By Leonard Klady Klady@moviecitynews.com

Review: Louder Than Bombs

Louder Than Bombs is a family drama about the emotional fallout of the death of a woman death on her husband and her two sons. The filmmakers take up the story three years after the tragedy, when her work—she was a war zone photographer—is to be exhibited, along with the publication of a monograph.

Directed by Joachim Trier and written with his usual co-screenwriter Eskil Vogt, the Norwegian filmmaker’s fraught with the inner demons of the living and the dead. Though hardly the button-down stereotypes of the American family that was reflected in distant decades in Ordinary People to American Beauty, the surviving trio appear to have adopted the tentative aspect of behavior that belies their true nature. What’s led to such a fierce defense is the film’s other haunting question.

Isabelle Reed (Isabelle Huppert) spent decades on the frontlines of hot wars and lingered past the heat of the hostilities to record their devastating consequence. She’s less adrenalin junkie than a slave to the professional pursuit of capturing images that encapsulate horror and humanity in the landscape. Though absence is a hallmark of her family life, flashbacks demonstrate that she was engaged when she returned home.

Ironically, or not, when she finally decides to give up war photography, she dies in a fatal car crash with a big rig. The “or not” is the belief that it wasn’t an accident and that’s about to be exposed in a newspaper piece. Her husband Gene (Gabriel Byrne) and eldest son Jonah (Jesse Eisenberg) know that scenario, but teenager Conrad (David Druid) was spared that complexity at the time.

The exhibition brings the family back together, at least physically. Jonah moved away, married and has just celebrated the birth of a child. Gene, a high school teacher and former actor (there’s a hilarious clip from the 1987 Hello Again to reflect his former glory), has spectacularly failed in any meaningful communication with Conrad. He also suffers acute nerdiness that manifests itself in acting out and digging in.

It’s fitting, perhaps even inevitable, and certainly organic, that aftermath is the signature of Louder Than Bombs. The past informs but life goes on. The dilemma confronting the three men isn’t entirely the result of Isabelle’s death. Jonah’s is that he beginning to question whether he wants a seemingly traditional family; Gene is struggling with his involvement in a new relationship and Conrad is confronting typical teenage challenges he will assuredly overcome in a few years.

The visual palette of Louder Than Bombs opts for somber tones and images are cropped to accentuate the confinement of each individual. Eisenberg, seemingly the pivot, plays his character with a sly quality of detachment. He vainly fends off the very things he has to know come close to the truth. But the glue ultimately is provided by Byrne. His is a relentlessly interior performance that frustrates at every turn and yet is so impeccably honest one cannot help but be enthralled by his inability to break out of his shell.

The explosions in Louder Than Bombs are primarily subterranean and therefore sonically muffled. Nonetheless if you’re still perplexed by the riddle of the title it is SILENCE.

Be Sociable, Share!

Comments are closed.

Quote Unquotesee all »

It shows how out of it I was in trying to be in it, acknowledging that I was out of it to myself, and then thinking, “Okay, how do I stop being out of it? Well, I get some legitimate illogical narrative ideas” — some novel, you know?

So I decided on three writers that I might be able to option their material and get some producer, or myself as producer, and then get some writer to do a screenplay on it, and maybe make a movie.

And so the three projects were “Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep,” “Naked Lunch” and a collection of Bukowski. Which, in 1975, forget it — I mean, that was nuts. Hollywood would not touch any of that, but I was looking for something commercial, and I thought that all of these things were coming.

There would be no Blade Runner if there was no Ray Bradbury. I couldn’t find Philip K. Dick. His agent didn’t even know where he was. And so I gave up.

I was walking down the street and I ran into Bradbury — he directed a play that I was going to do as an actor, so we know each other, but he yelled “hi” — and I’d forgot who he was.

So at my girlfriend Barbara Hershey’s urging — I was with her at that moment — she said, “Talk to him! That guy really wants to talk to you,” and I said “No, fuck him,” and keep walking.

But then I did, and then I realized who it was, and I thought, “Wait, he’s in that realm, maybe he knows Philip K. Dick.” I said, “You know a guy named—” “Yeah, sure — you want his phone number?”

My friend paid my rent for a year while I wrote, because it turned out we couldn’t get a writer. My friends kept on me about, well, if you can’t get a writer, then you write.”
~ Hampton Fancher

“That was the most disappointing thing to me in how this thing was played. Is that I’m on the phone with you now, after all that’s been said, and the fundamental distinction between what James is dealing with in these other cases is not actually brought to the fore. The fundamental difference is that James Franco didn’t seek to use his position to have sex with anyone. There’s not a case of that. He wasn’t using his position or status to try to solicit a sexual favor from anyone. If he had — if that were what the accusation involved — the show would not have gone on. We would have folded up shop and we would have not completed the show. Because then it would have been the same as Harvey Weinstein, or Les Moonves, or any of these cases that are fundamental to this new paradigm. Did you not notice that? Why did you not notice that? Is that not something notable to say, journalistically? Because nobody could find the voice to say it. I’m not just being rhetorical. Why is it that you and the other critics, none of you could find the voice to say, “You know, it’s not this, it’s that”? Because — let me go on and speak further to this. If you go back to the L.A. Times piece, that’s what it lacked. That’s what they were not able to deliver. The one example in the five that involved an issue of a sexual act was between James and a woman he was dating, who he was not working with. There was no professional dynamic in any capacity.

~ David Simon