Se7en: A Masterpiece.

Se7en is my favourite movie. It comes as close to perfect as a movie can - so far. While that personal truth might be uninteresting to you, here is an attempt at an objective explanation as to why I think this is the case.

The opening title sequence alone is masterfully done, setting the theme, mood and style better and more appropriately than most, which I would say only becomes truly clear after you see the movie a few times.

The title sequence itself is legendary, and has been copied many times ever since - rarely with a result that comes close to the 'original', however.

One can also see from the extra material on DVD how much work and effort actually went into making it.

The music for it is a perfect match, too, scratching and dragging along with an eerie heartbeat-like, breathy rhythm, consisting almost entirely of sounds that separately are noises that grate the hearing sense, but in combination form a sort of cacophonic symphony (yes, an oxymoron) of enormous sinister intensity, something that could be more or less directly transferred unto the movie itself.

Before the opening titles we actually have a scene that is filled with clues to the theme and issue of the movie, although strangely uneventful: We see Somerset in his apartment, getting ready for work. The movie opens; static shot, no music, no dialogue, only ambient sounds. So many things are immediately established tacitly and implicitly; he's a cop, older, lives in a big city, noisy, alienation, hostility, disassociation, but he is diligent, systematic - a perfectionist. The expression on his face seems neutral, but with a hint of sadness and apathy, and it doesn't change as he moves around, getting ready for work by going through his daily routine. Perhaps he uses that perfectionism to cope with a world that he feels distanced from.

All this is something inferred from a short scene, lasting less than a minute. (Can you see where this is going?) Don't worry; I'm not going to do a scene-by-scene account here, although I could easily do that and have a lot of good things to say about each and every scene.

Moving on to the film technical aspects:

The cinematography in the movie is quite unique. You don't really see any cool, flashy or weird shots or angles that don't have a point, as in many other modern movies. Many of the shots are slow pans or zooms, or even static. In spite of this, the tension and mood exude from each frame. The choice of lenses and the mise-en-scene (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mise-en-scene) also play a huge part in this, and the dark, but incredibly clear visuals make every frame an interesting one.

Take the scene with the Gluttony murder. The place is enveloped in darkness, penetrated only by the flashlights, and the picture is so clear that we clearly see all the dust in the air. Not that the dust has any immediate function in the movie, but I feel it adds to the sense of presence and reality of the scene.

You can hardly talk about the audio side of the movie by itself. It has a fantastic interplay with the visual side, and separating the two is just about impossible. Take the abovementioned scene: The music is very unobtrusive, so much so that you really don't notice it unless you focus on it. Yet it plays right into our subconsciousness with great effect, heightening the tension, as the characters venture further into the unknown.

Another scene where the soundtrack plays a big role, although in a more obvious, but still very unobtrusive, is the library scene, with Bach (Air for the G-String) playing in the back (It starts out within the frame of the movie, played by a radio in the location, then moves smoothly beyond the frame). In fact, it's a pretty damn good Bach music video, actually.

The scene itself is one of character development and it also supports the theme and mood. The situation in the movie in this scene is one where the two detectives are doing some good old research. Few films today actually take the time to do that anymore. The aesthetic value is tremendous and also very soothing, functioning as something of a haven amid all the darkness.

There are also less soothing scenes, such as the 'Lust' scene, and of course the action scene. The lust scene takes us down to the darker side of society. It doesn't create it, but it shows it. The place is dark, seedy and loud, and that's how it's shown. The senses are deprived, we can't see and hear as well as normal, and it makes us feel unsettling. But again, you actually don't see the actual gore and violence. You only see part of the victim, but you don't see what has happened to her, just that the police officers standing around her are shaken. Adding to the mix is an absolutely hysterical man, played Oscar-worthy by Leland Orser, yelling to get 'this thing' off him. We don't see what it is, and we're uncertain as to what exactly has happened until it is inferred in the next scene - standing in stark contrast to the previous scene - by means of a Polaroid picture. No gruelling gore, no visual violence, just the horrible hint at what has happened.

This, the interrogation scene, is another masterpiece: First showing the wide shot with everyone in it. Then the steady crosscutting between the interrogators and those being interrogated, in relative quiet, apart from the (actually) hyperventilating Leland Orser. The calm crosscutting between the interrogation rooms. The shocking revelation given, and the final breakdown of Orser's character, heard while showing the rolling tapes that are recording the session.

The finesse and detail in this relatively inconsequential scene is incredible, and another testament to the effort and dedication involved.

The other less soothing scene is the sole action scene in the movie, in reality. It starts without warning, and just explodes. It grabs you, and doesn't let go till it's over. The haunting music accompanies us all the way. We go down stairs, through rooms with people, then out in the rain, which is still (again) pouring down. The downward vertical shot in the rain is amazing, and the rest of the camerawork is great, too. There are so many unconventional shots used, but with immense efficiency.

