in a small town, it’s not uncommon for everyone to seemingly know everybody else’s business, a circumstance that can be inconvenient, frustrating or annoying. But, worse than that, if one is somehow associated with an incident that’s tragic, scandalous or unspeakable, dealing with the fallout of such conditions (and the associated consequences) can be wholly intolerable. These situations place the affected under a very bright spotlight, creating circumstances that make these often-unwitting victims the subject of scrutiny, scorn, ridicule, ostracism and a host of other unpleasantries. So how does one cope in scenarios like this? The answers often don’t come easily, leaving one unable to find the means to not only recover from the event, but also to learn how to resume a reasonably normal everyday life. Such are the relentlessly daunting challenges faced by a seriously chastised parent in the intense new domestic drama, “Eric LaRue” (web site, trailer).

Janice LaRue (Judy Greer) used to lead a fairly normal, seemingly contented life as a small town working class wife and mother – that is, until one day when her family’s life was turned upside down and inside out. Janice’s teenage son, Eric (Nation Sage Henrikson), a quiet but frequently taunted adolescent, went to school one day and matter-of-factly gunned down three male classmates. And, after he coldly carried out this heinous act, he walked home and calmly sat down to watch television until the police arrived, whereupon they ransacked his room and hauled him off to jail. From that point onward, nothing would ever be the same in the LaRue household.

Janice knew that Eric had occasionally been the object of hazing, but he generally seemed to let most of it roll off his back (or so she thought). Little did she know what was simmering inside him and the shocking way in which it would eventually be released. His actions were so astonishingly brutal and unexpected that she didn’t know how to respond. But that was nothing compared to what she would have to contend with from those around her.

In the wake of the tragedy, anyone in town who hadn’t previously known Janice certainly knew her now, and the deplorable treatment thrust upon her by virtually everyone has since become unyielding. Their reactions to her vary widely, from open hostility to calculated derision to impatient intolerance, responses that apparently echo the same forms of treatment to which Eric had been subjected just for being himself. And, at a time when even a modicum of compassion or understanding might help her cope with these trying circumstances, virtually none is to be had.

As this drama unfolds, viewers thus witness the deluge of negativity and unforgiving scorn inflicted upon her. What’s more, most everyone treats her as being wholly unworthy of any kind of courtesy or consideration for the devastating loss she’s experienced, even going so far as to heap contempt upon her as being an inherently unfit mother. And, because of this, Janice has been cast adrift, unaware of what to do with the shambles of what’s left of her life.

Admittedly, there are those who seem to want to help Janice, but they’re more concerned with “fixing” her than helping her meaningfully heal. That’s most apparent with her husband, Ron (Alexander Skarsgård), who’s convinced that Janice desperately needs Jesus to help set her on a renewed and righteous path. He firmly believes she’ll benefit from the divinely inspired guidance of his prayer group and the patronizing ministering of Bill Verne (Tracy Letts), pastor of the fundamentalist congregation he attends. And Ron is so insistent in his convictions that he tries pressuring Janice into following his lead. But, when she resists, he grows frustrated, quietly turning to his co-worker and fellow parishioner, Lisa (Allison Pill), for comfort, a move that threatens his marriage (and possibly hers). (So much for the sanctity of Christian fidelity.)

Given Ron’s overbearing evangelizing, Janice searches out her own form of spiritual guidance, joining a traditional Presbyterian parish headed by Pastor Steve Calhan (Paul Sparks). The genial but socially awkward preacher sincerely tries to help Janice find some answers by arranging in intervention between her and the victims’ mothers (Jennifer Engstrom, Annie Parisse, Kate Arrington), an experience that quickly goes south in the wake of their varying and unanticipated reactions and the pastor’s profound ineptitude, good intentions notwithstanding.

Janice also finds little comfort and support at her job at a local discount store. Upon returning to work after a leave of absence, she encounters rude customers (Jacob Alexander, Sierra Foley), who clandestinely but insensitively mock her based on her tragic experience, an incident that prompts her to lose her cool. It also raises concerns for her well-meaning supervisor (Mierka “Mookie” Girten) and tries the patience of the store manager (Lawrence Grimm), placing her job – and income – in jeopardy.

