A Review of Eli Roth's Death Wish
What’s up, my Horror Bound babies? Every once in a while I like to do something a little horror adjacent just to keep the vibe nice and fresh and recently, when watching a recent episode of Eli Roth’s History of Horror season two, it occurred to me that I had completely forgotten that he had directed a Death Wish remake just a couple years ago. I remember seeing the trailer back in its release year (2018) and thinking to myself, “That could be kind of cool,” for a few reasons: For one, I had been jonesin’ to see Bruce Willis back in the type of role that kind of made him famous and two, seeing Eli Roth direct him. Speaking of Eli Roth directing, the other thing that intrigued me about this film when it was first released was the idea of seeing Roth direct, not only from someone else’s script, but also in a genre that he’s not really known for. I mean, aside from the Keanu Reeve’s led Indie Knock Knock (which not a ton of people saw anyway), and the family friendly The House with a Clock in Its Walls, Roth is most certainly known for being a horror guy. So I found out where I could stream this latest take on the revenge film for cheap and sat down for the ride. Let’s dive in.
First, a confession: I think I can honestly say I’ve only sat through one of the Charles Bronson originals and it probably wasn’t even the first entry in the series. I remember an ex-girlfriend making me sit through Death Wish III on VHS back in the day, but I know for sure I’ve probably seen bits and pieces over the years of all five, yes, that’s five, films. That being said, I won’t be making any comparisons between Roth’s take and the originals or referencing anything form the classics aside from stuff that I researched in preparation for this write up. Like the fact that in Roth’s version, one huge difference is the occupation of our protagonist: In the originals, Bronson’s Paul Kersey is an architect living in New York, but in Roth’s, Willis is an ER doctor living in Chicago. These two, simple differences do make an impact on the story Eli’s telling, but more on that later.
So, if you’ve seen one revenge movie, you’ve seen them all, right? My personal favorites are Kevin Bacon’s Death Sentence (2007), which really could have been called Death Wish ’07 the films were so similar in theme, but James Wan brilliantly directed it and 1999’s Payback starring Mel Gibson, which was a wholly different kind of revenge film altogether. But what makes Roth’s recent entry into this genre so different is how much, at least me personally, one can relate to Willis’ character and I don’t know if that’s a testament to Roth’s directing, Joe Carnahan’s (The Grey, Narc) script, or Willis’ performance.
The premise, like most revenge films, is simple: Criminals kill a person’s family, or family member (usually after said family member has just been given some kind of great news or opportunity) during the course of a botched burglary. Not pleased with the job law enforcement is doing during the course of the investigation; surviving family member then seeks to mete out justice on their own. In this case, it’s Willis’s wife, played by Elisabeth Shue, currently enjoying resurgence in popularity due to the success of The Boys (although I still love her run in CSI: Crime Scene Investigation). Also during the course of the home invasion, Willis’s daughter (Camila Morrone) suffers a traumatic head injury and falls into a coma as a result. Fun fact: in the original Charles Bronson franchise, although his wife is murdered in the first film, it’s not until the sequel when his daughter is also murdered. Spoiler alert: the daughter survives in this one and comes out of her coma by the end.
But some of the other differences I really liked about this version was the decision to make Willis’ Paul Kersey a doctor and the use of Chicago as the backdrop and framing its real world problems into the story unfolding onscreen. These two small changes make a huge impact to the storytelling. For one, when the detectives are shown not making any progress on the investigation into Kersey’s robbery, it’s not because they’re bumbling idiots, but because there are so overwhelmed by so many other shootings, murders, and violent crimes. A true to life fact that Roth emphasizes by using canned radio and TV news reports as transitions from one day to the next. By the way, this is a great time to spotlight the rest of the amazing cast in this film. Dean Norris (Breaking Bad) and Kimberly Elise (Ad Astra and Fox’s Star) play the detectives assigned to Kersey’s case and the ones who eventually and unknowingly end up hunting down Kersey himself. Vincent D’Onofrio (Daredevil, Law and Order: Criminal Intent) plays Willis’ brother, Frank Kersey. Although I kind of feel like his character was unnecessary except for maybe injecting a feeling of doubt for the viewer as D’Onofrio’s characters are wont to often do. I kept sensing that uncle Frank was going to be revealed in some brilliant twist as being behind the whole thing to pay off some old gambling debt or something. But, no, he comes out of the whole thing pretty unscathed.
