Bruiser
Review by Peter Syslo

BRUISER (2000) is actually the first non-DEAD Romero film that I have seen, aside from CREEPSHOW. Any Romero fan can definitely tell his style, which largely consist of that subversive social commentary that is always dead on (no pun intended). That is one thing that I’ve always liked about Romero; he makes an enjoyable film which has a lot of substance to it. He’s not preachy about it either – some horror films are just too “in-your-face” about politics, society, etc. Romero always has that perfect blend which always lets the “horror” film breathe and be a horror film, first and foremost. Even though I am not a die-hard DEAD movie fan (NIGHT is still probably my fave), I do think that Romero is a great filmmaker and he is probably one of the most unrecognized (by the mainstream) writer/directors in existence. As far as BRUISER is c oncerned, I did like it and it had a certain charm to it, but I also felt that it was holding back some of the potential “rage” within it.

BRUISER is written and directed by George A. Romero, who is responsible for a large part of modern horror and who, like Carpenter, is basically synonymous with the genre. The film stars Jason Flemyng (THE LEAGUE OF EXTRAORDINARY GENTLEMEN, ROCKSTAR), Peter Stormare, Leslie Hope, Nina Garbiras, Andrew Tarbet, Jeff Monahan, and Tom Atkins.

The movie is about a man named Henry (Flemyng), who is an “everyman” sort of character – very likeable and you can identify with him. He works for a magazine called “Bruiser”, which seems to be like a “Stuff Magazine” or “FHM”. Henry has a loveless marriage with a conniving, cheating wife who wants to “sleep” her way to fame and fortune. His boss Milo (Stormare) is the embodiment of materialism and he is just a horrible, insulting, and manipulative man. Also, Henry’s “best friend” James is his embezzling, back-stabbing investment broker. As you can see, Henry has a lot on his plate! He snaps one day after finding out that his cleaning lady steals from him and this leads him on a murderous rampage. He does encounter a few genuine people along the way, like Milo ’s ex-wife Rosie (Hope) and his co-worker Tom (Monahan) and the film turns into a morality play/antihero’s quest to right what is wrong. Henry dons a blank mask, which emulates his lack of identity and he becomes almost a superhero, towards the end, finally achieving a true sense of purpose.

I liked BRUISER, but I didn’t love it. Like I said before, I don’t think that it went as far as it could have gone. I do like Flemyng as an actor – he is very talented and he projects that “tormented” quality perfectly - and it may have been how the character was written, but I really didn’t feel the psychoticism in the Henry character. I actually expected Henry to be more like Michael Douglas’ character in FALLING DOWN or Patrick Bateman in AMERICAN PSYCHO. Maybe Henry wasn’t as out-of-hand because he was new at revenge or he was still not confident with himself; actually, he becomes less apologetic as the film progresses. I felt for Henry and I identified with the fact of life that you have to deal with terrible people, but I just didn’t get enough rage/anger from him. There is one scene where he kills his wife, which is probably the most violent in the film, but overall, the kills seemed to be “watered down”. I did get the feeling that Henry was “on the edge” and the blank mask was a great idea, but I kept waiting for him to totally loose it.

As far as the other aspects of the film go, I was surprised to see that this film was made in the year 2000. I kid you not, the film feels like a 1980s film and it may actually take place in the 1980s – I’m not totally sure. Watching it, I was almost transported back in time, to the “corporate” movies of that period, like THE SECRET OF MY SUCCESS or WALL STREET . The acting was pretty good, overall, with Peter Stormare as Milo being the definite high point – he was so over-the-top and cartoonish that he was a bright contrast to the pale mask and the “grey” feeling of the rest of the film. The end of the film, I have to mention, is one of the most bizarre endings that I have seen in recent times; maybe Romero meant for the film to become more colorful/chaotic as it progressed. To sum up the end (without spoiling), Henry attends a corporate costume party, which features a live performance by The Misfits. Okay, now if that isn’t surreal enough, Henry also squares off with Milo and uses one of the strangest weapons I’ve ever seen on film. It all culminates in a superhero ending which is reminiscent of elements of V FOR VENDETTA and it has a shot of gumshoe/CASABLANCA dialogue in the final scene. It sounds crazy, but it all fit together well and it actually enhanced the whole film.

Cutting to the chase: BRUISER is an interesting film, which I liked but didn’t love. I felt that it could’ve used a little more punch but maybe the “grey” quality of the film was in line with the feelings of Henry and Romero may have been trying to make a larger point. As in Romero’s other films, there is a great subversive aspect to it which comments on materialism and ugly human nature and the film does flow very well, with a 1980s feel to it. If you are a Romero fan or you like some of the aforementioned films then you may like it. It’s worth seeing and it is a good example of how an ordinary person can be driven to madness – like the sane being trapped inside the insane asylum.