Sometimes, the timing of movie releases can feel like a particular rehash of current topics, which, at market value, seems like a great idea for everyone involved. Dead Man’s Wire, Gus van Sant’s first movie in several years, is not at all a bad movie: the direction is expectantly precise and enjoyable and Bill Skårsgard steps out of his usual shadowy figures for a firecracker performance. But I can’t shake the feeling that it falls short of saying something, instead blunting an otherwise sharp topic for a passive entry onto the collective conscience. 

Mirroring a real-life 1977 hostage situation in Indianapolis, the film casts Skårsgard as Tony Kiritsis, who attempts to confront the president of a mortgage brokerage firm after a dispute over Tony’s land. But because Mr. Hall was out of office, Tony redirects his attention to Mr. Hall’s adult son Dick (Dacre Montgomery), who also has a high-level position at the company. Using the Dead Man’s Wire, a tactic in which a wire attached to the trigger of the shotgun is tied to Tony’s neck so that the shotgun would fire from any abnormal movement, Tony is ready to get the party started.

Granted, van Sant is no mere director. He has tackled some of the more taboo topics in the ‘90s with electrifying, humanistic results. Dead Man’s Wire whirs around the morality, legality and justice of the situation;  sure, it’s bad to hold a quote-unquote innocent man at gunpoint, but are loan companies not predatory and assaultive enough down to ensure all but ruined livelihood? It is probably safe to use Dog Day Afternoon as an apt comparison (not only for the fact that Mr. Hall is played by Al Pacino, who soaks up the total five minutes of his screen time with the kind of elderly vitriol I expect). Instead of staring deeply into Sonny’s frantic cow eyes, we have Tony, a blue-collar character with hurt and earthiness to him. As police negotiations are held and news coverage spreads within the 63-hour period, Tony becomes a controversial figure: welcomed by those who have also been and antagonized by those who want to uphold the peace.

But I think the ability to like Tony is too easy. There are parts of him that represent the everyman that caters to the public’s sympathy toward his woes, and it helps in knowing how the public views the bloodthirsty rich. Still, I think about Pacino’s performance of likability against the grain, versus Tony’s predicament and reactions, which feels just like an adequate understanding of a course that has already been paved. 

Nevertheless, this is how the event unfolds. Montgomery submits to his role as a calm and compliant hostage with enough pallor and sweat to assume the role of a near-dead man. The secondary characters, from Myhala’s eager junior reporting to Colman Domingo’s radio host who airs his conversations with Tony, exist as intermissions from watching the Tony-Dick try to navigate going up the stairs or getting in a car (though truthfully, Domingo’s role plays a vital role in martyring Tony).

This movie is the first filmized account of the event, but the story has been revisited via documentary (in which this movie relies on, similarly to The Smashing Machine and subsequent criticism) and a podcast featuring Jon Hamm. It’s also my first time hearing about the story, but it had seemed apparent that by the time that Tony requests $5 million in exchange for Dick’s safety, his greatest idea started and ended at the shotgun. Though he clearly has a plan of how he wants things to go, especially with the grand scheme of making out of this alive, you can’t help but see how it goes down, flummoxed and all. And hey, maybe a dead man’s wire is the lifesaving end of a broken man’s rope.

Dead Man’s Wire
2025
dir. Gus van Sant
105 min.

Opens Friday, 1/9 @ AMC Boston Common