The story progresses steadily. Nothing is rushed. There are quite a few character development scenes, and some may find that they stray from the actual plot, but the characters actually express some of the main themes in the movie. One of the main points of the movie is how you view the world. The two main characters have diametrically opposite views, which makes for some interesting discussions throughout the movie, but also an obviously different approach to thing by the old, experienced but resigned Somerset and the young, idealistic but ignorant Mills.

The philosophical discussions they have are relatively short, but longer than in most movies. They also get to the core of the matter pretty quickly, and I feel you end up understanding both Somerset and Mills with what they're saying. They are diametrically opposed in some of their opinions, but I think the viewer is compelled to think about what they are saying, and perhaps, like myself, take a stance somewhere in between what the two characters are saying. At the end of the movie, however, it seems as if Somerset has started to care again, and changed his stance. The Hemingway quote and Somerset's commentary near the end might not be great philosophy, but it makes the point of the movie crystal clear, stating that the world and the things that happens in it is not always pretty, but all of it is still worth fighting for. Somerset seems to have recovered some of his lost idealism, and perhaps also lost some of the apathy that the world had infected him with.

Slight spoiler alert in this following paragraph:

The acting was yet another strong point of the movie. Again, not only did it stand on its own as being great, but it fit incredibly well into the overall experience. Morgan Freeman can be said to be doing his usual respectable and intelligent older guy routine, but there is something new in this movie, with an incredibly amount of resignation and disenchantment, almost to a degree where it is scary - because he is the one of the good guys, and you don't want him to give up! Additionally, his desperation at the end of the movie is so inspiring, as he tries to convince the emotional Mills of something he probably knows very well that he can not.

What Freeman's character lacks in vigour, idealism and hope, Brad Pitt's character can be said to more than make up for. I feel Pitt does a really good job showing this. He is impatient, eager to prove himself, rather emotional, bordering on thoughtless, but with a powerful drive to do the right thing. Sure, he can be said to be somewhat annoying at times in the movie, but that's the point, which just goes to show that he is doing a good job. His total breakdown at the end of the movie is in my opinion very well done, and seems like a natural reaction of his character.

Gwyneth Paltrow is great as the sweet, pretty and amiable little wife of Mills, appearing as a shining light in a dark world. She engenders a lot of sympathy, which is a rather cruel thing to do, one could say, as it adds to the experience of horror at the end of the movie.

Kevin Spacey is simply fantastic. It is almost scary how his character feels justified in his horrible actions, while still managing to convey an emotional message that you are forced to contemplate, and to some degree even agree with some of it.

And I think it is great that he didn't mind being featured in the intro titles, the trailer or any of the promotion material, in order to make the surprise even greater for the audience.

Many of the other characters deserve honourable mention, too, particularly Leland Orser for his incredible performance as the shocked 'unwilling killer'.

R. Lee Ermey originally auditioned for the part as John Doe, and while I'm thankful it went to Spacey, I am still glad they kept him in the movie as the Captain.

Then there are people like Richard Roundtree, giving a great performance as DA Talbot, and Hawthorne James as George 'How's this for culture?' the library night guard.

Perhaps one of the most disturbing things about Se7en, in my opinion, was that the killer actually made some good points. They were, after all, in some ways close to some of the things Somerset was saying, so that's understandable. Being fed up with the world is not unusual, and a certain amount of cynicism tends to accompany that. There isn't much that really separates Somerset and the killer in terms of the perception of the world, but there is an obvious difference in how they deal with it.

Somerset, and the viewer, do not end up sympathizing with the killer, but perhaps see that he does have a point. I for one see the point, and it's a good one. The point of killing people is not, however. You just cannot make a right with two wrongs. That is something people today should do better to remember, really.

Apathy seems to be a common denominator with the Seven Deadly Sins. It is also somewhat explicit in how the killer explains how his victims were hardly 'innocent'. Apathy is also mentioned in some of the discussions that Somerset and Mills have. The points about apathy are very interesting, in my opinion. I think you can actually argue that apathy is a major 'sin'. It does lead to just about all the crap we have in the world, and it could easily be called a sin, whatever you feel that implies. Perhaps interestingly, the Danish word for 'sin' also means something like 'A shame' and 'A pity'. The word probably has too many religious overtones and connotations for many people to take it seriously, but I feel that it means more than just something that goes against some supposed divinity or divine laws. However, I'm not going to go into a religious or spiritual discussion here. I feel 'sin' denotes all kinds of wrong doings, whether done to others or yourself. It is something from which the world does not benefit. Just as well as I feel that 'Apathy' means more than just being passive or lazy. I feel it is a state where people chose the less beneficial (for the world) option, and opt for the quick and selfish way out, which in the long run comes back and slaps you in the face. So in essence, it's also stupid and 'uneconomical'.

