Mel Gibson and Brian Helgeland had everything going for them in the ’90s. Mel nabbed his two Oscars for producing and directing Braveheart, and Helgeland nabbed his Oscar for adapting L.A. Confidential, both of which are some of the finest American films of the latter half of the 20th century. The two met during the production of Conspiracy Theory, which was also written by Helgeland. During that time Helgeland came across The Hunter, a crime novel written by Donald Westlake (under his pseudonym Richard Stark). After working it into a script, he had Mel read it over and even offered him to star in the lead role. Mel agreed to the part and Helgeland took on his first feature film as the director. Payback would be their last movie to close out the century, and while not recognized as an instant classic and huge success at the time of its release, there’s no question that it is one of my favorite crime/noir movies of all time and it deserves more recoginition.
It’s important to note that there are two different versions of this movie: the theatrical and director’s cut. Surprisingly, I actually side with the studio executives for once and enjoy the theatrical cut more than Helgeland’s version. The director’s cut has an entirely different third act with some additional scenes sprinkled throughout. If you are checking this movie out for the first time, seek out the theatrical version first before watching the director’s cut. There’s no question that the theatrical version is far superior. For purposes of this article, I am strictly referring to the theatrical cut.
Payback stars Mel Gibson as Porter, a small-time thief who stands ready to make his next big score. When his buddy Val comes along with a job involving a large payout, Porter agrees to help out. After completing the job and collecting the cash, Val, along with Porter’s wife, double cross him and leave him with nothing but two bullets in his back. Left for dead and empty-handed, Porter recovers from his wounds with one thing on his mind: $70,000. Determined to get his just due, Porter crosses paths with a variety of different criminals, a pair of crooked cops, and two crime syndicates, stopping at nothing to take back what is rightfully his.
It is immediately apparent that this film lacks a typical hero, per the noir tradition. The opening credits roll as Porter wanders the streets stealing from all walks of life. He steals from the homeless, doesn’t tip his waitress, dines and dashes, and lifts a credit card from a middle-class guy to go on a spending spree. Within the first five minutes I’m already wondering how I’m supposed to get behind this character for the rest of the movie. Every other character in the movie is just as bad, if not worse in a lot of ways. But what this movie does so well is that despite being void of “good guys” to root for, it still finds a way for you to root for the bad guy.
It becomes clear throughout the movie that it is not so much focused on what you know about the characters, but how you feel about them. Porter clearly does some despicable things, but at the same time he doesn’t necessarily feel like a despicable person. Val on the other hand, feels scummy. Not only do his actions reveal his true character, but there’s no shaking the slimy vibe that his character gives off. Other smaller characters give off a similar vibe despite not knowing anything about them. I love that about this movie. It’s not looking to dive into the history of the characters and their past in order to invoke how you should feel about them. It doesn’t feel the need to establish an origin story for Porter in order to justify why he does what he does. It allows you to feel around the room of each scene and pick up on the vibes of each character, telling you exactly what kind of person they are and how you should feel about them.
The world-building is excellent here and I can’t help but think it inspired certain elements of the world-building in John Wick. Porter’s journey doesn’t stop at Val, but leads him up the ladder of a crime syndicate that is headquartered at a hotel. We never really know what it is that they do or how each member got in their position, but we’re given just enough to get a sense of this extensive criminal underworld that prowls the city. The story could take place during the 70s just as much it could take place in the 90s. We don’t even know exactly what city the movie takes place in and yet, it works to its benefit. We’re just thrown into Porter’s world and watch how he deals with it and its various characters.
As I mentioned earlier, Porter is not a “good guy” by any standards. Regardless, we still find a way to sympathize with his situation. He’s clearly a loner with no connections and has no where to go. The only place he has to go after being shot is his apartment where his double-crossing wife still lives. Despite her shooting him in the back, it’s clear that he still cares about her, giving us a window into his attitude towards his relationships. He ultimately reconnects with his past acquaintance played by Maria Bello, who runs an escort business and helps Porter track down the right people. Their relationship further allows us to see Porter’s somewhat softer side and helps us to look past some of his more indecent behavior. Mel’s narration is also excellent. It lends us some insight into his character and how he interprets the situations happening around him.
Payback is easily one of the most underrated films of both Mel and Helgeland. At just over an hour and a half, its pacing is incredibly smooth and is able to build a small, but palpable world without spending too much time on its set up and back story of characters. It’s difficult to think of another one of Mel’s characters from his movies that rivals that of Porter. He’s one of the coolest characters and I wish we could’ve followed up with his character in a second movie. Remember this movie the next time you’re in the mood for a quick crime noir movie. It’s smooth, it’s fun, it’s Payback.
