Zipper full movie review - A film that shows us how human we are.
I don't know if I should chastise Patrick Wilson for starring in two films that are somewhat similar in plot, but dissimilar in tone-in the same year-both films talk about adultery in marriages.
The first film is "Home Sweet Hell" ---it follows a furniture seller as he engages in an affair with a junior worker. And how his cold, calculated, homicidal and obsessive wife played by Katherine Heigl resolves it by murdering several members of the gang who uses the said lady to extort money from her partner. While the second is "Zipper", which I am currently going to review-the plot revolves on a successful district attorney as he engages in affairs with different call girls thereby hurting any chances he has of moving up the ladder in his political aspirations. His wife here, played by Lena Headey also takes action for damage control, albeit in a different manner.
Sincerely, I don't know which film debuted first and I don't care to know. But at this point, I am going to assume Patrick recognized the error in his ways by featuring in the first film, which even by comedy standards is stupid-and then he decided to use a similar scenario to correct his mistakes. By far, "Zipper" is better than "Home Sweet Hell", but given the end products, I would have liked if "Zipper" had borrowed some elements from "Home Sweet Hell": like an exchange to make one transcend from stupid to tolerable-the other, from a tense dramatic entertaining affair to near perfection.
1/8 of this film focuses on sexual rendezvous between the main character and his escorts, but what drives him into such act or motivations are not expanded or expatiated upon. It gives too much room for assumption from the audience. But one of those assumptions would never be based on the fact that there is a lack of sexual intimacy between and his wife. At least, we get to see a sex scene- prior to that; there is a scene where she coerces him into the act, which he refuses. So, based on the absence of no explanation, it leaves a feeling of "effect" and no "cause"- "action", but no "drive". And even in scenes where it seems that there is a hint of "reason" for such deeds through dialogue which gives a hint at the character's back story, which is not shown-the director then quickly moves past this parts and mini-exposure-shy from developing it.
There is a particular scene, where the Sam Ellis (Character played by Patrick Wilson) negotiates with a girl to have a sexual romp in his car. This particular moment is ironic because it comes moments after Sam discovers that he is under an investigation from the FBI for patronizing the escort agency-a distressed moment for him. And given the scenario, one would expect "a lesson learnt" or perhaps "change of ways", but still he engages in an intercourse with a character who is supposed to aid him out of his predicament. I laughed during this scene because of its paradox. While I laughed, I suddenly remembered a recent film I saw called (Addicted) starring Sharon Leal. But it also made me understand that the director subtly spotlights on "addiction" as a theme in the film, but never connects it to larger events like "Image" and public perception of a hero.
"Because I help people doesn't mean I am better than them": that was my best line in the film and the character's admittance of mistakes which brings me to this because most people have heroes that they look up to-mentors-role models: respected public figures. But the film asks a bold question. Are role models supposed to be demi-gods in the morals department? Are they meant to be mistake-proof or bacchanal repellents? Of course the answer will vary, but if you ask me- I say a definite "No". After all, they are humans-flesh, blood and guts.
Personally, I think one of the major successes of the film is that it tries to re-orientate our view of public figures and mentors from a definite white-black stand point to a more flexible tolerance understanding grey one. Here we have a respected public lawyer whom the public are rooting for to attain a higher political office-then he risks squandering his reputation by indulging in endless nights of intercourses. He risks the public's confidence in him and should prep for backlashes and dwindling in support. But one thing I admire about the character, which is quite controversial now that I think about it is that he never for once expresses profound guilt and I admire the way he goes about it with utmost discreetness in the second act of the film.
Patrick Wilson is another underrated actor in Hollywood, no doubt. But his performance is a total opposite to the moronic weakling he played in "Zipper". Lena Headey in the role of a wife isn't convincing enough. Her character is an ambitious one, but her posture gives a feeling of the opposite. Tonally, the film is a dark dramatic one with mild doses of tension.