Directed by John Madden, the 2011 political thriller, The Debt, is a film that implicitly construes ideologies on truth and infamy. A riveting film throughout, there is a clear moral to be had at the end of the story about living a lie. The protagonist is Rachel Singer (played by Jessica Chastain in her 20’s and then Helen Mirren 30 years later), who, after a heinously cruel Nazi hostage (escapes while she is on watch, agrees to live with a lie that really she killed him. The lie is developed by the antagonist of the film (Jesper Christensen) who seems more interested with protecting his reputation as a Mossad agent and hero of Israel than with telling the truth that the team failed in their mission. These two characters represent a binary opposition seen in the moral of the film; truth and punishment versus deception and fame. By choosing to lie about the actions of December 31st 1965, the characters must relive their lie over and over and again for the next 30 years. It consumes one of the Mossad agents, David, (Sam Worthington and then later Ciaran Hinds) who kills himself by stepping in front of a truck when faced with being forced to continue living with the lie, after Stefan, who is adamant the true must never be told, begins to investigate his return to Israel. At the end of the movie, Rachel does kill the Surgeon of Burkineau, as she has been saying she did for the past 30 years, but not without punishment. She is stabbed and injured though when the film closes we do not know if it was fatal. However, she does allow the truth to come out after all this time claiming “she wants to do something her daughter can be proud of.” This conclusion implicitly presents ideology about truth, justice, lying, and fame.
Why do you argue that the movie is implicit? You said it yourself that “she [Rachel] does allow the truth to come out after all this time claiming “she wants to do something her daughter can be proud of.” Remember that the definition of ‘explicit ideology’ is almost identical to an implicit one except that aim is to teach or persuade as much as to entertain. Patriotic films, many documentaries, political films, and movies with a sociological emphasis all can fall under this category so why can’t “spy films” or “movies about the Holocaust”. Also, usually an admirable character articulates the values that are really important (like Bogart’s famous speech at the end of Casablanca),” you think Rachel’s letter at the end of the movie does not qualify as that? Articulating values just means expressing them clearly, which I think her letter, as well as David’s suicide accurately described their thoughts on the subject. Could it not be said that the aim of the movie is to teach people not to make decisions that will haunt them in the future? Rachel possibly gave up her life for something that happened so long ago, it didn’t make sense for her to confront Vogel, she actually gets punished for it til the end of the movie.
ReplyDelete