Knock-Knock, Grieve, Repeat

“The Messenger” (2009) — movie review
Today’s review is for the quietly devastating “results of war” drama “The Messenger” (2009), starring Ben Foster as Staff Sgt. Will Montgomery (a wounded Iraq War veteran reassigned to the Army’s Casualty Notification service), Woody Harrelson as Capt. Tony Stone (a seasoned officer with a rigid protocol and a fraying sense of detachment), Samantha Morton as Olivia Pitterson (a widow whose grief complicates the boundaries of duty), and Jena Malone as Kelly (Will’s ex-girlfriend, whose absence underscores his emotional isolation).  Directed by Oren Moverman, the film explores the moral weight of bearing witness to loss, the limits of military stoicism, and the fragile humanity that flickers beneath uniformed surfaces.
Background:  This was my first viewing of  “The Messenger”.  I was looking for a free stream of the film “Taking Chance” and this film came up on YouTube “Shorts”.   It looked interesting, so I decided to give it a view.  The film was nominated for two Academy Awards:  Best Supporting Actor (Harrelson) and Best Original Screenplay (Moverman and Alessandro Camon).  It also won the Silver Bear for Best Screenplay and the Peace Film Award at the Berlin International Film Festival.  However, the film didn’t make much money at the box office.
Plot:  Will Montgomery returns from Iraq with physical scars and emotional distance.  Instead of redeployment, he’s assigned to notify next-of-kin of soldiers killed in action — a task governed by strict rules:  no touching, no consoling, no deviation.  His partner, Tony Stone, is a procedural purist, masking his own trauma behind protocol and alcohol.  As they deliver news to families — each encounter a study in shock, rage, denial, and collapse — Will begins to unravel.  His connection with Olivia, a widow who receives the news with eerie composure, breaches the professional wall and forces him to confront his own grief.  The film doesn’t build toward resolution;  it accumulates emotional weight, scene by scene, until the burden feels unrelated to the actual viewing.
So, is this movie any good?  How’s the acting?  The filming / FX?  Any problems?  And, did I enjoy the film?  Short answers:  Yes;  exceptional;  restrained and intimate;  a few;  absolutely.
Any good?  Yes.  “The Messenger” is a rare war film that never shows combat.  Instead, it focuses on the aftermath — the domestic front where grief detonates quietly.  It’s a film about duty, empathy, and the impossibility of emotional neutrality.  The screenplay is taut, the pacing deliberate, and the emotional stakes high.  It’s not a crowd-pleaser, but it’s a truth-teller.
Acting:  Ben Foster delivers may be his career-defining performance — his Will is haunted, tender, and barely holding it together.  I am not a fan of Harrelson, but his Tony is a masterclass in controlled unraveling;  his Oscar nomination was well-earned.  I found the character interesting because although he served in a “war zone”, he never personally came under fire.  He sees this as a personal (and career) failure and feels his awards and decorations are somehow not as valid as someone who earned his while actually in firefights.  Samantha Morton brings quiet power to Olivia, and her scenes with Foster are among the film’s most affecting.  Her character feels the other wives in the area think she is a “slut” for entering a relationship so soon after the death notification of her husband.  My impression was both she and they are really just afraid that’s how they might react and they feel they’re betraying “the memory” of their spouses even though they (the spouses) are still alive and fighting in Iraq.  The supporting cast (including Steve Buscemi in a brief but gutting grieving father role) adds texture without distraction.  The ensemble works because each character is a fragment of grief — some brittle, some buried.
Filming / FX:  The cinematography by Bobby Bukowski is intimate and observational — handheld shots, natural light, and close framing create a documentary feel.  The editing is unobtrusive, letting scenes breathe and reactions linger.  There are no visual effects, no musical score-driven manipulation.  The film’s aesthetic is emotional realism — raw, quiet, and unadorned.
Problems:  Minor.  The pacing will feel slow to viewers expecting narrative propulsion.  The romantic subplot between Will and Olivia, while thematically resonant, creates ethical ambiguity that the film never resolves.   Some viewers may find the procedural (notification) repetition numbing — but that’s part of the point.  The emotional toll is cumulative, not episodic.
Did I enjoy the film?  Yes — though “enjoy” feels like the wrong verb.  I was moved, unsettled, and grateful.  “The Messenger” is a film that respects its audience’s intelligence and emotional capacity.  It doesn’t offer easy answers or cathartic release.  It offers the viewer presence — bearing witness to pain, without flinching — just as it does for the characters in the film.
Final Recommendation:  Strong recommendation.  “The Messenger” is a war film (almost) without war, a love story (almost) without romance, and a procedural without resolution.  It’s about the cost of service, the fragility of protocol, and the human need to connect — even when connection is forbidden.  If you’re interested in films that explore grief, duty, and emotional integrity, this one’s worth your time.  Watch it for the performances (especially Foster and Harrelson), the writing, and the quiet moments when silence says more than you expect.
.
Click here (30 November) to see the posts of prior years.  I started this blog in late 2009.  Daily posting began in late January 2011.  Not all of the days in the early years (2009-2010) will have posts.

Read Full Post »