Movie Review: Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri (2017)

I will try to avoid spoilers that are not in the trailer. See the official trailer at the end of this post.

This film is directed by Martin McDonagh (Seven Psychopaths) and stars Frances McDormand (Fargo), Sam Rockwell and Woody Harrelson. Strangely, this film features at least 6 actors (Frances McDormand, Woody Harrelson, Peter Dinklage, John Hawkes, Peter Clarke and Željko Ivanek) who have previously starred in an HBO series or miniseries. I guess that doesn't matter, but it was something I couldn't help but notice while watching the film.

I was trying to stick to reviews of new movies I see in the theater, as I’d rather not have my opinion clouded by hype, awards and everyone else’s opinions. (I’m distinguishing between writing reviews and analysis.) When any movie gets multiple awards and nominations, it’s just always going to be hard to live up to the hype. This really is a good movie, even if it takes a little bit of settling in to see what all the hype was about. For the acting, all awards and nominations are richly deserved.The story however, can be grueling as the characters proceed to make nothing but poor decisions. There is just too much anger for such a small town as the fictional Ebbing, Missouri.

The movie’s plot stems from a novel form of activism. Mildred Hayes (Frances McDormand) is a grieving mother of a teenage girl who was raped and murdered. The case having not yet been solved, she pays to put messages on three billboards on a seldom traveled road:

1. “Raped While Dying"
2. "Still No Arrests?"
3. "How Come, Chief Willoughby?”

This film has inspired real life activism. In the film, this activism might be for naught. Being directed at Chief Willoughby specifically, it just deflects anger around the town. It is really this entire closed system that is at fault. Yes, the police are inept, corrupt, racist and a symbol of injustice. But with the murderer (and rapist) probably far away at this point, should this case not fall on the federal level at some point? Why not target the FBI? Wouldn’t her advertising money be better spent on hiring a private investigator?

But this isn’t a movie where the characters do rational things. Everyone is angry, and spiteful. Occasionally tenderness and understanding break free, only for the characters to again be consumed with anger. It’s frustration at the misery of this world, of life halted by a senseless crime. As one character says, “anger begets anger.” Misery passes down from generation to generation. Sam Rockwell’s character is an old school cop, almost what you might see in a film noir. He’s a brute, a racist who thinks it’s no action can be racist unless someone uses racial slurs. He seems to care about solving cases, but he lets his energy be misdirected at more accessible targets.

Perhaps that is why one of the only rational caring persons in the film is one who is often an easy target. Peter Dinklage plays (obviously) a man of short stature who presents a voice of reason. He may be one of the only ones who doesn’t constantly misdirect his anger, even as he has every right to respond in kind to insults from the other characters.

This film is a farce disguised as a drama. The anger makes it hard to see the comedy. There are scenes that defy logic, especially where fires are concerned (no spoilers). Every character is brilliantly played as serious in intent but ludicrous in their actions. Whenever they seem about to redeem themselves, they’re surely going to do something to create more pain for someone else. There is a lesson about anger, and the power dynamics that lead to violence out of frustration. This can aggravate the viewer, because it’s played seriously. It’s easy to think characters redeem themselves, but at no point do they really end this cycle of violence.

I guess I should rate this as an 85/100.