Falling Down Review

We live in a society, or so that’s what people. I won’t go into details, but it really does feel like almost every aspect of modern life has become more of a pain to deal with, regardless of what it is. Elements that are financial, social, physical, or even small and simple things in day-to-day life all feel harder to deal with than ever. It doesn’t affect everyone per se, but enough to the point that it is noticeable. However, while it seems to be something that more people notice now than before, discontentment with the modern world is nothing new. We have always had some sort of cultural irritation at something within average, modern life, and we are just going through ours for this decade. Don’t believe me, well, a film from over 30 years ago spouts similar frustrations that almost feels ahead of the curve in what it says and how it portrays people with said frustrations. This is the movie Falling Down.

Directed by Joel Schumacher, I know for a fact you all have hesitations now that I said that name. In all honesty, he might be one of the most disrespected directors. Sure, his filmography is spotty, but the films that got him his negative reputation don’t really represent his full body of work and honestly feel more burdened by higher-up demands rather than fully being his fault. He could work within a wide variety of genres and always had a good knack for style and visualization. He brought Kiefer Sutherland to prominence and made Colin Farrell a known name. He is a far more interesting filmmaker than given credit for and does have great and interesting films to his name that are still beloved like The Lost Boys and Flatliners. Honestly, you look at the films he made before Batman Forever, and you would honestly agree with the choice to have him replace Burton since he excelled at stylized and moody production design and focusing on the psychology of his characters.

Falling Down might be his best work and is honestly a really engaging film. It follows William Foster, played by Michael Douglas. A defense worker who, after experiencing a sweltering stop in traffic on a morning commute and all the irritations that it gives, simply steps out of his car and says he’s going home. What follows is an Odyssey of sorts where he encounters regular irritations of the modern middle-class American, such as overpriced items at stores, gangs harassing him, a fast-food place not serving breakfast only a few minutes after the hour, and the excesses of the wealthy. However, instead of simple irritation and anger, Foster lashes out in extreme violence and devolves further and further into aggression as the day goes by. We learn more and more about him, starting with the fact that he’s divorced and still intends to force his way to his daughter’s birthday through multiple obstacles. The brilliant thing about this film is that it presents Foster as reasonable, if over the top at first. The things he gets angry at are logical irritations of today, but he just goes to the extreme in his reactions. However, a few key details about him are revealed, and suddenly the entire view of him is flipped, and how crazy and unreasonable he is comes to light. It honestly feels very ahead of its time in a way. So many people do have the same image of being someone preaching the frustrations of the day, only to reveal themselves to be unstable people who aren’t there to help ease things or provide answers, but either lash out at the problems or make them worse. They are people who do need help and are struggling, but choose to take an aggressive approach instead of finding ways to cope with issues. Also, considering how we have so many videos of people flipping out at minor problems, Foster aiming a gun at the fast-food workers in reaction to his mild irritation doesn’t seem out of place and lines up with things actually.

Foster’s story is paralleled by Martin Prendergast, played by Robert Duvall. He’s a middle-aged desk cop who is on his last day of retirement. He starts to piece together Foster’s rampage by observing clues and connections and starts to go on the path towards him. What’s interesting is that the film does draw a comparison between the two. Like Foster, life seems to be kicking him when he’s down. He’s only retiring because his wife is extremely paranoid and clingy, constantly calling him in anger and tears to come home due to minor inconveniences. She clearly has emotional issues (likely due to the untimely passing of their child) but has not processed anything and isn’t doing any work to heal her problems, so she’s taking it out on her husband. His co-workers are also dismissive and passive-aggressive towards him, both in their sort of hazing ritual for his retirement, dismissing his efforts by going after Foster, and just being callous to him in general. Unlike Foster, however, he is mostly passive and takes things as they go. It’s only through chasing after Foster that he grows a backbone towards his wife and coworkers. It showcases an interesting difference, however. Foster is shown to have lost a lot of himself but lashes out at everyone and everything rather than finding things to improve or appreciate and maybe self-reflect on how his own faults got him to this point. Prendergast maintains a sense of levelheadedness in how he approaches both his change in outlook and how he takes daily irritations. It’s a good observation for the film to have since it sympathizes with Foster, but also acknowledges that he’s going too far and is partially an architect of his own misfortune. More need to be like Prendergast, who is willing to pull himself up and take the right approach of self-improvement and being firm even if few are in his corner.

