Fri 16 Jan 2009
THE NUMBER 23. New Line Cinema, 2007. Jim Carrey, Virginia Madsen, Logan Lerman, Danny Huston, Lynn Collins. Screenwriter: Fernley Phillips. Director: Joel Schumacher.
What this is, when you get down to it, with the dirt ground in deep beneath your fingernails, is a movie about obsessive numerology:
You get the idea? There’s more:
“Parents each contribute 23 chromosomes to their kids; the Earth’s axis is off by 23.5 degrees (and 5 = 2 + 3); the Mayans predicted the apocalypse on December 23, 2012 (20 + 1 + 2 = 23).”
And still more:
You see what I mean?
Who’s Walter?, you ask. He’s Walter Sparrow, the obsessive, semi-nerdy protagonist of The Number 23, an animal control specialist, happily married (Virginia Madsen), with one well-adjusted son (Logan Lerman). Things are fine until his birthday (see above). A loose dog named Ned (see above) keeps Walter from meeting his wife on time. Loitering in a bookstore, she comes across a hand-produced book titled The Number 23, by Topsy Kretts, and she buys it for Walter as a gift.
That’s when things go bad. Very bad. Walter begins to identify more and more with the protagonist in the book, a homicide detective named Fingerling. Noirish nightmares follow. A entire world filled with doppelgängers. A world filled with noir symbolism: rainy streets, saxophones playing in the background, beautiful suicidal blondes, knives, blood, death. A world of paranoia. Who do you trust? Are the dreams real?
Many reviewers seem to have thought that since Jim Carrey is the star of The Number 23, that the movie is a comedy. They are wrong. Since they, the reviewers, didn’t laugh, except to ridicule, they decided that this is a black comedy. They are wrong.
This is, believe it or not, a straightforward detective movie, and it is up to Walter Sparrow to determine, first of all, who died, and when, and then, finally, who did it. The story doesn’t get there in straight-forward fashion, though, and I admit it’s easy to lose track of what’s happening. (Some people who’ve left comments on IMBD were so totally confused after 20 minutes that they simply stopped watching. Why they want others to know this, I do not know.)
This movie is a visual treat for the eyes, if you don’t mind skrunge, if you don’t mind madness occurring right in front of you, if you go with the movie instead of fighting it.
I do wish, though, that the makers of this movie had chosen another ending. This one’s flat. It took a lot of work to build up to a suitable climax, but this one isn’t it.
The mystery’s solved, the culprit’s named, but the sudden swoosh of air out of your lungs is less a release of tension than one of disappointment.
Not that the ending isn’t the one the movie was pointing to all along. It’s not that. It’s that it could have – should have – been more. Not happier, not sadder, just one with a little more edge to it. That’s all I’d ask. (I’ve read that the DVD contains an alternative ending, but so far I’ve not been able to confirm that.)
______
Please note: ● Friday’s the 6th day of the week, January’s the first month of the year, and this is the 16th. 6 + 1 + 16 = 23. ● If you were to copy this review into WordPerfect, the images would each appear as three words: The Number 23. There are 23 paragraphs in this review. ● There are 828 words: [2 + 3] + [8 + 2 + 8] = 23.