Looking now at some of the criticism of Se7en, from some of the user comments that only gave it one or two stars usually, shows a complete lack of understanding for the movie and its points. But while you can misunderstand those points, disagree with them, or just find them repulsive, it doesn't change the fact that the movie was made with incredible skill and with a unique understanding of the film media. The cinematography, the mise-en-scene, the editing, the sound editing and the soundtrack, it is all executed perfectly, mastering all those aspects, and adding new and powerful ones.

With that in mind, there is no way you could ever justify giving this movie only one star, or even five, for that matter - provided you vote by more or less objective criteria, considering movies as an art form with many involved factors.

One thing that struck me with all the critical comments is that so many of them mention the gore, blood and violence in Se7en. This is interesting, because you never really actually see much gore, blood or violence. Perhaps these people mistake all that rain for blood? All kidding aside, you actually never see the killer kill anyone. You see some bodies, but not much, and not for long - apart from the Gluttony victim. You can probably say a lot of things about him, but my guess is that when his body is shown in the movie, more people are thinking, 'my God he's fat!' than they are thinking, 'my God that's gory, bloody and violent!' And yes, you see some blood at other times, most noticeable with the 'Greed' and 'Pride' murders, but that blood is dried up - You don't see the blood spraying, as the killer stabs/shoots/maims his victims, as you do in many other movies. To reiterate what I said previously, you never see the killer kill anyone. In any case, Se7en uses the power of suggestion to make an impression on the viewer, which requires a very skilful director, and evidently, it does it so well that some people found it too heavy.

Doing this is not cheap, as someone said. Doing what so many slasher horror movies do, showing the gore and spraying blood, is cheap, but not what Se7en does.

Some critics say that the movie is just too dark and sinister. Compared to what, though? Real life? Real life is much more dark, sinister and grim than any movie could ever be. Se7en doesn't really show any particular nastiness that hasn't already been seen out there. Many thousands of people die everyday in horrible ways, and _that_ is the truly grim reality. The fact that someone gets upset about a few people dying in a movie should check out the daily news.

But sure, Se7en puts it right in our face, and it adds some extra rain, some grey and some dark shades, and so what? As we say here: 'Exaggeration gets the point across.'

Another thing to mention is the amount of effort put in to realize the artistic vision of director David Fincher, and script writer, Andrew Kevin Walker. As you can imagine, with an ending like that, and such a dark movie in general, has not been an easy thing to get past the Hollywood producers. Listening to some of the audio commentary on the DVD will tell you this. My mentioning Kevin Spacey not being in the intro title credits and such earlier is another proof of this. This is something I find very admirable, and it seems very rare these days.

All in all, Se7en has a lot to offer as a movie. The themes and aesthetics contain so many interesting aspects that one can enjoy and discuss at great length.

The fact that all the aspects in the movie have been made with such dedication and sense of perfection creates a synergy, making the experience truly special - even when watching it for the tenth time.

That is why Se7en is a masterpiece and my favourite movie.

---o---

Well, having finally finished my extensive praise of my favourite movie, with the honour of this being my first comment for a movie on IMDB, I went to the site, proud of my accomplishments.

As it turns out, there is a maximum limit on 1,000 words for a comment in there. And well, my Blab is slightly beyond that, at almost 2,500 words. Crap.

The moral of the story? Check out crap like that before you do something like this. But Se7en is still a great movie!

Additionally, I went ahead and wrote a new comment for IMDB. This one at exactly 800 words (yes, completely intentional!!).

You should be able to find this on the Se7en page of IMDB, at: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0114369/

But as a service to you, I bring it to you here. So once again, without further ado, here is why Se7en is such a great movie:

---o---

A Masterpiece!

Se7en is an amazing movie in so many ways. It is, in fact, my favorite movie, and here is why:

To me, the story and themes in Se7en are incredibly interesting and well thought out. It is not so much the murderer, the killings, and the police work that matter, it's what lies beyond these. The movie deals with the fundamental ways with which we look at life. This is demonstrated best by the diametrically opposite views of detectives Mills and Somerset, respectively, but also the views of the killer, in contrast to their views. Apathy is the key word here, while Choice is another important factor, which is intrinsically connected to Apathy.

Apart from this, the story is masterfully told; it does not rush anything. It takes its time to make the points it needs, which are plenty, without seeming to add any superfluous elements.

The technical aspects are pure genius. Not only is everything executed flawlessly, but put together it all has a certain synergy that makes it all seem, well, better than perfect, really.

