The Onion FieldTerrible crimes leave lingering after effects, trauma that ripples, ruining far more than the initial act did. The Onion Field is a true crime procedural drama about a pair of police officers--Karl Hettinger (John Savage) and Ian Campbell (Ted Danson)--who are abducted after a routine traffic stop by a pair of criminals: Gregory Powell (James Woods) and Jimmy Smith (Franklyn Seales). After taking the officers out to a remote onion field in Bakersfield, Powell shot Campbell and Hettinger narrowly escaped and ran for help. But even after Powell and Smith were arrested and convicted of first-degree murder, Karl suffered from survivor's guilt and his life began to spiral downward.
|
|
Like most true crime stories, The Onion Field dramatizes true events to paint a picture of a moment in history. The great challenge with true crime stories is that in the retelling, there is always the possibility that events are dramatized for the sake of the narrative, regardless of the veracity. The Onion Field is adapted for the screen by Joseph Wambaugh, from his book of the same name. It begins with a bird's eye view of a suburban idyll, which ends with a newspaper delivered and picked up by a resident, informing of this crime and the trials that followed. This opening is helpful to establish that what The Onion Field is meant to represent is an insider's look into one of those notorious stories that made headlines...until it didn't, forgotten by the public at large, but not by those affected by the crime. In fact, similar to movies like The China Syndrome, this movie's lasting effect in the public eye may have influenced the course of justice to an extent, notably for Gregory Powell, who spent his last breath behind bars. Just like Charles Manson, Powell was always denied parole. The fact that Gregory Powell murdered Ian Campbell in cold blood was never in dispute, but the question remains as to whether he was kept in prison for purely political reasons. After all, nobody wanted to be the one to be remembered for letting Charles Manson back on the streets, so his reputation influenced his right to appeal, just as it appears to have been for Powell; and that may have much to do with this movie. Make no mistake: I am not justifying any crimes committed by either Powell or Smith, but one has to consider just how much movies influence our justice system--from cases like these to anything else that happens to be high-profile. Woods's performance as Powell made him a name in Hollywood, largely because of the unhinged, dangerous way he portrayed the killer. On top of that, there are so many other character flaws that make this version of Powell simply ooze evil and corruption, from the slithering way he ingratiates himself on death row to his all-too-quick to pull a gun attitude for even minor infractions. It also doesn't help that he's an arrogant dope who tragically killed Campbell for the sake of a law that he misunderstood, namely the "little Lindbergh law", which would not have applied until he killed Campbell. There also remains the hotly-debated question as to who it was who fired four more rounds into Campbell's body--i.e. either Powell or Lewis--but The Onion Field suggests through subtle mannerisms in the actors and tone that it was Powell, who spitefully frames Lewis for this for purely selfish reasons. Perhaps unsurprisingly given the more sympathetic tone with which the movie treats Lewis, Lewis was paroled in 1982; even The Onion Field seems to have predicted this in the movie's final act.
One wonders how much artistic license was taken with the characters in The Onion Field from the first time Karl Hettinger and Ian Campbell meet in the evidence locker the police station, where Campbell is practicing his bagpipes. He says that when he plays at home, the neighbors call the cops. He shares that the bagpipes are a part of his heritage, and that the song he is playing is a funeral dirge--which is ominous given his terrible fate. When the two officers are held at gunpoint in the eponymous onion field, they tear up and blame the predominance of onions. Maybe this would happen, but it feels more likely that it is brought into the story because it emphasizes the tragedy about to come. Like with Truman Capote's "In Cold Blood", this story strives to get "in the heads" of the key participants, but is the artistic flourish meant to speak to the genuine tragedy on a deeper level, or is it for the benefit of the audience's experience as moviegoers? After the arrest, the movie shifts its focus away from Powell and Smith (for the most part) and onto Karl and his disintegrating family life and career. He is coerced to speak before other officers by a superior, embarrassing himself again and again for giving up his gun while he was held at gunpoint. He is forced to relive the trauma again and again during more than a half of a dozen trials, because Powell and Smith take to exploiting the legal system with appeal after appeal. (Coincidentally, their death sentence is changed to life in prison after California ruled the death penalty unconstitutional.) Karl's breakdown leads to kleptomania and his forced resignation from the police. In his darkest hour, he smacks his crying infant child and puts a gun in his mouth before coming to his senses. Did this actually happen? Did it happen this way? Certainly the audience will sympathize with Karl and feel the remorse that he feels because The Onion Field is effective at stirring our emotions. But in each scene, in each depiction of real people and real events, like every other "true story", we're always forced to ask ourselves just how much of it is "true" and how much is there to sell a ticket?
Recommended for: Fans of a tense and tragic crime story that starts like a procedural but ultimately feels more like a "based on true events" drama at the end. The Onion Field and true crime movies like it will always be in demand, largely because we as a people instinctively want to better understand events in our world, including high profile cases like this one. The inherent risk comes from letting the movie tell you exactly how it was, and not framing the dramatization as just an interpretation of those events.
One wonders how much artistic license was taken with the characters in The Onion Field from the first time Karl Hettinger and Ian Campbell meet in the evidence locker the police station, where Campbell is practicing his bagpipes. He says that when he plays at home, the neighbors call the cops. He shares that the bagpipes are a part of his heritage, and that the song he is playing is a funeral dirge--which is ominous given his terrible fate. When the two officers are held at gunpoint in the eponymous onion field, they tear up and blame the predominance of onions. Maybe this would happen, but it feels more likely that it is brought into the story because it emphasizes the tragedy about to come. Like with Truman Capote's "In Cold Blood", this story strives to get "in the heads" of the key participants, but is the artistic flourish meant to speak to the genuine tragedy on a deeper level, or is it for the benefit of the audience's experience as moviegoers? After the arrest, the movie shifts its focus away from Powell and Smith (for the most part) and onto Karl and his disintegrating family life and career. He is coerced to speak before other officers by a superior, embarrassing himself again and again for giving up his gun while he was held at gunpoint. He is forced to relive the trauma again and again during more than a half of a dozen trials, because Powell and Smith take to exploiting the legal system with appeal after appeal. (Coincidentally, their death sentence is changed to life in prison after California ruled the death penalty unconstitutional.) Karl's breakdown leads to kleptomania and his forced resignation from the police. In his darkest hour, he smacks his crying infant child and puts a gun in his mouth before coming to his senses. Did this actually happen? Did it happen this way? Certainly the audience will sympathize with Karl and feel the remorse that he feels because The Onion Field is effective at stirring our emotions. But in each scene, in each depiction of real people and real events, like every other "true story", we're always forced to ask ourselves just how much of it is "true" and how much is there to sell a ticket?
Recommended for: Fans of a tense and tragic crime story that starts like a procedural but ultimately feels more like a "based on true events" drama at the end. The Onion Field and true crime movies like it will always be in demand, largely because we as a people instinctively want to better understand events in our world, including high profile cases like this one. The inherent risk comes from letting the movie tell you exactly how it was, and not framing the dramatization as just an interpretation of those events.