Number 23

General Release, R (US) 15 (UK), 95 Mins

Hell isn’t an imaginary land of fire and brimstone; chock full of imps and demons. Hell is tJimche darkest recesses of the human mind. Our darkest impulses, fears and sometimes memories dwell there. Although this film is nominally about the number 23 of the title it is also about that, it is about the main characters descent into hell

Jim Carrey is Walter Sparrow. Sparrow is aptly named as he works as a local Animal Control Officer. He is somewhat melancholy but otherwise well-adjusted that is until he is bitten by a dog named NED. NED leads Sparrow to the grave of a Laura Tollins. Arriving late to meet his wife, Agatha Sparrow (Virginia Madsen), Walter is presented with a birthday gift of a book ‘of obsession’ called The Number 23. Thus begins the descent of Sparrow into psychosis, as he reads through the book it is seemingly based on his own life with one important exception, it details a murder that has yet to occur.

Thankfully, the mythology surrounding the number 23 is kept to a bare minimum. At the beginning a series of facts connecting the number to a series of momentous (in a bad way) events in human history sets the tone but apart from a sketchy outline mid-way through we are spared the gory details. Belief in the mystic significance of the number 23 stems from a modern chaos religion called Discordianism which has the Greek goddess of discord, Eris as its principle deity. 23 is considered, all at the same time, sacred (to Eris), lucky, unlucky, sinister and scared to unholy gods (Cthulhu Mythos) and strange. Sparrow’s question, “is it god?”, is thus answered; 23 is a corollary of the Discordian law of 5’s in that it’s properties are divisible five different (and sometimes mutually exclusive) ways.

One of the things that immediately strikes you about this film is that Carrey looks every bit the part as Sparrow. Ace Ventura and The Mask seem like a world away as Carrey gives a consummate performance as a deeply disturbed character. ‘Fingerling’, the anti-hero of the book, is however perhaps a dark allusion to The Mask. In a way Carrey’s journey from the fun-loving Mask to the psychotic ‘Fingerling’ is iconic of his progress as an actor. Making the transition from such wildly different genres successfully shows a versatility which should surely be applauded? Carrey’s supports all perform admirably in their often multiple roles alongside him (incidentally, the multi-parting is not a fact that is ‘accidental’ or unrelated to the plot).

This strong use of suggestion is something that will keep you on your toes if you are one of those people who like’s to beat the plot to the end. For example, NED’s bite is seemingly innocuous in the beginning, a plot device to bring Sparrow and book together but the fact that NED bit Sparrow begins to assume allegorical importance as the plot unravels. It has been asserted that the plot twists are easy to unravel which they are for a well-trained critical eye but I rather suspect that the casual movie-goer, who switches off their brain at the popcorn stand, will find slightly more suspense in the plot. Immersing yourself in the character of Sparrow is the key to actually enjoying this film; ignore the wider-world and follow the twists and turns of his inner psyche and you will be genuinely disturbed.

At the end however you maybe left feeling a little disappointed as the movie suddenly switches tack from descent-into-hell into a more traditional tale of redemption. One feels that the story perhaps deserves a darker end but the courage was lacked to prosecute this which ultimately is a shame.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: