Skip to content

Killer Joe (2012)

August 21, 2012

VERDICT:
3/10 Hick-Fil-A’s

Some envelopes just shouldn’t get pushed.

Killer Joe is about a white trash kid from a trailer park in Texas who finds himself $6,000 in debt after his mom steals his coke to fix up her truck. Naturally, he comes up with a plan to off his n0-good mama so he can cash in on her life insurance policy and pay off his dealer in turn. Now, since he’s new to this whole matricide thing, he gets his dad, sister, and step-mom to join in on the fun. But since they’re new to the whole matricide thing too, they request the services of “Killer” Joe: a local cop who does some – you guessed it! – contract killin’ on the side. Eventually, Joe obliges them with his expertise, but being that they’re so poor they can’t even pay attention, he decides to take the kid’s sister as his retainer of sorts. While the kid isn’t too keen on this agreement, he’s not too keen on being dead either. So with time running out and options running low, the kid hounds Joe to get on with his mom while Joe’s busy getting on with his retainer.

Oh, Texas. You so crazy.

Not that it warrants clarifying, but this here movie is pretty effed up. Like, Before The Devil Knows You’re Dead-effed up. Granted, it’s a lot funnier and a lot more entertaining than it sounds, but “pretty effed up” has been the go-to answer each time I was asked, “How was the movie?” And the more time I’ve had to think about it, the more I’m not really sure what compelled me to see this Southern fried sick puppy over all the other fine options at my disposal. I mean, I’ve got all kinds of time for Thomas Haden Church, and I’ve always had a soft spot for Matthew McConaughey, but Emile Hirsch and Gina Gershon are what you’d call “red flags.” That, and something about the poster and title just weren’t doing it for me. As a proud advocate of not judging books by their covers, you can color me hypocritical, but when you’ve got two hours to kill and a ten spot in your pocket, why not go for the NC-17 movie?

And since that’s always the million dollar question with these things, let’s just start with the obvious: does Killer Joe deserve its NC-17 rating?

As idiotic as the MPAA’s ratings system is and as much as I want to take the side of the censored…the rating’s pretty accurate. Up until the last 15 minutes or so, it’s actually more like a rock-solid R. Lots of nudity, lots of bad words, plus all that noise about killin’ parents and crooked cops sleeping with girls who aren’t “all there.” Don’t bring the kids, but nothing mom and dad can’t handle. But there is those last 15 minutes, and those right there are a deal breaker. After all the NC-17 nonsense with Blue Valentine two years ago, I’ve always thought the rating was a bunch of hooey caused by rich folks who have nightmares about teenagers seeing private parts. But this is no Blue Valentine. Blue Valentine‘s about as racy as the Car Bears compared to this.

Folks, sometimes even the prudest of prudes get it right.

As for those last 15 minutes, I’ll get to them in a bit, but the second most important thing to know about Killer Joe is that during that whole time when it was still rated R, it was cruising at a solid 7. As usual, Emile Hirsch did nothing for me as our coke-pusher, Chris; and the same unfortunately goes for Gina Gershon as his step-mom. But also as usual, Thomas Haden Church is a total trip as Chris’ uber-gullible, simple-minded dad; Juno Temple – who I’ve never seen before – is pretty darn good as Chris’ sister who can’t keep her damn clothes on; and it’s also one more glaring reason why Matthew McConaughey needs to quit doing rom-coms.

As you can probably guess from the pictures, McConaughey plays “Killer” Joe. Aside from his instantly eerie Johnny Cash getup, he does a great job of confirming our suspicions about Joe by not doing anything all that blunt to get him there. It’s the grisly stories he tells over morning coffee without batting an eyelash, the level-headed manner he keeps when everyone around him’s in dire straits, the feeling that there’s an evil behind those shades, an evil that’s just waiting to boil over. You watch McConaughey as Joe, and you don’t need a body to know his nickname was earned. It’s a really good, subtle performance from a guy who keeps letting himself get typecast in shit that’s way, way underneath him. Call me crazy, but just you watch, this year’s gonna be a good one for old Wooderson.

