Shallow Grave dissects murder plot with humor and wit Shallow Grave Directed by Danny Boyle. Written by John Hodge. Starring Ewan McGregor, Kerry Fox, and Christopher Eccleston. Sony Copley Place. By Rob Wagner

The idea behind this film is not a new one: Three friends find their new flatmate dead of a drug overdose with a suitcase full of money under his bed. It would have been easy for director Danny Boyle to make this film cliché and inane, by playing for laughs with a "hide the body" concept, as in a bad American sitcom. Instead, a viewer expecting a British version of Weekend at Bernie's will be pleasantly surprised.

The flatmates are David (Christopher Eccleston), a chartered accountant, Juliet (Kerry Fox), a doctor, and Alex (Ewan McGregor), a journalist. One gets to know these diametrically opposed characters so well, that their names become a blur. This film avoids the cliché by creating the perfect crime. The three flatmates plan to bury the body out in the forest and keep the money. To prevent the body from being identified, they decide to saw off and incinerate the hands and feet, smash in the face with a hammer, and remove the teeth. They also plan to dispose of his car in a lake, reminiscent of Psycho.

The film presents an involved study of Eccleston's character, David, who is at first completely unwilling to involve himself with this scheme. At first, only Alex even considers the possibility of keeping the money. Juliet eventually agrees to try, though her transition is not emphasized.

David reluctantly decides to join the scheme after evaluating how dull his accounting job is and much pleading from Alex. In the meantime, the body remains in the room and "starts to smell." The flatmates decide to draw straws for who does all of the sawing and bashing of skull. Filled with fear, David is unlucky and draws the short straw. Nauseated by the task, he reluctantly obliges: The sight of him vigorously and insanely grinding through bone with a hacksaw and bashing the skull with a hammer is indeed hilarious as well as disturbing. Immediately after the incident, David becomes entrenched in a fit of depression. Inflicted with paranoia that the police are on to them and paranoia that the other flatmates are after the money, he locks himself in the attic with the suitcase full of money.

Boyle emphasizes the great amount of money in the suitcase, though it is never mentioned explicitly. He periodically shifts scenes to show two gangsters killing person after unfortunate person while searching for the money, and he emphasizes the extreme importance of keeping it safe. Only after the two gangsters break into the flat and the police encounter the evidence of apparent homicide does the plot really thicken.

The fact that the police find the bodies and then interview the flatmates sends David into an outrage, because he warns Alex earlier that the grave isn't deep enough. By this time, David is convinced that the police know everything, and his outrage intensifies Alex's fear and suspicion of him - all of which results in the total isolation of each individual. All of the money, except for that spent during a short, extravagant, and insanely happy shopping spree, remains untouchable, by reason of either fear or guilt.

In the end, with no one person trusting another, the film can be viewed as a misanthropic or misogynistic dark comedy. Despite the suspicious and contrived elements necessary to advance the plot, this film has an unexpected conclusion and is definitely suspenseful and involving.

Copyright 1995, The Tech. All rights reserved. This story was published on February 24, 1995.

 

 

Abstract: Three roommates (Kerry Fox, Ewan McGregor, and Christopher Eccleston face a moral dilemma when they accept a fourth roommate (Keith Allen) and he turns up dead with a suitcase full of money in his room. Unfortunately, their greed wins out: they decide to keep the cash and clandestinely dispose of the body piece by piece.

Summary: When SHALLOW GRAVE opened in London in January of 1995, its Glasgow director. Danny Boyle was immediately cheered as Britain's answer to Quentin Tarantino, whose PULP FICTION (1994) was then the hottest ticket in town. Reviewing the film for What's On, James Cameron-Wilson claimed that Boyle had "the same sick brilliance, dramatic precision and narrative economy as QT does." Before the London opening, Boyle had tested SHALLOW GRAVE at a film festival in Munich after its premiere at the Edinburgh Film Festival. Back in Britain, Boyle explained his "mission" for making the film: "we've got to keep people interested in British films" by aiming for "a contemporary audience" and dealing with "contemporary values and contemporary youth in an unsentimental way." The challenge was to make a film that would be both new and innovative as a black comedy.

Certainly films such as SHALLOW GRAVE are few and far between. Wrought with tension and latent greed, the film is a seething and, ultimately, fatal concoction of brutality, violence, and deceit. Closely following the course of the friendship among three flatmates, the film begins with their caustic, yet comic search for a fourth flatmate, and quickly darkens in both tone and humour as the newly chosen flatmate is subsequently found dead. The discovery of a suitcase filled with money further complicates the situation; becoming the catalyst for each character' s development and eventual demise. Having decided to keep the money, the three flatmates dispose of not only the corpse, but their humanity and decency as well. What Boyle places before us is an intricate study of human nature, steeped in cold, calculated realism, blatantly exposing the brutality of humanity, the naked greed driving each character, and the cruelty between "friends."

