SEVEN IS WITHOUT A DOUBT ONE OF THE DARKEST FILMS EVER MADE

SEVEN IS WITHOUT A DOUBT ONE OF THE DARKEST FILMS EVER MADE.

Seven is one of the darkest films ever made, but what makes it memorable is not the violence. The film's lasting power comes from its exploration of morality, evil, and whether a person can become so consumed by a belief system that they justify murder in the name of virtue.  It was directed by David Fincher, who is one of my favorite directors.  While the concept of film noir usually has a good vs. bad scenario – usually police chasing some type of criminal.  Seven takes this concept to a whole new level.  The movie ends on one of the most shocking twist endings of all time.

The movie is about Detective Somerset who is days away from retirement, but is breaking in a younger Detective Mills, who requested to be transferred to the darkest and most crime ridden city available.  Somerset and Mills start by investigating the murder of a fat man that was forced to continuously eat food until he burst.  Somerset is left solving this case while Mills then is assigned the murder of a lawyer that was forced to mutilate himself in his office.  They eventually discover that these murders are the act of John Doe, who is preaching a sermon on the seven deadly sins through acts of murder. 

Fincher does a great job at making the entire setting appear dirty, sinister, and hopeless.  Most of the scenes are filmed to appear as if it were in a large metropolitan city.  Many scenes were filmed at night or during the day when it is raining.  The dialogue is mostly a discussion of horrible crimes that continuously happen locally or why they should never raise a child in this city.  All this leaves the audience with a feeling of hopelessness, depression and fear.

John Doe is a fascinating character as he is a mix of insanity, strong moral beliefs, and the need to be heard.  He murders because this is his only way to effectively communicate his messages of morality to the rest of the world.  While he is sinister and enjoys his work, he believes that he is actually helping people.  However, another aspect of Doe is that he went to great lengths, spent large sums, and learned various skills to commit these crimes.  If he was truly trying to guide people into morality you would think that he could have applied his skills, money and drive to helping people in a non-violent manner.  Lastly, as Detectives read some of his journals his real drive seems to be his hatred of other people and his belief of being superior to others.

The entire film is a discussion on the need for moral values in society.  John Doe goes to extremes to make this dark place understand the need for morals.  Doe, however, justifies committing acts of violence to get his point across, which is the opposite of the very moral values which he preaches.  Somerset, on the other hand, continues to endure trying his hardest to do the right thing as a detective by solving murder cases – as he continues to believe that the world is still worth fighting for.

TF’s NOTES:  Is John Doe Insane?  A theme through the movie is the concept of insanity and what that looks like.  Mills dismisses Doe as a crazy person that wears his dead grandma’s panties and applies peanut butter to his chest.  He continuously refers to him as a ‘nut job’.  Summerset advises him not to underestimate or belittle Doe.  However, later the prosecutor and the defense lawyer argue whether Doe is insane, with the prosecutor claiming that the defense could never prove insanity.

This is actually a common discussion amongst lawyers in criminal law.  Many people that are ‘legally insane’ have been able to commit very detailed and well-thought-out murders.  The legal defense of insanity is not so much about how crazy you are, but whether you understood right from wrong when you committed the crime, or whether you were able to control your actions within the limits of the law.  In essence, was the act of murder something that you could not control, or did you not know that what you were doing was wrong?

It is not enough to suffer from a mental illness or mental defect; it is more about how the disease or defect affected the murderer at the time of the killing.  Applying this to what we know about John Doe from the movie, he first has to   have a mental disease or defect.  Given the nature of his crimes, we can probably assume that he does.  The next question is does he understand that what he is doing is wrong?  It is pretty clear that he does.  He seems to understand that the murders are wrong but this is the only way he get everyone’s attention.  Therefore it boils down to could he control his actions within the limits of the law?  That is always a tough one and would require an expert to make that evaluation.  However, given the fact that John Doe had to change his plans and proceed with an expedited version of his sermons sounds more like it was not a sudden act but one that involved serious planning on Doe’s part.  Also the fact that the crimes were linked to each other, shows that Doe did not temporarily lose control of himself, rather he acted as a diabolical murderer.  Therefore, as crazy as John Doe appears, he is likely sane. 

I would call Seven a “Neo-Noir” film, because it embraces classic noir movies but kicks it up a notch.  Unlike most noir, Seven removes all hope for a better world, except for the handful of people that strive to make it a better place.  It is truly a masterpiece.  It does earn its R rating.