The cinematography is excellent. Many of the camera angles are different, but not weird or artsy just for the sake of being either of those. The visuals have a sharp purity to them, and are incredibly clean. So clean, in fact, that you can see the dirt and dust in the air at times (particularly in the Gluttony crime scene.)

Many scenes are somewhat dark and gray, for instance all the rain, but it is shown so artfully, which makes them incredibly interesting instead of just depressing. This depressing motif is highly fitting to the themes the movie deals with, though, so it is not at all out of place or misused, in order to try to just seem artsy or dark.

The sound and music is not just good, but so fitting and so well done that it actually enhances the experience of the movie, something I feel sound and music are supposed to do in movies - and not just in the simple and cheap way tension music does it in so many thrilled and horror movies.

Both the sound and music go in and interact with the visuals (or the other way around) on just about all situations in the movie. Like the very first scene, where we see Somerset in his kitchen, where the ambient sound actually goes in and gives us audio clues to the surroundings and situation. Or the legendary (often since copied, never outdone or equaled) intro title sequence, where the titles and the gritty, almost evil visuals move and shake in sync with the industrial grinding of Nine Inch Nails? 'Closer'.

A scene standing in stark contrast with that one, but no less interesting, is the Library scene, with Bach playing in the back (until it slowly moves into the front). It is an incredibly aesthetically pleasing scene, almost like a fully fitting music video for one of the most soothing pieces of classical music around.

There are many other scenes that merit at least a page each of praise on the audio and visual aspects, like the Lust scene, the Interrogation scene, the Chase scene and the scenes from the movie's finale, but there is simply not room for it here.

The acting is also dead on. It is just so fitting that it becomes great. Freeman has an aura of experience and intelligence over him, but also a strong sense of having given up and resignation that often shows, as the character is supposed to be portrayed. Pitt might not have gotten equally appreciated with his effort, but living up to Freeman is no easy task. I feel Pitt, with his impatience and visible energy, does an incredible job, playing the diametric opposite to Somerset, which in my mind is the exact way that character is supposed to be portrayed, as well.

The movie, I feel, leaves you stunned. It gets the point across better than any movie I have seen, not just by cheap shock effects, but by a deep, disturbing rumbling that culminates in terrible realization. It does indeed get your attention by hitting you with a sledgehammer.

As a final note, I would like to mention that the amount of gore and violence seen in the movie is not great. Strangely, many people seem to think so. They claim the movie was too harsh and violent, but when you confront them with this, it turns out they only got this impression, but didn't actually see anything. This, I feel, is a testament towards the skill with which the director so expertly implies these things, instead of going for cheap, visual thrills and shock effects by actually showing all the gore.

And that is why Se7en is my favorite movie.

---o---

As a final note, I would like to go on at length about how I think a number of people on IMDB are rather stupid in their voting, to be honest and blunt.

I think the voting should reflect whether or not the movie is good or not, and not only whether or not you liked or not. And yes, there is a huge difference between the two, with the second one solely relies on emotional reaction, and not the slightest hint of objective evaluation.

I guess you could say that it's a free place, and people may vote as they may. Well, that may be the case, but that also means I'm free to complain about this. Damn it, it will at least make me feel better!

Seriously, though. Sure, you might think a movie totally sucked, but it is seldom that all aspects of it were purely made - unless it is an amateur movie or something.

Movies on the top 250 list on IMDB all have something or other to offer, and are usually pretty well made. You might disagree with some of the aspects of the movie, such as the story, the acting, the themes, or whatever, but that doesn't mean the movie is poorly made.

I mean (and this is where I get it all off my chest), how in the HELL can you give a movie like Se7en a 1 or 2 grade? Or even 3, 4 or 5, for that matter? Sure, you may feel that it was too dark, it was too boring, too gory, or that Brad Pitt is a total clown, but there is obviously something redeeming about the movie, too.

But well, I guess some people just don't consider this, and I guess I should not be bothered by it, but well? too late!

Do try something for me, though. Go to the top 250 list and check the voting for some (all) of the top movies. You'll see a distinct pattern forming immediately: A disproportionate amount of 1's are given to these movies, with the percentage to prove it. It seems obvious to me that people are just letting their emotions get the better of them, and voting in spite. Many of them, as they mention in the comments, also say how they had the movie recommended, either by friends or critics, and are consequently disappointed by the hype. It is my theory that hype alone killed the movie for these people. What is it with all these people listening to hype, anyway? And then only reacting in sheer spite? Well, that bit I can actually relate to slightly. I mean, most of us probably wouldn't hate Britney Spears, Paris Hilton, The Backstreet Boys, etc. if it weren't for all the hype and media attention.

Anyway, this was probably a topic for another Blab, but there it is. And I'm done for now. :)

Gnug215