Needless to say, all of these stresses pile up, filling Janice’s plate to an unmanageable level. And, to top it all off, Janice hasn’t been able to bring herself to visit Eric in prison. He may be her son, yet he’s also the source of all the disruption that has plagued her life. It’s bad enough that she’s been chastised for having raised such a monstrous son, but she also wrestles with seeing herself as a monstrous mother for having possibly failed him and essentially abandoning him to deal with a life behind bars. (Damned if you do, damned if you don’t.)

Obviously, Janice can’t keep going on like this, but what comes next? That’s what she must figure out for herself – and soon – if she’s to retain any semblance of her sanity and self-respect. Here’s hoping she can do that, despite the stacked deck that would appear to be seriously working against her. Fortunately, there’s a way out if she’s willing to embrace it, but it may be difficult, as it involves making some hard choices and requires her to take a hard look at herself and her existence. And doing that calls for her to examine her beliefs, the cornerstone foundation of her world and the form it takes. It’s unclear whether Janice has ever heard of this way of thinking, but, if she ever hopes to get herself out of this bind, she should certainly make an effort to learn about it and put it to use if she’s ever to change her life and give herself a shot at a viable future.

To this end, the most important question Janice must ask herself at this juncture is, “What must I do to move on from where I’m at?” It seems as though she may have been struggling to address this but has yet to come up with a viable answer. However, the solution may actually be simple, if somewhat unsettling, intimidating or unpalatable: When faced with circumstances that no longer serve us, perhaps the most effective way to deal with them is to relinquish them entirely, to give up on trying to alter the perceptions of those who have already made up their minds and to change the playing field in adopting a new way of life. That necessarily involves letting go of the existence we know and everything associated with it, embracing radically different beliefs to create a new everyday reality.

That might well seem like an extremely scary prospect to many of us. And that’s particularly true where Janice is concerned considering the enduring trauma she’s been through. Nevertheless, in light of what she’s had to undergo, is it truly wise to continue to do so? Given how unrelenting this scenario has been, is it realistic to think that it will be any different going forward, especially since efforts at attempting to reconcile it have invariably proved unsuccessful? Under conditions like this, starting with a clean slate may be the best option.

To be sure, this is probably a daunting prospect for Janice. The incessant barrage of scorn and ridicule has left her locked in place, unsure of what to do, but remaining in such a state is ultimately no better. Contrary to widely held contentions, sometimes the devil we don’t know may indeed be preferable to the one we do, especially when we’ve seen what havoc the more familiar demon is capable of wreaking.

Admittedly, in contemplating such a profound change, Janice has her work cut out for herself. There’s ample setup work to be done before proceeding, especially where her beliefs are concerned, particularly in terms of the role they’ll play in helping her manifest a new direction. First, she must decide and heartily believe that what she’s been through is no longer tolerable, and, by this point, she’s certainly had more than her share of opportunities to find that out for herself. The answers here should be quite clear by now and provide the impetus to let go of what’s holding her back.

Next, Janice must assess the impact of what she’ll be giving up, which could be seen as quite substantial. Nevertheless, her experience also shows that holding on to such unending negativity provides her with little to draw upon in forging an acceptable life. But that, in turn, requires her to determine what might be causing her apprehension to do so. In all likelihood, doubt and fear of the unknown are the culprits keeping her stuck, beliefs that are quite powerful in themselves and can readily prevent us from implementing meaningful change. Getting past those limiting notions is thus critical. Moreover, that process can be significantly bolstered by zealously embracing beliefs related to courage and personal heroism, potent counterpoints to the inhibiting beliefs that have left Janice trapped in her circumstances.

In a sense, shifting one’s perspective in this regard may not be as difficult as one might think. Janice has had ample opportunity to see what her experience has brought her. And, considering the consequences, she must frankly ask herself, is this something she wants to continue? What’s most telling in this is that Janice’s experience has allowed her to see the true colors of those around her. Indeed, it could be argued that their unflattering traits were in place even before the tragedy with Eric took place; they were simply waiting for a catalyst to bring them to the surface. In fact, in light of the incident that sparked this scenario, those same qualities could have been what prompted Eric to respond to them as he did, even if it wasn’t the wisest choice on his part and even if Janice couldn’t see or appreciate the nature of their presence until she was subjected to them firsthand.