And the script’s not too shabby either. Tracy Letts throws some great one-liners in here and has a real knack for getting laughs out of the royally grim circumstances he creates. Not much going on in the way of plot as it takes these characters a really long time to start doing something other than what they were doing to begin with, but whatever, it’s fun to just watch them do as they do. The only thing that bugged me was that, since it’s adapted from the stage, that’s exactly how it ends up coming across. Characters don’t just have everyday conversations with each other, they speak in stories. Like if you went up to your buddy at the bar and said, “Hiya, Phil! Whatcha’ drinkin?,” only to have Phil respond, “You remember the old railroad down by the river? Johnny and I used to love that old railroad. One time, back when we was little, we almost died on those there tracks. Did I ever tell you that story? Well, it was the end of summer. That’s right, I remember it now. Mama done told us to stay away from those tracks. No, wait. Maybe it was August…”

You get the idea. It’s all in the way these people talk to each other and it’s like that from one scene to the next. Not the worst thing in the world and it’s not poorly written by any means, it’s just that it all feels more like a well-filmed Broadway production than a decently-filmed movie. Personal preference: I’d go for the latter.

So that’s all well and good for the most part, but then there’s this scene in the last 15 minutes that I keep alluding to…

Since I’m not in the business of spoiling movies, I can’t get specific about what happens in the said scene – which is convenient because I wouldn’t want to anyway. But just to give you an idea of what happens, try imagining an unhappy medium between The Killer Inside Me and Irreversible. Not gonna be the guy who recommends two of the most misogynistic movies of all-time just to prove a point, so if you haven’t seen ’em, you’re just gonna have to trust me on this one. It’s not so much that the scene comes out of nowhere, it’s just hard to justify such brutal violence towards women as anything but unnecessary and despicable. Seriously, if you’re looking for a great way to ruin a movie in one fell swoop, beat up on a girl or worse. As you can see, it works every time.

I’m guessing there are folks who’ll defend the scene as “character development” or “pitch black humor,” and at the end of the day, that’s their prerogative. Different strokes for different folks. But I’m not on the bandwagon, and it’s a mighty fat chance that I’ll be getting off. If it was meant to shock, it was a sound success, which is unsurprising given William Friedkin’s penchant for shocking the shit out of people. The problem is that there’s a fine line between shocking and sickening, and Friedkin treads heavily towards the latter. To tell you the truth, if I didn’t have a movie blog to report back to, I probably would have walked out. I’ve never walked out on a movie before, and I’m frankly shocked that no one else walked out amidst the echoes of “Jesus Christ!” throughout the theater.

It’s also got a pretty wacky ending to boot. I overheard a couple people on the way out of the theater talking about how it was, “One of the better endings I’ve seen in a long time,” but that struck me as a pretty subjective statement. It certainly leaves us on an inspired note, I will give it that. Although given everything that goes down leading up to it, it was all just too much for me.

It really is a shame I couldn’t give this movie a higher Verdict because Killer Joe is not without its merits. It’s actually got merits up the wahzoo. But that doesn’t change the fact that I can’t, in good conscience, recommend it in the slightest. I can only imagine the looks and comments I’d get from folks if they saw this just because I went and gave it an extra four “Hick-Fil-A’s.” If you could have seen the seat-squirming going on in that theater, you would understand. But my own reputation aside, the deciding factor in all of this is that it’s very difficult to support a movie that’s ultimately so deplorable, even for such a short amount of time. One of those scenes that makes you feel awful for those involved and makes you wonder why it exists in the first place. Or maybe it doesn’t, but it sure did for me.

Just glad I saw this by myself. Friends don’t take friends to see Killer Joe.

Advertisements
14 Comments leave one →
  1. Branden permalink
    August 22, 2012 12:30 am

    I’m sorry that you didn’t like the movie. I understand what you are coming from, but I felt that it was deserved. Would I do that? No, but that’s the way Joe deals with it.

    The same thing happens in True Romance, would you fault the entire movie based on the actions of one brutal act?

    • August 22, 2012 9:42 am

      It’s weird, because there’s a lot of it that I did like and it wasn’t until the last 15 minutes that it really took a nosedive for me. Honestly would have rather him put a bullet through her head instead of doing what he did.