But back to Willis’ Paul Kersey. It’s quite a treat to watch Kersey evolve throughout the course of the film from pacifistic ER surgeon to one-man army against crime. What makes it so entertaining is how almost immediately he uses his brains to become the best vigilante he can be. He goes to purchase a gun for the first time, but upon realizing all the paperwork involved, not to mention all the surveillance in the gun store, he decides against it, coming to the conclusion that there would be just too many opportunities for him to get caught. Instead he opts for stealing a handgun from a gang member patient who’s rolled into the emergency room one night D.O.A. His unique position also gives him access to the discarded clothes of deceased patients in the property bins, where he continually steals different hoodies in order to maintain the persona of the “Grim Reaper,” as he eventually becomes known in the city, as well as to prevent any physical evidence from being traced back to any of his own personal belongings. The best part about all this character evolution is that it happens organically and without a ton of exposition or dialogue. We just believe Dr. Kersey to be this kind of cerebral thinker due to his station in life and occupation.
Even in the climax, when one of the final perpetrators responsible for his home invasion gets away alive and knowing that criminal will most certainly come back to finish him and his now fully recovered daughter off, Kersey goes back to that same gun store and legally purchases a few firearms with the intent in certainly using them in the face off to come knowing full well he can claim self-defense. Which leads to quite an action packed final scene. And that’s it. With the detectives close on his tail, his daughter back home and requiring his full attention, and his vendetta finally at an end, Kersey decides his days of vigilante justice are over. That’s right, he lives, his daughter lives, and he escapes justice.
That’s probably the thing I like most about this film. Cinema these days seems to feel the need more and more to teach us a moral lesson. Which is funny, since we’ve become more and more morally bankrupt as a society, and maybe that’s Roth’s point. Knowing the type of filmmaker he is, it wouldn’t surprise me that at the end of the day, that’s what he’s saying: Let the good guy get away with it for once. Why not? He was wronged and just wants a little revenge. That’s good writing, good directing, and good acting. We can understand the character’s actions, and even more so, his motivation. We want him to get away with it, because we get him. How many of us out there have wanted to get revenge on the bad people among us, those who would prey upon the innocent and defenseless and then do away with us like we were nothing more than human garbage? I know I have, especially this year, am I right? So fuck that lesson bullshit, let the good guy get away with it for once.
But Death Wish is also not without its flaws. Aside from what I already mentioned in reference to D’Onofrio’s character, there’s a couple of other issues I had with the film. A small beef I had was with this odd sense of time that occurs towards the end of the film. In one scene, Kersey tells his brother he’ll be able to take his daughter home a week or so after she wakes from her coma and it’s at this time that the last target on Kersey’s list is also in the hospital suffering from a gunshot wound he received from Kersey earlier that same night. In the next edit, Kersey is seen taking his daughter home from the hospital when he bumps into that same final target guy in the hospital elevator and there’s a brief exchange between target guy and the daughter where he mentions that he’s just been released as well. She asks him what he was there for and he explains the gunshot. I don’t know, I just found it odd to follow. Had a whole week already passed? Could he have been in the hospital that whole week for just a gunshot wound to the shoulder or had he just been following Kersey around and waiting for him to pick his daughter up? The scene after that suffers from a similar issue because we know that they’re going to come after Kersey and his daughter, yet when Kersey goes to legally purchase some firearms, we’ve already been informed in an earlier scene that it takes 72 hours to get cleared for his gun purchases. Did the bad guys really wait that long to go after Kersey in his home if they were so itching for payback?
In terms of other plot holes, I also found it weird when Kersey finally commits to hunting down the dudes responsible for his wife’s killing that there are four dudes that are eventually taken out, although there were only three involved in the crime at the beginning of the film. Since the three dudes were all wearing stocking masks during the event, we don’t really get a good look at them, so it’s hard to know once he starts taking them out, who was actually there and who was just associated with the crime in some other manner. It just got confusing, who was this fourth dude and how was he involved. If I had to take a guess, looking at the length of the film, topping out at an hour and forty five minutes, which is already long for a film of this type and genre, I’d venture that there was some footage left on the cutting room floor that probably would have better explained the connection between all the men involved.
But those are really small gripes for a film that was entirely entertaining. I can’t remember what the word of mouth was on the movie when it came out, but taking a quick look at the numbers, it totally made it’s money back and then some, so not a box office failure by any means. I like this film. Not on a, “let me go out and buy it for my personal collection,” type of vibe, but if it were on pay cable (there’s definitely some violent bits that just wouldn't be the same on an edited broadcast) or any of the streaming services for free, I would definitely check it out. It was most certainly worth the 99 cents I paid to rent it on Prime Video. But for the weird passage of time in the end and some minor plot holes, I’m breaking off one corpse finger and giving it a four out of five.
Don’t want to miss anything on the site? Sign up for our newsletter HERE
Want more horror movie reviews? Just search below.
