Bates, The Debt

The Debt is a realistic movie that tells the story of three Mossad agents and their failed mission to capture a former Nazi. The first half of the film is largely set in the past, depicting the strife of the operation, while the second half reveals how their failure and subsequent lie about the collapse of the mission returns to haunt them. The movie addresses multiple issues concerning morality and justice, expressing ideologies that are both implicit and explicit. However, I argue that most of the ideologies are implicit, particularly the question concerning revenge and justice.

Based on the extreme circumstances that pervade the film, an argument could easily be made for the permissibility of revenge. Dieter Vogel (Jesper Christensen) is a horribly evil character who, during World War II, committed atrocious acts against Jews in the name of medicine. The three Mossad agents, David (Sam Worthington), Stephen (Marton Csokas), and Rachel (Jessica Chastain) capture Vogel in 1965 East Berlin but, after their escape plan goes arie, become trapped in their hideout with their prisoner. During this time, Vogel taunts them, and the audience is made to hate him through his cruel comments and disgusting behavior whenever the agents try to feed him. Thus, when Vogel pushes David to far and David beats him, the audience is pleased. This scene subtly allows the viewers to be open to a vengeful resolution. By this point, the agents have been deserted by their government, and the option of killing Vogel and escaping with their lives becomes appealing. No one would miss Vogel, nor would anyone learn of the murder. Vogel committed horrible crimes in his past and is unrepentant; given such facts, releasing Vogel seems less moral than killing him. Additionally, the longer the agents wait to leave, the more precarious their situation becomes. The audience is left to wonder which option is better: the agents to become killers or to sacrifice themselves trying to hold Vogel captive while hoping for justice through trial. If one were to take a Utilitarian approach to this desperate situation, killing Vogel would be justifiable because the greatest good would result from his death—the agents would survive, and an evil man would pay for his crimes and be removed from the world.

However, the movie also makes an implied argument for justice. In the final scenes of the movie, the elderly Rachel (Helen Mirran) goes to kill an old man whom she thinks is Vogel to keep him silent about the true events of his capture thirty years earlier. Yet despite the threat he poses, she finds herself unable to carry out the task even before she realizes her mistake. This shows that Rachel does not want to be a killer, suggesting that price of revenge is too great. This attitude is shown once more when she tries to leave after confronting the real Vogel. Justice is also echoed throughout the movie whenever either David or Stephen loses his temper. The other always calls on justice in order to calm the other’s animalistic instincts. Thus, revenge is made out to be less desirable than justice.

Yet the line between revenge and justice becomes blurred at the movie’s end. Rachel kills Vogel despite her reluctance, thus bringing about a type of revenge. The one saving grace is that she kills him out of self-defense, which lessens the moral responsibility she carries for his death. In the end, the movie never asserts whether revenge or justice is more moral, but rather allows the audience to decide the right course of action.