This movie takes the viewers for a ride. It is constructed like a courtroom drama with a mystery aspect. But the courtroom dealings are already over and the mystery does not reveal that the accused is innocent or with a twist that he is guilty after all, contrary to the viewers' expectations. He is innocent, there is a twist and he is guilty after all. In short: the mystery does not exist. Well, it does exist as far as the viewers have no idea what is going on up to the end - but for a reason that does not call for a mystery, really.
The Life of David Gale has a very contrived screenplay which is too smart for its own good. It is an indictment against the death penalty, I assume. But those who battle against it in this movie are such unsound and fanatical characters that in the end it might as well be a pro DP movie. But I guess this is a pretty faithful reflection of many political activists of our era: it's much less about the betterment of society than about their own, very personal moral and mental setup. Granted that there is a serious and important issue involved (and in the case of DP, there is), these people can cause great harm to the issue in question. In my opinion that's what happens in this movie. What is outrageous about the DP is that a court of law factually declares itself infallible, but that's not something that anyone in this movie alludes to.
There is some heavy handed symbolism to be found e.g. a cuddly toy lamb, owned by Gale's son but left behind when the family split and faithful companion of the troubled ex philosophy professor (Gale, that is). The professor dead, the journalist played by Winslet inherits the lamb, shakes it, gets electrified by the plastic clicketyclick inside the ovine tummy and without much ado turns to slaughter the poor animal (rip, tear, rip), extruding a crucial videotape from its interior. Bitter and unironic as it appeared on the screen, I was glad for the probably unintended comic relief. And again, there is a rental car that does not work and causes its driver trouble. Was it only a cheap story device to add some extra tension? Or is there something deep and meaningful behind it? I really don't know.
The Life of David Gale has a very contrived screenplay which is too smart for its own good. It is an indictment against the death penalty, I assume. But those who battle against it in this movie are such unsound and fanatical characters that in the end it might as well be a pro DP movie. But I guess this is a pretty faithful reflection of many political activists of our era: it's much less about the betterment of society than about their own, very personal moral and mental setup. Granted that there is a serious and important issue involved (and in the case of DP, there is), these people can cause great harm to the issue in question. In my opinion that's what happens in this movie. What is outrageous about the DP is that a court of law factually declares itself infallible, but that's not something that anyone in this movie alludes to.
There is some heavy handed symbolism to be found e.g. a cuddly toy lamb, owned by Gale's son but left behind when the family split and faithful companion of the troubled ex philosophy professor (Gale, that is). The professor dead, the journalist played by Winslet inherits the lamb, shakes it, gets electrified by the plastic clicketyclick inside the ovine tummy and without much ado turns to slaughter the poor animal (rip, tear, rip), extruding a crucial videotape from its interior. Bitter and unironic as it appeared on the screen, I was glad for the probably unintended comic relief. And again, there is a rental car that does not work and causes its driver trouble. Was it only a cheap story device to add some extra tension? Or is there something deep and meaningful behind it? I really don't know.