Ryan McNeil
If you did a straw poll amongst movie lovers as to who their favorite directors were, I wager you’d hear the name Christopher Nolan quite often. It’s incredible to think that the man has only been on the scene for just eleven years (or thirteen if you go back to his debut short film, FOLLOWING) thirteen years. And yet, when discussing his filmogrophy, an overwhelming majority of his fans regard his second feature as the redheaded step-cousin of the family.
This leaves me to wonder, what did INSOMNIA ever do to deserve such disdain?
In case you’ve never seen it, INSOMNIA is Nolan’s 2002 remake of Erik Skjoldbjærg’s 1997 Norweigan film of the same name. After a teenage girl is murdered in a small Alaska town, two L.A. cops are dispatched to help with the investigation. One of them, Will Dormer (Al Pacino) is under investigation back home for misconduct in the handling of recent cases. The other, Hap Eckhart (Martin Donovan) reveals on the flight in that he’s been offered immunity if he complies with the investigation. They are greeted in Nightmute, Alaska, by Ellie Burr (Hillary Swank) who will work with them on the case. Dormer works quickly and identifies local author Walter Finch (Robin Williams) as a person of interest in the case. When a unit of cops, including Dormer and Eckhart go calling on Finch to question him, the whole situation gets complicated in a hurry.
Has INSOMNIA been kicked around because it’s an inferior film? Hardly. The movie was received to primarily positive reviews at the time, and has aged remarkably well over the decade that has passed since its release. Its story – admittedly established in the Norwegian original – is a grimy murder tale that is less concerned with whodunit than it is with making the audience wonder what they would do. Most murder stories are about establishing blame; in INSOMNIA blame is suspected pretty early on, and confirmed pretty quickly afterwards. Instead of taking us on a trip we’ve been on dozens of times before, the plot decides to complicate one killing with another, and lay guilt on top of guilt. Nolan’s films have unilaterally dealt with characters that compromise their morals, and INSOMNIA wears that suit rather well.
Does INSOMNIA work with lesser talent? Nope. Interestingly, the three leads in the film have somewhat checkered track records. First there’s Pacino, who has become an SNL parody of himself. Not only is Nolan able to keep him on the leash in this movie, but he draws from him a performance that can tell the difference between dopey and exhausted. At the moment, it stands as Pacino’s last great film performance and for all we know, it might stand that way for quite some time. Then there’s Robin Williams, a man I’d describe as “manic” if it didn’t feel like a short-sell. Nolan has him turn the volume all the way down, and in so doing, brings out a creepiness in Mork we hadn’t seen on the big screen before. Finally, Hillary Swank, who in 2002 was quickly becoming an Oscar-winning afterthought thanks to silliness like THE GIFT. In this film she plays to her strength by combining a rural sensibility with a slightly wide-eyed naivety. Show of hands all those who thought the next karate kid was capable of this? To have evoked one of these performances – or even two – would have been a good day at the office. For Nolan to have inspired all three is a rare feat.
Is the film technically lacking? Not even a little bit. Wally Pfister, Nolan’s cinematographer since MEMENTO has a field day in Alaska (and on occasion, BC standing in for Alaska). He wastes no time in showing off, setting the opening credits to stunning aerial photography of glaciers and mountains that’s worthy of National Geographic. Intercut with that, is the creepy visual of blood soaking into the fibres of a white cloth – a visual we won’t understand until much later, which is one of Nolan’s favorite ways to open a film. As of that opening wasn’t splendid enough, the key scene in the film’s first act – the raid of Finch’s cabin on a foggy morning could arguably be among the five best-looking scenes of Nolan’s career (the comment section is below: bring it). INSOMNIA doesn’t just look great, but queue up the scene where Dormer takes a spill into a log drive and you’ll be treated to a scene that sounds fantastic, and also rather frightening. On the subtler side of things, the movie plays up Dormers insomnia by showing how loud the slightest noises seem to a person who can’t sleep. My wife has explained this phenomenon to me several times (to no avail as I sleep like static) but all she ever needed to do was play this scene to articulate her point. It’s a fantastic way to illustrate pure fatigue.
So knowing all of that, what is it about INSOMNIA that prompts a collective shoulder-shrug? While I disagree, I need to believe that its status of a remake brings pause. To be clear, the 1997 original is a fantastic film that is every bit as handsome, suspenseful, well-acted and well-executed as this rendition. It didn’t need to be remade, especially in such a faithful manner.
But…
If a film like INSOMNIA is going to be remade, could you envision a better retelling of it? The setting was honored, the characters wonderfully cast, and much of the subtleties left intact. It was retold with care, and well-executed by a talented director on-the-rise. In some ways, it could be held up as an example of what to strive for: If you aren’t going to remake a film as well as Nolan remade INSOMNIA, then you shouldn’t remake it.
Why does INSOMNIA spark so much disdain? I have no clue. Part of me believes its low rewatch factor leads fans to forget about it, the same way an offering like MUNICH is a Spielbergian afterthought. This is a pity since this is a film that puts content first, preferring subtlety over flash. It stands as a turning point in Nolan’s career; the moment he proved he could handle a larger budget, a grander scale, and A-list talent. To be specific, Nolan never would have been handed the Dark Knight franchise without nailing INSOMNIA.
Perhaps I’m overthinking it though. Perhaps the reason is, quite simply, that something has to finish last on the list.
Insomnia is a perfectly decent film but there is something a bit forgettable about it. In my case, I think Batman Begins is Nolan’s least film, though still a success.
I should point out that Following is a feature, not a short. Doodlebug is Nolan’s short film.
“Perfectly Decent”
They should have put that on the blu-ray box! Interesting to hear you have BB at the bottom of your list. Most people I know it’s either this or THE PRESTIGE. As for the length, I can’t seem to find an official qualifier, but I think a film that clocks in at less than 70 minutes is still considered a “short”…a long short, but still a short.
A film over 40 minutes is usually considered a feature. One that’s over 60 is definitely a feature. Would you called Dumbo a feature film or a short? That movie is only 64 minutes.
Note taken – made the correction above.
I didn’t realise the movie was treated with distain. The only negative thing I can say about it, is that it isn’t as good as the original but then how many people have seen the original?
As mentioned above, the academy definition of feature length is over 40 minutes.
I think its dislike just comes from it being the Nolan film that people have seen the least, and therefore they remember it being “just OK”.
I find it odd that Insomnia is poorly received by Nolan fans. I think it is one of his best films. An excellent thriller, with a pair of great performances from Pacino and Williams. It put me on the edge of my seat, kept me guessing, and it holds up well. I can’t say the same for The Prestige or The Dark Knight, which for me have not held up well on repeats.
You had me until you mentioned PRESTIGE and TDK not holding up. Anything in particular about those two movies that left you cold on rewatch?
I thought it was usually MEMENTO that people thought didn’t work as well the second time.
“Perhaps the reason is, quite simply, that something has to finish last on the list.”
Exactly. It’s the “weakest” Nolan movie but not a bad one at all.
Well said.