At the beginning of March, Netflix released Triple Frontier, a film that has been in works since 2011, and has a star-studded cast including Ben Affleck, Oscar Isaac, Charlie Hunnam, Garret Hedlund and Pedro Pascal. In my regular weekend haze of swiping through the lists of recommended movies on Netflix I was intrigued by the trailer that showed off an exciting mix between a heist and action movie. So, obviously it was my choice for my next movie night.
Before starting, I was bracing myself for yet another patriotic, pro-military Hollywood production, but I was happily surprised otherwise. The film tells the story of five friends who got to know each other through active service as former Special Forces operatives. They reunite at the behest of Santiago Garcia (Isaac’s character) to use their skills for their own economic gain, in a morally ambiguous plan to steal millions from a mobster.
My initial reaction to the film had me sighing dramatically at the screen as human stupidity seem to undo all the progress the characters were making time and time again. But after taking more time to reflect, I think this is where the power of the film lies. The frustration was palpable but when expressing this frustration to my friend, they asked me if I would honestly act any differently? I would like to think that I would be to remain objective and see the big picture from what I could gain rather than all that I would not gain. However, the truth is that the fear of losing what you have begins the very moment it comes into you possession.
As someone who watches heist movies quite regularly, I am well aware that the most important part of any heist is the getaway. And Triple Frontier was no exception to this formula. A good half of the film detailed how the getaway progressed, moving away from the heist genre into the action realm. However, it is also when you truly get to know the characters.
At the beginning of the film, it is very much the connection between this group of friends that draws your attention. How they interact with each other, work together and act as the support for other’s weaknesses. Yet as the story goes on, the characters are left wondering how they are going to live and support themselves after everything they have to do to survive. They are forced to confront their intentions and morals headfirst, placing them in difficult positions, mostly because what was revealed to them shocked them.
And it was this that I found the most interesting about the film. They seemed shocked by the decisions that they made and where it took them. I guess at some point, especially once we hit adulthood, the expectation is that we know who we are, know how we will react to things, and know are strengths and weaknesses. Often, not knowing who we are is a mark of being unmoored in one’s own life, a moment of failure, something to progress away from. But I wonder now whether these characters had been hiding behind a mask of who they thought they were, becoming the failure thing that triggered the consequences they could not anticipate.
When the characters were first introduced, their lives were made to seem stable and solid. Sure, it may not have been great, and the characters may have been unhappy with the state of their lives, but it was stable. They knew who they were and how they got to where they were. But the story takes the characters down a path were what they thought they knew about themselves and the others is slowly torn apart. They have to confront the deeper sides of themselves that perhaps they didn’t want to know or admit to.
Mid way through the film, during an exchange between Pascal and Hedlund’s characters, Catfish and Ben, Catfish laments on an earlier scene, how he was too quick on the trigger, how he killed those people. In a morose moment before Bob Dylan’s “Masters of War” begins to play, Ben responds with: “No you didn’t. We all did.”
He comes to the realisation that the actions of the one became the actions of the group. With the promise of money and comfort in front of them, they did not stop to think what it would cost them. And it is only after, when they are placed in a position of struggle, do they have to consider if it was worth it after all. Before they can ask the question “how far can you go before you can’t come back from it?” the question is answered for them.
It a beautifully cinematic scene two thirds of the way through the movie, a mule falls off the edge of a steep cliff, the rocks that held him up tumbling beneath him, taking with it hundreds of thousands of dollars, that seem to be floating as they burst from the bags when the mule hits the rocks. The group is left contemplating the worth of their life and the money they just lost, wondering all the while whether any of it was worth it.
Though deeply frustrating, there is a realness to the film, which I immensely appreciated. The kind that makes you uncomfortable. Realising that greed can take over even the best of people and change them into individuals even they would not recognise. It leaves you questioning what could bring you to that point?
~S~
