Album Reviews
Movies
Concert Reviews

Top 10
Resources
Contact Us

Neo-nazis and other fascists have become one of Hollywood's most useful villains. They don't embody racial or religious stereotypes that might offend, they promulgate a viewpoint an audience likes to hate, and they're just crazy enough to be dangerous, at least in movie terms. So it's interesting when a film turns the tables and features a neo-nazi as its protagonist. Even more so when that character happens to be Jewish.

Danny Balint (played by Ryan Gosling) is a charismatic force of nature. At the age of 22, he's an impassioned skinhead who leads a small band of followers and dreams of shaking up society by committing acts of violence. For the moment, he's content merely to mug young Jews on their way home from yeshiva, but his hope is to start a campaign of assassinating prominent Jews in New York.

What sets Danny apart, however, is his rigorous philosophical bent. He can argue with anyone and never come across as a lunatic. So when he walks into a meeting featuring the well-known fascist Curtis Zampf (Billy Zane), he sets himself apart as an up-and-comer. Zampf and fellow fascist Lina Moebius (Theresa Russell) encourage Danny to become a prominent voice of the movement, even as Danny gains confidence to undertake a more violent approach.

While all of this is going on, Danny's suppressed Jewish heritage is starting to re-emerge. Lina's daughter Carla (Summer Phoenix) falls in love with Danny and is intrigued by his knowledge of the Jewish faith. While he's careful not to admit how he came by that knowledge, he encourages her to "learn more about the enemy," a process which inspires Danny to do the same. Later on, a chance encounter with old yeshiva classmates leads to a visit to a local synagogue. All the while Danny continues to make speeches advocating neo-nazi positions, and prepare for a violent rampage.

This dichotomy is the core of the film. How could someone who is Jewish become so virulently anti-Semitic? And how could a neo-Nazi still be attracted to his former faith? It can't just be the simple 'we hate what we love.' While the film is apparently inspired by real events, it always has the smell of a Jerry Springer episode. The sensational subject matter borders on the lurid. Furthermore, the hand-held camerawork and grainy photography make the film seem like a documentary. This creates an uncomfortable lack of distance for the audience. We're thrust into the world of a character we can't hope to understand, and The Believer doesn't provide the resources we need to sort it out.

I'm sure that this effect is intentional. Writer and director Henry Bean purposefully muddies the waters, never letting on what makes Danny the way he is. It could be related to his upbringing or his theological training or his lack of direction, but the movie refuses to point the way. Not that this is necessarily a poor gambit, but it reinforces the visceral impact of Danny's beliefs. We can only watch with our mouths hanging open. And when the end comes, which is one part Sartre and two parts Sisyphus, we're no nearer to understanding than when we started.

Grounding the entire project is Ryan Gosling's stunning performance. Taking a character that could easily become a caricature, he instead endues it with realism. Riding the fine line of sensationalism and passion, he's
absolutely gripping. His best scene is a long interview with a journalist in a diner in which he defends his beliefs. But when the journalist confronts him with his Jewish heritage, he has nothing to offer but threats and curses. It's a fantastic moment and one the Academy should remember next winter.

A powerful film, The Believer will inspire numerous post-movie discussions. Whether it will actually add to our understanding is an open question.

J. Robert Parks 6/10/2002