JOHN DOE VIGILANTE

Australia, 2014, 90 minutes, Colour.
Jamie Bamber, Lachy Hulme.
Directed by Kelly Dolen.

To say a film is interesting is not meant to be put-down. If the film is considered interesting, it is stimulating, emotionally involving, giving the audience a challenge and something to reflect on.

It can be said, definitely, that John Doe Vigilantes is interesting, even confronting.

But that is not to say that all audiences will want to have this experience. This is a story, set in Melbourne and using Melbourne and locations effectively, about a serial killer who is called John Doe. When it comes to screen vigilantes, many might remember Charles Bronson in the Death Wish series in the 1970s and 1980s, a man whose family has been violently assaulted and who feels that justice cannot be done by the legal system and so takes the law into his own hands, wreaking vengeance. A more recent example is Denzel Washington in The Equaliser, a seemingly virtuous man, edifying even, who goes to the defence of a young girl and turns into an exterminator of hyper-exploitative gangsters.

The thing is that the audience found these men of vengeance initially sympathetic, and found that what they were doing was righting wrong. John Doe is definitely not sympathetic. His serial killing (some of it shown in harsh or suggested detail, especially the intense confrontation with a brutal childkiller) has as its target criminals who have moved beyond the justice system or those who have served time, been paroled and offend again.

At the opening of the film, the verdict is about to be given in his trial. The screenplay introduces a journalist, played by Lachy Hulme, whom John Doe has allowed to interview him. This gives the audience the opportunity to look at and listen to John Doe, rather phlegmatic as he talks to and listens to the journalist, remembering the various episodes. Within the interview, there are many flashbacks, the first focusing on a paedophile priest, his treatment of a little girl, and he is killing being taped. John Doe tapes many of his killings and forms an alliance with a television interviewer, sending him the tapes for newscasts.

This introduces a theme which is most significant in the film, the role of the media. We have the journalist interviewing John Doe, who goes about his investigative work by interviewing an array of people, the police, psychiatrists, the television journalist, the producer of the program, and some ordinary people in the street. This raises the issue of exploitation by the media and individuals and communities allowing themselves to be manipulated.

By this device, the film-makers are able to introduce all aspects of serial killing and vigilantes killings, for and against, nuances of Justice, difficulties of law enforcement and prison sentences, the role of parole, the different perspectives of the media, exploitative or restricted, and the attitudes of people who want to watch the videos of the killings and those who do not. This means that the audience may be shifting positions all the way through the film, approving, disapproving, being challenged, thining that some episodes might be exploitative or necessary for the message of the film, wondering about their own stances.

The film focuses on several of John Doe’s more than thirty victims, and abusive husband, brutal bouncers at nightclubs, horriblel abusers and killers of children… The point that John Doe makes is that they have escaped the law but deserve to be punished rather than to be kept alive at the taxpayers’ expense.

Another effect is the influence of the vigilante vengeance on the public, demonstrations in favour of the vigilantes, and individuals who set up posses, inflamed by their hate and wreaking Justice, or what they think to be justice, and indulging their vicious passions. The journalist raises the question for John Doe and whether he enjoyed his killing or not.

Lachy Hulme is very good and insistent as the investigative journalist, wondering why he has been chosen – and finding out with something of a shock. Jamie Bamber (British but working extensively on US TV) is intense as John Doe, though given some humane moments in video material with his wife and daughter.

The ending, dramatically speaking, is quite clever, though it will give audiences reason to reflect because it comes so suddenly.

This is a well written and directed film, which is definitely not an entertaining night out, but a contribution to issues about the law, justice, vigilantes.

1. A small and intense film? Its a message?

2. The title, the anonymous character, the anonymous citizen? Becoming vigilante?

3. Melbourne story, the use of the city, Parliament buildings, the streets, the bays and the docks? The musical score?

4. The dramatic structure: information about John Doe, the court, expecting the verdict, the interviews, the flashbacks, the particular targets, the role of the media, the experts, the disciples and vigilantes, the explosive ending? The overall impact?

5. John Doe and his case, the sittings in the court, the verdict, audience and response?

6. The decision for the interviews, John Doe permitting, the journalist, in himself, confident, the audience believing in him? why he was chosen – and the clues of torture throughout the film, audiences noting them or not? The journalist, his questions, psychological aspects, discovering more and more, his interviewing other people, the psychologist, the various experts, the police, the media and the boss, the television interviewer? Building up the profile of John Doe, his motives?

7. John Doe, ordinary, his job, his wife and child, deaths, anger? In proportion, out of proportion?

8. The difference between justice and the law? The killing of his family? His decision to get revenge, clever, capturing everything on video, his reputation through the media, the interviewer building him up? The playing of the material on television? The effect on those watching, individuals, in the hotel?

9. A masked avenger? His different targets, the abusive priest, the violent bouncer, the domestic violence, the child killer? The images of these perpetrators? Scenes of their crimes? Topical, resonating with the audiences?

10. The long interview with the child killer, his denials, excuses, anger, admissions? Death?

11. The issues of right and wrong, the arguments, for his vengeance work, against him being a vigilante? The audiences asked to make up their minds?

12. The killing of the interviewer, its suddenness, the reasons and his being a legitimate target because of his violence?

13. The followers, the young man, the interviews, the public response, the arguments for and against, the final bombs, the consequences of the vigilante action?