![\"\"](\"http:\/\/www.gadflyonline.com\/wpblog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2011\/02\/film2_148563t.jpg\" "\\"film2_148563t\\"")
<\/a>The film opens with the line, \u201cMy name is Charles Bronson and all my life I wanted to be famous.\u201d\u00a0 This is essentially the main premise of the movie:\u00a0 a man so compelled to become famous that he set on a mission to become the most violent prisoner in England.\u00a0 Bronson goes on to explain that with little options for fame, he used his seven-year prison sentence as an opportunity.\u00a0 For him, prison became a place to \u201csharpen my tools, hone my skills.\u201d Using his experience as a bare knuckle boxer (his promoter thought the name Charles Bronson was more suitable than Michael Peterson), Bronson instigated over a dozen hostage situations, rooftop protests, and repeated attacks on prison staff and inmates, resulting in the prison system having him \u201cghosted\u201d (moved from prison to prison) over 100 times.<\/p>\n
The film, however, isn\u2019t your ordinary biopic.\u00a0 The narrative doesn\u2019t follow convention and much of the movie is comprised of random scenes of a greased up, bloodied Bronson inciting violence to swelling classical music.\u00a0 There are some elements of the film that confuse me, mainly the homoerotic overtones. While I am certain Refn included these for a reason, it remains a total mystery to me.\u00a0 The script itself isn\u2019t particularly mind-blowing, but Refn\u2019s strength lies in his direction.\u00a0 There are very few scenes where the camera moves with the action.\u00a0 Most scenes, the camera is a close and steady shot of Bronson, as if he is imprisoned by the screen.\u00a0 We get a sense of the tight space of solitary confinement that Bronson has lived in for the bulk of his adult life.\u00a0\u00a0 This film direction also gives us the sense that here is a man desperate to be watched.<\/p>\n
The film portrays Bronson as a mastermind of drama and often his monologues are shown with him in a three piece suit on stage before an adoring audience.\u00a0 In some of these scenes his face is painted like that of a mime or a clown (Michael Peterson was a circus performer before he moved to bare knuckle boxing) and we see a man capable of extreme violence but also humour and charisma.<\/p>\n
And here-in lies the movie\u2019s strength (and a major dilemma for the viewer):\u00a0 we acknowledge that even when enraged, there is something charismatic about this man.\u00a0 We like him, want him to succeed. We applaud his verve, but we are also fearful of him, scared of his unpredictable nature.\u00a0\u00a0 I believe this nuance was achieved through the brilliant performance of Tom Hardy (he also stole every scene in Inception<\/em>).\u00a0 My husband asked, after viewing the film, if I thought the movie would have been so successful with another actor (Jason Statham was originally supposed to play the part, but couldn\u2019t due to scheduling conflicts) and I think the answer is no. \u00a0Hardy\u2019s ability to arouse sympathy from the viewer is so good, the performance should be seen in the same league as Malcolm McDowell\u2019s Alexander DeLarge (A Clockwork Orange<\/em>) or Anthony Hopkins\u2019 Hannibal Lecter (Silence of the Lambs<\/em>). Tom Hardy\u2019s performance is subtle enough to portray the conundrum of Bronson, a man prone to violence, humour and tenderness.<\/p>\n It is this tenderness and charisma, no doubt, that has spawned thousands of Charlie Bronson fans.\u00a0 There are numerous YouTube videos, petitions and websites<\/a> demanding his release.\u00a0\u00a0 His art (the movie used his original compositions) has won awards and was shown as part of ArtBelow<\/a>,\u00a0 and LA designer Joseph Randle collaborated with Bronson to create Bronsonwear<\/a>, street wear that uses Bronson\u2019s artwork. \u00a0Bronson supporters maintain that his lifetime prison sentence (given in 2000 after another hostage incident) is unjust, and even more unjust is his solitary confinement.\u00a0 They reason that he has not killed anyone and never been violent towards women or children.\u00a0 They argue that the prison system has intentionally baited Bronson into violence and there have been no efforts to rehabilitate him.<\/p>\n Bronson himself uses the same rationale for his actions.\u00a0 Bronson recorded a video statement that was shown at the movie premier, in which he says, \u201cI’ve grown up, I’ve matured, I’m a different man, I’m now anti-violent. I’m anti-drugs, anti-crime, but I’m still held in a cage in solitary. I’m not a murderer, I’m not a rapist, I’m not a paedophile. I’m a hostage of my own past.\u201d Since the premier, however, he\u2019s had several more violent outbursts, the most recent in November 2010, when he buttered himself up and attacked six guards.<\/p>\n Murder and rape aside, the penal system is posed with a problem:\u00a0 what are they to do with an inmate who continually acts out violently, putting other inmates and guards at risk?\u00a0 Sure, he hasn\u2019t killed anyone, but he habitually inflicts physical and emotional damage on other people.\u00a0 But Bronson and his supporters are right in another sense: does anyone deserve to be caged up in a tiny space, without any efforts of rehabilitation?<\/p>\n The film isn\u2019t really successful in addressing these problems.\u00a0 Nor is it concerned with the why and how Peterson became so violent, except to chalk it to his desire to become famous.\u00a0 The film is correct, in a sense, that Bronson has been opportunistic.\u00a0 He\u2019s published eleven books, most notable is Solitary Fitness,<\/em> about working out in small space. \u00a0\u00a0I\u2019m not sure if I believe in the main premise that Bronson was a public relations mastermind, a classic narcissist who used his circumstance as an opportunity for fame.\u00a0 But regardless of who Bronson really is, the film is right, butter or no butter, you can\u2019t pin him down.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" You can’t pin him down. Contributing Editor Gradyfinger analyzes the chilling biopic “Bronson” (2008)<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":241,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[4],"tags":[65,231,34,62,64,63],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/gadflyonline.com\/home\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/240"}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/gadflyonline.com\/home\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/gadflyonline.com\/home\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/gadflyonline.com\/home\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/gadflyonline.com\/home\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=240"}],"version-history":[{"count":7,"href":"http:\/\/gadflyonline.com\/home\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/240\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":3065,"href":"http:\/\/gadflyonline.com\/home\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/240\/revisions\/3065"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/gadflyonline.com\/home\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/241"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/gadflyonline.com\/home\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=240"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/gadflyonline.com\/home\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=240"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/gadflyonline.com\/home\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=240"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}<\/a>