Boyle and his screenplay collaborator John Hodge drew heavily from the genre of the film noir, and the requisite elements of a film noir plot are easily identifiable within SHALLOW GRAVE . The three friends in question, David (Christopher Eccleston), a strait-laced accountant, Alex (Ewan McGregor), a shrewd journalist, and Juliet (Kerry Fox), a young doctor, are at the fringes of society, bound together by a mutual disregard for social practice and procedure, as is evident in their process of interviewing prospective flatmates. Having utterly and completely humiliated each applicant for their own enjoyment, it is obvious from the onset that these three friends cannot be expected to act according to the accepted ideas of behaviour deemed correct and proper by society. It comes as no surprise, then, that Hugo (Keith Allen) is selected as the fourth flatmate. Hugo is a man of few words, and ultimately, remains so, as he is found dead only a few days after he has moved in. It isn't the discovery of their new flatmate's corpse that most disturbs Alex, Juliet, and David, however; it is the discovery of a suitcase full of money hidden beneath Hugo's bed.

In juxtaposition to these early scenes, the viewer is also introduced to some rather shady characters, their menacing nature clearly identified by their superb ability to inflict pain, as we witness the horrific and hellish torture inflicted upon one of Hugo's acquaintances in an effort to locate Hugo. It seems Hugo was not at all what he appeared to be, a recurrent motif throughout the film, and one central to the film noir tradition. As the three flatmates discuss their options following the untimely demise of Hugo, Boyle never lets us forget what is ultimately behind their deliberations, as each shot includes the open suitcase and the stacks of cash in the foreground, and as the focus of the shot. While Alex and Juliet immediately agree to keeping the money for themselves, and disposing of the body, David repeatedly insists upon calling the police; a futile, if not foreshadowing, attempt on his part to retain his own, rather weak, sense of reason. Yet, after a few days, during which Hugo's decomposing body languishes in the fourth bedroom, David relents, and agrees to the plan. This submission is a strong allusion to film noir conventions and the weak nature of the leading man in the face of temptation. The allusion is well-placed, however, as David, an accountant, is characterized by his talent for meticulous and orderly calculation, yet ultimately, by his talent for meticulous and orderly brutality.

The premise of SHALLOW GRAVE, also borrowed from film noir, is one that both fascinates and frightens the viewer. Boyle uses this duality to heighten and cultivate the horrific nature of the process in which the flatmates dispose of the body, as well as the brutal consequences of their decision to do so. Once Alex, Juliet, and David transport Hugo's body to a remote and secluded forest, the intimation of what is to occur becomes terrifyingly clear. Alex and Juliet, having decided they cannot participate in the rendering of Hugo's body as unidentifiable, leave David with this horrible responsibility. This turn of events, characteristic of film noir, traps David within a situation from which he is unable to escape. He finds himself becoming further and further immersed in all that is occurring, and increasingly less in control of his life. Thus David finds himself responsible for the removal of Hugo's hands and feet, and the obliteration of any and all identifying facial features. In silhouette, one sees David frantically sawing, and, as one hears the chilling sound of a handsaw grinding against bone, the scene becomes overwhelmingly effective without resorting to graphic and sensational violence. This is not to say neither is employed at other points during the film, as both are equally effective during subsequent scenes.

Having returned to the flat, Alex and Juliet set their sights upon the suitcase, descending upon the boutiques and shops in a frenzied spending spree, while David begins his own descent, a descent into madness. Having discovered his friends' lavish spending spree, David reacts by asking if either has considered the cost for all they have done, the cost for all that they have sacrificed. Squirreling the suitcase away in a corner of the attic, David places himself in charge of the care and protection of the money. Initially, David's concern seems wise and well-placed, as it is only a matter of time before the two men torturing Hugo's friend will locate Hugo's new address, and come to retrieve the suitcase.

The two men succeed in "breaking" their victim and then break into the flat swiftly and suddenly, quickly immobilizing Alex and Juliet. Having had his shins beaten by a lead pipe, Alex sends the thugs into the attic after the suitcase, and David. What neither Alex nor the thugs take into consideration, however, is the state into which David has deteriorated. No longer the meek, well-mannered accountant, David has become a brutal killer. Once again, we are unable to see what is occurring, as only the sound of one body, and then another, falling to the floor of the attic is heard. The subsequent shot, of first one body, and then the other, falling through the hatch onto the floor of the entryway, followed by David silently leaping to the floor below, switchblade in hand, is evidence enough of the change in David. Disposing of the bodies in the very same manner in which he was once forced to dispose of Hugo, David is now a frenzied killer, and far more vicious, as we later discover one of the bodies has been skinned. In a departure from the film noir archetype, David's descent into dementia begins to gain in acceleration and paranoia. This deterioration culminates in his drilling holes into the ceiling of each room so that he is able to know the whereabouts of his flatmates at all times, yet this also suggests the hierarchy of the flatmates in relation to their individual cunning and deceit. While David retreats to the attic and surveys them from above, Alex and Juliet scheme to retrieve the money below.

No film noir would be complete without its femme fatale, and Juliet certainly proves herself more than capable of filling that role. Having become involved with David, ultimately to better acquaint herself with the whereabouts of the suitcase, Juliet preys upon the desires of both her flatmates in a well-planned scheme to gain the contents of the suitcase for herself. Nothing is as simple and as clear as it seems, however, in SHALLOW GRAVE, and the character of Alex is certainly no exception. Remaining pompous and detached throughout the film, Alex is directly confronted with the reality of what has occurred, as well as his own sense of loyalty and self-preservation once the bodies have been discovered, and his own paranoia begins to set in. Having been assigned the story of the discovery of three "shallow graves" in a nearby forest, Alex seems decidedly unnerved, and very close to confessing to the two investigators regularly appearing at the flat in search of information. It is Alex, however, who is ultimately able to outsmart everyone.

The final sequence of SHALLOW GRAVE is perhaps the most nerve-wracking sequence of events to have been captured on film. In the tradition of film noir, the resolution of all that has occurred is no simple matter; there are sudden, as well as shocking, reversals, revelations, and reverberations. The flat is dark, and eerily quiet as Alex tentatively dials the number of the police investigator, to confess to his flatmates' involvement we suppose, and as David silently saunters toward the front door, suitcase in hand. He is stopped, however, by Juliet, fully clothed, and curious about where he may be going at such an hour. Having noticed the phone cord stretched across the foyer, David calls to Alex, and insists he come out into the hallway to join them. David accuses Juliet of planning to escape with the money herself, as he has found a plane ticket in her bureau which Alex claims to have purchased. A struggle between David and Juliet quickly ensues, and the suitcase is momentarily in the possession of first David, and then Juliet. Once Alex becomes involved, the brawl moves toward the kitchen, where David quickly grabs a large knife, and plunges it into Alex's shoulder, pinning him to the kitchen floor. Just as he is about to reach for a second knife, Juliet comes from behind, grabs the knife, and quickly dispatches of David by stabbing him through the throat. In a state of shock, or so we suppose, Juliet pulls the knife from David's body, and turns to face Alex. As he breathes a sigh of relief, Juliet plunges the knife into his other shoulder, completely pinning him to the floor. As she removes her shoe to pound the knife further into the floorboard, we are finally offered a glimpse of the true nature of Juliet, a dangerous femme fatale. Escaping with the suitcase, she leaves both her "friends" in an ever widening pool of blood, and heads toward the airport.

In what would seem the perfect ending, however, there is yet another twist in store for us, and this, too, is typical of film noir. Alex, having managed to survive, although remaining pinned to the kitchen floor, is questioned by the investigator, as a smile slowly creeps across his face. As the camera moves down from the handle of the knife toward the floorboard, the shot is intercut with shots of Juliet in her car, about to open the suitcase. The camera moves further down, and we see Juliet again, a rage passing over her face as she finds the suitcase is filled with stacks of bill-sized pieces cut from the newspaper article Alex had written about the bodies found in the forest. The camera moves further down, and we see the end of the knife beneath the floorboard, and Juliet running toward the ticket counter at the airport. The camera moves further down, and we see the drops of blood slowly falling upon stacks and stacks of money, neatly hidden beneath the floorboards.

In the final shot of the film, we see David, laid upon an examining table in the morgue, the very same shot with which the film began. It is the final, and most taunting irony of the film, as we were led to believe from the onset that David survived to provide the voice- over for the story of the three friends. The noir voice-over, as we are now aware, is that of Alex, and there is a sudden shift in our perception. Where the introductory passage, "I think we all need friends... but if you can't trust your friends, well, what then?" once seemed sincere, but it is now sarcastic, and callous; what once seemed certain is now distorted by mistrust, and skepticism. Yet it is this final revelation that reiterates the noir tone of SHALLOW GRAVE, and that answers the very question posed by Boyle. Having asked, "What's a little murder between friends?" we have been given an engrossing, and extremely honest answer in Boyle's portrait of three friends and all that came between them.

Danny Boyle was excited by the screenplay John Hodge had written because, as he explained in a promotional statement, "unlike most British writing for television or screen, it was very simple, very dramatic and didn't carry a lot of history or moral baggage with it. Although its social milieu is very British, there is something American' about its absolute concentration on the drive of the narrative." John Hodge, a doctor by profession, studied medicine at the University of Edinburgh and practiced there until he took time off for writing SHALLOW GRAVE in 1992. In the film he plays the role of Detective Constable Mitchell. After his acting and writing debut, he now practices medicine in London. He admits to having watched and imitated "a succession of American films" and designing the story to move quickly so there is no time for the characters to examine "the rights and wrongs of their actions."

The film was not received with the same level of enthusiasm in the United States as it was in Britain. Hal Hinson of The Washington Post dismissed it as a "passable thriller," and Anthony Lane of The New Yorker opined that the film was "too smart, at times, for its own good" and was appalled by the reaction of a "smiling, unshockable, Tarantino-trained audience." Others objected to the lack of character definition and the shallowness of the style. Obvious comparisons were made to Hitchcock and the Coen brothers, however, and Janet Maslin of The New York Times concluded, after objecting to the "emptiness" of the characters, that the film was "too visually saavy to ignore." (Reviewed by Melissa Brabetz and James M. Welsh.)

Country of Origin: Great Britain Release Date: 1994 (1995 U.S.) Production Line: Andrew McDonald for Film Four International, in association with the Glasgow Fund and Figment Film; released by Gramercy Pictures Director: Danny Boyle