      And I don’t feel like it’s the same with True Romance. That’s a brutal scene, granted, but there was a real element of sadism to what Joe does that made it worse for me, and I didn’t get that with James Gandolfini’s character. Felt more like the rape scene in Watchmen than anything else actually, one of those “Was that really necessary?” moments in film.

      • Branden permalink
        August 22, 2012 3:38 pm

        I understand that, Aiden. If he did do that, then nobody would know the reveal. Besides, he has to be paid or intent to pay to kill anyone. He would not do it out of anger.

  2. August 26, 2012 7:02 pm

    oh man, really? that bad? i was looking forward to it! thanks for ruining it, lol.

    • August 27, 2012 6:44 pm

      Haha. My apologies, but I trust that I’m doing you a favor on this one.

  3. August 31, 2012 4:08 pm

    This movie is trash. Great review — detailed and well written. I like your writing style, keep it up. Btw, I have a movie review site of my own, check it out and follow my blog if you like the reviews: http://www.cinemasoundblog.com

    • August 31, 2012 6:03 pm

      Thanks! And totally get what you’re coming from. Will check out the site and thanks for stopping by. Always love hearing from new bloggers!

  4. October 20, 2012 10:01 am

    Okay, I saw it now. I didn’t like it much either, but for different reasons than you I think. I have no problem with ‘sick and twisted’ and — as a proper European — it takes quite a lot for me to regard a film as ‘controversial’, hehe, but the problem I had with it is that I just couldn’t shake off the feeling that it constantly tried to be ‘sick and controverial’ for the pure sake of it. ‘Let’s just have them get naked all the time so it is a true shocker’, that kinda mindset, which just turned me off. Some fine acting by McConaughey and Haden Church, but most predominantly by Juno Temple, totally agree on that one. Had to laugh that you consider Emile Hirsch a ‘red flag’. Why? I usually like him, but here I couldn’t take him. He was overacting so bad, it actually seemed like a farce. So I guess, Aiden, the big day has come for the both of us — WE AGREE!

    • October 28, 2012 12:16 pm

      Regardless of why you didn’t like it, a win’s a win when we actually agree on a movie. HOWEVER, I totally do agree with why you didn’t like it. That whole last scene felt so unnecessarily gratuitous for the sake of being unnecessarily gratuitous. Ruined the whole movie for me. And idk what it is specifically about Emile Hirsch that I don’t like, but he’s never done a damn thing for me. Every movie I can think of that I’ve seen him in is a movie I didn’t like, this included, and I don’t think that’s a coincidence.

      Anyhow, I am toasting a beer to this comment tonight. A celebration is most definitely in order. They don’t come around too often.

  5. October 28, 2012 8:48 pm

    you didn’t like ‘into the wild’? how about ‘lords of dogtown’? 😉

    saw some truly shitty movies today. ‘the comedy’ and ‘red lights’, if you wanna check some shitty movies out 😉

    cheers!

    • November 5, 2012 9:41 am

      Haven’t seen either one, even though I’ve always wanted to see the former. One of these days…

      And thanks for the heads up on two more movies I’ll continue to avoid! Much appreciated.

  6. sarina permalink
    December 26, 2012 10:28 pm

    I saw the movie today and consider the ending the worst I have seen in any film ever. This is saying a lot, considering I watch a lot of international cinema with pretty intense, graphic, and dark material. I agree the director is being ” sick and twisted” , just for the sake of being sick and twisted. I note, all these deranged people in films are always from Texas, I live in Toronto but if I lived in Texas I would be offeded.

    • January 15, 2013 5:47 pm

      Yup, I can totally agree with you on that. I’m from New England, and I am also of the mindset that Texas is generally a pretty fucked up place (except for Austin, which is supposed to be awesome). Actually dug a lot of what this movie had going for it up until that ending, but that ending really tarnished the whole experience, didn’t it?

Trackbacks

  1. 60 Second Movie Review: Killer Joe (2011) « polentical

Drop that knowledge!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: