Prisoners of the patriarchy

Prisoners (2013) directed by Denis Villeneuve from a screenplay written by Aaron Guzikowski, cinematography by Roger Deakins, starring Hugh Jackman, Jake Gyllenhaal, Paul Dano, Viola Davis and Maria Bello.

(This does contain minor spoilers about the plot).

Prisoners is the third Villeneuve I've watched after first seeing Blade Runner 2049 in May 2020 and Dune in late September 2021. I must admit the only reason I watched Prisoners instead of Arrival or Enemy etc was a comment from Zendaya where she told an interviewer about how she loves this film. It clicked, it felt right and I went for it. Most of the time movie picking for me is impulsive, instinctive and, for that, exciting. Anyways, I am not the biggest fan of the crime-thriller genre, I definitely enjoy the psychology behind it and I like the thrill, but I just don’t have the best time watching these movies. I thought a lot of Zodiac, but also of Wildlife, I couldn’t tell you why exactly, maybe for Dano, maybe for the unsaturated color grading of the suburbs. But I overall thought this was pretty excellent. It was haunting, it was moving, it was creepy and it was, most of all, flawlessly done. But I’m not interested in talking about the film as a whole, what captured my attention is something else, something very precise: I want to discuss with you the depiction of masculinity in this movie.

I’m a feminist, which if you’re a woman may as well mean nothing at all. But I definitely try to deconstruct my way of perceiving the world, breaking the chains that tie me in a certain position, questioning things that were imposed on me by the male gaze and by a very patriarchal society. I really don't know how much Denis was conscious of the embodiment of patriarchy that there is in each of these characters, but I think he was very aware and that is why the film is called Prisoners. It shows how Villeneuve managed to translate on screen something extremely real to the point you can analyse these characters like you would random human beings. It is impressive and very very remarkable.

First of all, women are secondary. The two daughters aren’t there, America’s most beloved and precious possession. Both wives live on the interstices of this story and seem to both do nothing all day basically. And we don’t have any well rounded female characters. Now, I don’t thing this is a bad thing. Evidently the story is just not about women, which is totally finally, but therefore we need to think more about the male components of this tale, cause our focus is on them.

At first, despair seems like a good excuse, it drives the film like there is no one responsible. But soon we realise: despair only allows what was underneath to come up. It does not create villains, it does not justify crimes.

Hugh Jackman portrays the patriarchal father, the one holding together the family, protecting them, making them feel “safe“, until he didn’t. And he’s feeling guilty because every promise he made is now empty, valueless, and those promises were a contract that founded the affection that linked the family together. Now all his certainties come crawling down, the bonds shake, the ground trembles. And he has to restore his power, and therefore the stability of his household, by taking matters into his own hands. He isn’t sure about anything but he can’t allow himself to doubt and feel powerless. Anything he does will inevitably bring to his self destruction, or at least to the destruction of the patriarchal ideal of a man, and that is terrifying to him, as it is to every component of our patriarchal system that benefits from it.

He’s not evil, but he is the embodiment of structural oppression, toxic masculinity and repressed anger. He is the exemplary male product of our world, the oppressor.

Terrence Howard is the more sensitive one, and for that reason he’s considered the weakest.

He is spineless, has no courage to either disagree or to fully take responsibility for his actions. His distinction between good and wrong comes from the outside and not from within himself. He ultimately does not open the door. He’s stuck, society made him stuck, and for that he can’t be defined as a good person. By doing nothing he’s an accomplice to an act of violence. By not choosing he let others choose for him the wrong path. He’s an oppressed who sided with an oppressor.

Jake Gyllenhaal - the detective - is haunted, probably because he has both sides. He’s sensitive but has to be strong in the eyes of society, he has to bare the heavy load, the responsibility of finding two little girls, the most prized subjects of our society. He’s under a lot of pressure. He can’t break down, he can’t listen to his feelings, he has to “man up”.

I really like the detail of his blinking. He is anxious, he is scared, but he can’t give into that feeling cause it all depends on him, he cannot be stuck and do nothing. He is an oppressed who resisted, who fought back, an oppressed who’s trying to free themselves, but he's not free, not yet. None of them are.

I haven’t talked about Paul Dano’s character cause he is more than an oppressed. He’s a slave, he is the source of power for his oppressor. As capitalism teaches us, he is the “unnecessary” piece that needs to be sacrificed in order for the oppressor to live on (maintain/restore their power, continue their oppression). Paul Dano incarnates the resources that need to be exploited to the maximum extent in order to make a profit for the capitalist.

I think only a person who truly understands the hidden mechanics of humanity and social life could write a movie that so well captures them. This is a great film, and I think a lot more could be said and explored about these characters on a second/third (and so on) viewing, so I can’t wait to revisit it in a while. In the meantime, let me know your thoughts!