Citizen Vigilante: A Petulant Pet Project or a Provocative Political Statement?
In the realm of cinema, where art and entertainment intertwine, the latest offering from Uwe Boll, Citizen Vigilante, has sparked a heated debate. This movie, a vigilante tale with a twist, has garnered attention from the far-right online community, leaving a trail of mixed reactions. The film follows Michael Sanders, an American landlord turned vigilante, who takes it upon himself to right the wrongs of Europe's perceived criminal justice system. But is this a mere fantasy or a reflection of a deeper cultural shift?
The movie's premise is intriguing, yet it quickly unravels into a petulant display of violence and petulance. Sanders, played by Armie Hammer, is a landlord by day and a one-man army by night, taking on the role of a modern-day hero. The film's opening sequence, a brutal murder in a sunny neighborhood, sets the tone for the graphic and over-the-top violence that follows. However, the execution falls flat, lacking the tension and pacing that would make such scenes impactful.
One of the most intriguing aspects of Citizen Vigilante is the character of Sanders himself. He is not your typical vigilante; he's a landlord, a role that adds a layer of complexity to his character. The author argues that even the creators of Batman understood the importance of keeping the hero's wealth vague, ensuring it doesn't overshadow the fantasy. Sanders' dual identity as a landlord and a vigilante creates a unique dynamic, but it also raises questions about the nature of his vigilante activities.
The movie's narrative takes a turn when Sanders, frustrated with the legal system, decides to take matters into his own hands. He becomes a symbol of resistance against what he perceives as the injustices of the criminal justice system. However, the author points out that Sanders' actions are more petulant than anarchic, as he still seeks to profit from the capitalist system. This dichotomy makes him more of a dumber Travis Bickle than a true revolutionary.
The author delves into the idea that conservatism in art is often misunderstood. They argue that there has always been great conservative art, citing examples like 'Bad Boys 2', 'Cobra', and 'Rambo'. These films, they claim, are conservative in nature but are often dismissed due to a lack of empathy and skepticism of authority, traits that are supposedly inherent in the conservative worldview. Citizen Vigilante, however, fails to capture the essence of conservatism, as it lacks a coherent ideology or political stance.
The cultural trend of petulance, as the author suggests, is a significant factor in the rise of Citizen Vigilante. The movie's release coincides with a moment in history where men, in particular, are expressing their perceived grievances through petulant behavior. From online influencers using slurs to the rise of streamers like Nick Fuentes, the culture is permeated with a sense of entitlement and a lack of empathy. This petulance, the author argues, is not limited to the far-right but is also evident in the news media and stand-up comedy.
Despite the movie's flaws, the author acknowledges that its provocations are poorly executed. The plot lacks depth, and the characters are one-dimensional. The author even imagines a better version of the film, directed by Abel Ferrara, who has a talent for exploring moral complexity. They suggest that Citizen Vigilante could have been a thought-provoking piece if it had delved into the victims' perspectives and the complexities of justice.
In the end, Citizen Vigilante is a movie that fails to live up to its potential. It is a product of a culture that thrives on petulance and trolling. The author questions the nature of trolling and the purpose of ragebait in the current political climate. They speculate that the future of political cinema might lie in the rise of leftist movements, hoping for better-crafted and more impactful films to emerge from this wave.
In conclusion, Citizen Vigilante is a film that sparks debate and reflection on the state of contemporary cinema and the cultural trends it reflects. While it may not be a masterpiece, it serves as a reminder of the power of art to provoke, challenge, and ultimately, inspire.
