This is not a film. This is not even a documentary. This is a carefully calculated dissection of the innate human desire to obey authority at a most alarming level, as unnerving as it is unbelievably frightening.
I must admit that my initial reaction to the film was outright incredulity; it seemed unrealistic and pretty much impossible that any middle-aged woman, at the behest of a voice on the phone claiming to be a police officer, would strip search a young girl and then proceed to subject her to escalating acts of cruelty and sadism. But the real-life events upon which this film is based only makes this dramatization all the more chilling. And important.
At first, I was reminded of the 1960s Milgram experiments in which an authority figure in a lab coat instructed participants to deliver electric shocks to someone in another room who they could hear but not see. Milgram had initially surveyed students before the experiments, noting that all interviewed had claimed they would never do such a thing. And yet, once the actual experiments were carried out, two-thirds of the participants complied with the instructor's demands, administering the final 450-volt shock to the anonymous victims.
The experiments helped illustrate people's inherent reluctance to confront those perceived to be in power. As Compliance writer and director Craig Zobel states, “We can’t be on guard all the time. In order to have a pleasant life, you have to be able to trust that people are who they say they are. And if you questioned everything you heard, you’d never get anything done.” Indeed, it's easier - and undeniably more efficient - to simply follow the leader because otherwise we might be forced to - gasp! - actually think for ourselves. And worse yet, what if upon logical thinking and pragmatic reasoning we realize that we were duped by those in power? Or worse yet, that they were wrong?
Indeed, if anyone still finds blind obedience to be unbelievable, look no further than the recent Sandusky trials. For more than a decade, the most powerful men at Penn State failed to take any steps to protect the victimized. It wasn't until after Sandusky was arrested - once the perceived power was stripped from the man - when individuals finally began stepping forward and expressing any concern for the safety of the victims.
It’s a bitter pill to swallow, acknowledging our own shortcomings, admitting our own inherent weaknesses. But Compliance manages to pivot off a disturbing real-world event to allegorize a deeply disturbing flaw in our society. And in the wake of both the Republican National Convention and the Democratic National Convention - in the midst of a political environment already overwrought with extravagant persuasion and subterfuge - is there any film that dares to probe the human conditions in a more important light?
Consensus is the backbone of politics. And by definition, consensus requires mass acknowledgment of a shared interest, a tantalizingly perilous shade of groupthink. Already, partisans back their party's every grandiose pledge, every extravagant promise, often without regard to logical thought. They surrender their free will - their very power to reason critically - because they've already made up their minds. Why do I need to listen to the other side of the argument when I've already chosen to hear the sound-bites that invariably support my own views? Why should I question my party's elected official if he's the one I've voted into power? If I doubted him, wouldn't that somehow diminish his appeal, taint his armor? If I questioned him - and somehow arrived at an unsatisfactory conclusion - wouldn't that reflect badly upon myself for having supported a liar? A fraud? It's this very mindset - this very inclination to comply with authority and submit to the overwhelming gloss of lies and ease of deception - that makes trading the turbulence of doubt for the safety of certainty not just intrinsically appealing, but painfully understandable.