Alongside the great leads, the presentation of the film is excellent. The cinematography and editing aren’t too flashy, but the visualization of the film makes it pop. There is an overbearing, hazy filter in many scenes, which is done to visualize the heatwave going on. It is most effective in the opening, where you feel how hot Foster is in his car. The sound and cinematography make it feel like a distorted nightmare. The score by James Newton Howard also elevates the film. It plays more like feral, jungle music to accompany Foster’s descent and to reflect how Los Angeles feels like a modern-day jungle of concrete. It also executes both action and comedy really well. The scene where he holds up a McDonald’s knockoff and tries to still play his complaints casually is a really great scene of black comedy, as are other moments in the film. As a thriller, there is a really good sense of tension and escalation. Foster basically acts like a video game character gaining more experience and weapons as the day goes on. The throughline of his wife being genuinely worried about his presence and the growing sense of unease and diminishing rationality from him boils to a fever pitch.

As for the commentary of this film, well, there’s an underlying focus on people being discontent over their lot in life. Foster’s drive for his unhappiness is that he feels like he did everything right in life and was taking a good path that he believed was important. As a defense worker, he feels that he is responsible for helping protect the nation and that he deserved better than he got. It’s why the mansions and golf courses he encounters disgust him since they are inhabited by plastic surgeons and rich retirees who he sees as not providing value to the world. There is also a key scene where Foster sees a man protesting a bank that refused to give him a loan because he was considered “not economically viable,” and he repeats the same words later in the film. The undercurrent of frustration about individuals vs. society at large is showcased immensely, but as I said before, what makes this commentary work is the framing and Foster’s true colors. He did get screwed over through a layoff, but small elements show an unstable and aggressive man who isn’t willing to compromise or find solutions. He complains about change and irritations as if they all impact him all at once. Sure, we all get annoyed by someone pestering you for the phone, but Foster shooting one up out of anger highlights that he doesn’t have perspective outside of his own. This also comes to light when he encounters a housekeeper’s family at a mansion. He tries to play off the situation in a normal way, but is an aggressive and invasive intruder, and the family is terrified of him. It is a realistic look at him since we have spent so much time following his perspective that we need a reminder that, to the average person, he looks and acts like a maniac. This is compounded when he confronts a snide old golfer. At first, the old man is unreasonable about Foster walking onto the course and escalates the situation. But when Foster shoots up his golf cart, the old man has a heart attack and loses his medication when the cart that has it in it goes into a lake. Instead of any sort of remorse, Foster gloats that the old man will die. It is such a shocking moment but a real showing that even if Foster’s frustrations and points are valid, he is still a violent and aggressive man at the end of the day and willing to knock people when they are down just to get some satisfaction. He never considers other people’s perspective, never reflects on his wife’s fear, how his emotions and anger led to his divorce, creating any sort of plan or future after he was laid off, or even if any of the violence that he’s doing is justified. He simply chooses violence rather than anything else. It’s a closed-mindedness that’s almost as selfish as he claims the rest of the world is. It showcases a truth that some people who are wronged by the world sometimes throw a similar mentality and aggression back at others, even if all it does is give brief selfish catharsis at the expense of others.

This really caught me by surprise. While yes, it is a bit bombastic and isn’t subtle in the slightest, I was still really engaged by this film. Not just because of the execution of its ideas and performances, but because it didn’t feel like it was taking an easy answer to the issues it brings up. It sympathizes with Foster, but doesn’t condone him. It shows him as someone who is unstable and is someone to be pitied, but not admired. We can fall into the trap of agreeing with the lone individual who is pushing against the unjust world, but we need to be careful in recognizing that many times, they are partially to blame for how they are and refuse to pull themselves up in necessary ways. Frankly, that is a far more realistic and necessary way to look at this character archetype. Are things unfair? Yes. Do things not go our way, absolutely, but do we need to make it personal and aggressive every time? Absolutely not. There is a need for balance and perspective when it comes to our problems, and having some self-perspective is necessary. A lot of people will simply just get angry and redirect said anger at others and encourage everyone to do the same. That doesn’t really do a whole lot in the long term, though, does it? Stewing in discontentment and spreading it to others won’t improve things.