About Me
Theres not much that can be said about Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer that hasnt already been said. A controversy and sensation due to its unflinching portrayal of violence, Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer was first screened at the Telluride Film Festival in 1986, but languished in distribution limbo for years before getting a proper release in 1990. It garnered generally strong reviews and in the intervening years has become a sort of a benchmark for serial killer films. Films like Se7en or The Silence of the Lambs have been flashier and made serial killing sexy, but few films can match Henrys hardcore grittiness. Make no mistake, Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer is the real deal.After opening with a series of disturbing tableaux of Henrys victims, the action shifts to a seedy section of Chicago, where Henry and his roommate Otis live. Otis sister Becky, running away from a failed and abusive marriage, has come to Chicago to live with Otis. Its this threesome that is the focus of the film.Special attention should be given to Michael Rookers performance in the title role. Even more amazing is that its his motion picture debut. Rooker has gone on to do some very impressive work, but has never really gotten the leading man status and recognition he deserves. Nevertheless, his portrayal here is pitch perfect. Rookers shortcomings as a leading man are assets here; his everyday face and soft, gravelly voice are the perfect cover for the madness that seethes inside Henry. His bursts of anger, especially those directed towards Otis, are truly frightening. Even more frightening is Henrys casual indifference when he is teaching Otis the ins and outs of serial killing. Its these moments that are the real heart of the film, since we get insight into Henrys psyche.The most interesting relationship is the one between Becky and Henry. Having been at the hands of an abusive father and brother her whole life, she sees in Henry a kindred spirit and protector. When Henry spurns her advances, she takes that as a sign that he is the real deal; a man who doesnt just want to use her body, but who wants to protect and take care of her. Its this blind idolatry that makes Becky overlook a lot of the red flags in Henry's behavior. Its interesting that Henry doesnt kill her after she sees incontrovertible proof of Henrys psychosis. Only after a night in a hotel room, where they presumably sleep together, does Henry commit the actions that lead up to the films haunting final shot.Otis is by far the least well developed of the three, but then his purpose here is to make Henry seem likable in comparison. Considering that the protagonist of the film is a serial killer, how could he possibly be made sympathetic? Otis is your answer. To that effect, Tom Towles turns in a great performance. His Otis is so slimy he made me want to wash my hands after the movie was over. When hes not letching after his sister, hes deriving perverse pleasure from a videotape of him assaulting a woman, rewatching it in slow motion and frame by frame (in a scene that should make even the hardest horror fan stop and think). The reason it works, and the reason it doesnt feel manipulative, is that there are people as nasty as Otis, and however disgusting he may be, he never takes that step over the line into implausibility. It makes sense that Henry would be attracted to a person like Otis.I guess Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer seems like such a breath of fresh air, even twenty years after its initial release, because it doesnt apologize for its protagonist. It doesnt try to explain him, it doesnt sexy him up and it doesnt make excuses for him. Sure, Henry had a rough childhood, but so did Becky and the only time she hurts another human is in defense of Henry. After Rob Zombies reprehensible The Devils Rejects, in which Zombie tries to manipulate the audience into feeling sympathy for a family of sexual predators by their casting as victims, Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer doesnt condone, tacitly or otherwise, Henrys actions.Admirably, Director John McNaughton never stoops to cheap shocks, and despite the film's reputation, its gore is used sparingly for impact. There is dark humor in the film, especially in McNaughtons condemnation of violence as entertainment, but it never gets out of control. With a debut as impressive as this, its a wonder McNaughton hasnt done more in the genre since."...Spare, intelligent and thought provoking....This film gives off a dark chill that follows you all the way home..." -- Peter Travers, Rolling Stone"...Exceptionally well-acted....[A] challenging, uncomfortable and honourable approach to real-life horrors..." -- Kim Newman, Sight and Sound"...A more explicit PSYCHO made with Hitchcock's integrity..." -- 4 out of 4 stars-- Mike Clark, USA Today"...Profoundly disturbing....[McNaughton's] artistic control of the camera and narrative is evident from the start..." -- Caryn James, New York Times"...Rooker captures a psychopath's charisma in a film as raw as a fresh blade wound." -- Rating: B+ -- Lawrence O'Toole, Entertainment Weekly"...As fine a film as it is a brutally disturbing one..." -- Sheila Benson, Los Angeles Times"[It is the] careful, naturalistic direction of actors that gives the film its creepy staying power." -- Dave Kehr, New York Times
