In the Valley of Elah

---

Tools:
Send to a friend »

---

You would think that 2007, a year that saw public approval for America's involvement in foreign affairs at an all-time low, would have been a good time for Hollywood to make movies critical of the subject. And you'd be right. There were a flock of such films, including "Lions for Lambs," "Rendition," "Redacted," and this one, "In the Valley of Elah." However, none of them were particularly successful at the box office. Maybe the country was sick of the subject, I don't know. In any case, I hope the disc release of "In the Valley of Elah" wins over a bigger audience; it's a pretty good film.

From start to finish the movie belongs to Tommy Lee Jones, who earned an Academy Award nomination for his performance. Paul Haggis (the writer and director of "Crash" and the co-writer of "Letters from Iwo Jima," "Flags of Our Fathers," "Casino Royale," and "Million Dollar Baby") wrote and directed "In the Valley of Elah," inspired, as the opening titles tell us, "by actual events." With a real-life story as his guide, with dynamite portrayals by Jones and his supporting cast, and with Roger Deakins ("The Shawshank Redemption," "Fargo," "O Brother, Where Art Thou?," "A Beautiful Mind," "House of Sand and Fog," "The Assassination of Jesse James," "No Country for Old Men") as director of photography, Haggis could hardly go wrong, and, for the most part, he doesn't.

Jones plays Hank Deerfield, a retired military policeman now running a gravel-hauling company. Hank is a patriotic, straight-arrow Midwestern traditionalist who puts pragmatism above sentiment. But when his son goes missing after returning from a tour of duty in Iraq, he gets mightily upset. The army calls Hank and tells him his son has gone AWOL, absent without leave. Hank can't believe his son would do such a thing, even though he later learns that any number of soldiers return home depressed enough to want to blow off a little steam. Still, Hank is dubious and begins his own investigation to locate the boy. What he finds out are answers he didn't want to know.

The more Hank delves into the case, the more it looks like neither the army nor the police want to cooperate. Then, when the army claims to make a startling discovery, they really clam up about it. Hank begins to suspect the worse, that possibly somebody is covering something up; and the less people want to help him, the more vigorously Hank tries to find things out for himself.

Jones puts in a performance that at once reminds us it is Tommy Lee Jones while at the same time creates an entirely new character for him. He looks appropriately tired and frustrated, relentless in his pursuit of the truth and noticeably weary of the fight. He gets some reluctant help along the way from a local policewoman, Detective Emily Sanders, played by Charlize Theron with almost the same world-weary resignation that Jones puts into his own role. Theron has established herself as one of Hollywood's top female actresses, and she proves it once again playing a woman in a man's world, a female cop besieged by male chauvinist colleagues who constantly belittle her accomplishments. In any case, as good as she is, and as good as co-stars Jason Patric, Susan Sarandon, and James Franco are, they tend to fade into the background in light of Jones's low-key yet towering performance.

The movie is meticulous in its detail, and it lets its story unfold slowly for maximum tension. It's a mainly a quiet film, while presenting new conflicts, new revelations, and new insights at every turn. In other words, it's a darned good mystery that keeps the viewer attentive to each new detail and leads the viewer forward with the precision of a fine-jeweled watch.

Which is not to say the film is without its minor shortcomings. I found it a little long for its subject matter and a bit slow at times, never quite getting to a point as quickly as it might have. There are also several maudlin moments that the movie perhaps overplays. The background score by Mark Isham seems a trifle gushy at times. One gets the impression with the male chauvinism that Haggis may be piling on too much. And the movie's ending, while conveying a powerful message, at the same time seems somewhat flat, leaving one wanting a little something more.

---

---