With realizations like these, Janice may now be on the brink of seeing those around her for who they truly are – miserable, meddling, judgmental individuals who unapologetically inflict pain and suffering on others without taking into account the impact such behavior has on those they’ve targeted. Even those who think they’re helping may unwittingly end up adding to the confusion wrought by those whose intents are more willfully malicious and unforgiving. This includes many of the local residents, Janice’s co-workers, her own husband and perhaps even Eric himself. They represent people she no longer needs in her life, thereby making it easier for her to decide that they’re highly toxic, undesirable and expendable influences. Blaming her for an act that she didn’t commit solves nothing; in fact, it only makes her life that much more difficult. Their actions thus reflect the beliefs they’ve willingly adopted, even if unconsciously.

So, with that understanding, then, why would Janice want to keep them in her life? What purpose would that serve? She’s had plenty of opportunities to see that holding on to such influences won’t get her the redemption she seeks or the life she wants and deserves. Given that, then, maybe letting go of them isn’t as foreboding a notion as she has allowed herself to long believe. Walking away from this circle of familiars may call for courage, will and fortitude but perhaps not nearly as much as what she has led herself to believe, particularly when considering what taking such proactive steps might accomplish in the end.

Considering what transpires in this film, it could be argued that this is more Janice’s story than Eric’s, despite the title of the work. But that doesn’t diminish the message that the picture is seeking to convey. So many of us have allowed ourselves to tolerate conditions that don’t benefit us, either through fear, complacency, or even a basic lack of awareness of what’s unfolding around us or holding us back. However, that doesn’t mean we have to settle for or surrender to such circumstances. We can choose new and more satisfying paths for ourselves without having to resort to rash or ill-conceived acts. Eric may not have shown us that, but Janice certainly does, providing us with a lead worth following when conditions warrant.

Struggling to find clarity in a sea of confusion can be a truly frustrating experience as Janice discovers for herself in this intense domestic drama. And watching her grasp at straws to find answers can be just as maddening for viewers as it is for her (one of the criticisms that has been frequently leveled against this work). Nonetheless, the film’s spot-on depiction of her seemingly fruitless search provides audiences with an insightful look at what individuals in her shoes often go through. Director Michael Shannon’s ripping presentation of this story thus has an edge-of-the-seat quality that one might not typically find in a story like this, especially since resolution of the issues examined here often seems hopelessly out of reach. But therein lies the captivating nature of this story, as it keeps viewers continually guessing what will happen next, especially when it turns in unexpected directions.

In addition to the foregoing matters, the film once again raises thorny questions about the reasons and means behind teen violence, observations not unlike those brought up previously in such offerings as “Mass” (2021) and “We Need to Talk About Kevin” (2011). And, because of that, this can indeed make for an uneasy watch for sensitive viewers. Nevertheless, those who can handle such a degree of intensity are bound to be thoroughly impressed with this picture, most notably its fine ensemble, particularly Greer, Skarsgård and Pill, who deliver performances that reveal acting chops not seen before. “Eric LaRue” is also one of the finest stage-to-screen adaptations I’ve ever seen, successfully sustaining its pacing and narrative flow while never coming across as the least bit stagey, a true credit to screenwriter Brett Neveu in adapting his own play. To a great extent, this is made possible by the script’s deft inclusion of comic relief, effectively incorporated just when it’s needed most and held back when the dramatics need to take over for maximum impact. This 2023 production has been long time in coming to the cinematic marketplace, but the wait was definitely worth it. Shannon has made an impressive debut with this offering, and I look forward to whatever directorial projects he comes up with next. The film is available for streaming online.

Coping under fire is something most of us would probably rather avoid. While it may be true that it can help us build up our emotional strength and our capacity for problem solving, it can also be a major energy drain that can continue to drag us down and make it increasingly difficult for us to get back on our feet (no matter what inspirational platitudes might contend otherwise). In that sense, then, sometimes the best way to overcome such hardships is to make a clean break, to cut our losses and move on, ridding ourselves of people, places and things that no longer serve us. That can be a challenging step, but, in the long run, it could be the best thing we could do for ourselves. Remember that the next time you feel cornered – and look for a way to escape that fate so you never have to endure it again. 

A complete review is available by clicking here.

Copyright © 2025, by Brent Marchant. All rights reserved.