"Man on Fire" is one of those movies that is great the first time around, but when viewed a second time takes on new meaning that, for me at least, was almost like watching a different film. It’s not so much about plot twists this time, though, it’s more about getting to know the characters thoroughly. Once I knew who does what and learned about the motivations that drive them I was able to more fully appreciate why they do things that they do.

I don’t think I’m giving anything away by saying that the little girl, Pita (Dakota Fanning), gets kidnapped for ransom. That event splits the movie pretty much in half. The first half is about Creasy and Pita building a relationship. Creasy (Denzel Washington) is a miserable man; he has turned to alcohol for fulfillment and only takes this job bodyguarding Pita at the insistence of his friend. His life of killing others has left a shadow on his soul that persists until Pita shows him it is OK to live again. The first part of the movie is about the building of their bond and the changes that result in Creasy. I thought all of that was a bit slow when I first watched it, but I soon realized that it is vital to the movie being great.

The second half is where the intensity begins. Creasy embarks on a mission of bloody justice taking down everyone that was involved in the kidnapping. His new-found reason for living has been stolen leaving him with all he knows, killing. So basically you have a sweet character story followed by an intense revenge story. Without the strength of the second half the beginning would lead nowhere and without the development of the first half the end would have been a forgettable revenge plot. The compliment of the halves creates a whole far beyond what either could have achieved individually.

Plot-wise this is one of the best movies I have seen in a while. The character development is great particularly with Creasy; he’s severely conflicted and deciding what to do with his life. We get hints that he is nothing like the man he used to be: a tough guy that has it all together. Somewhere along the line his life degenerated, and we are seeing the results of that.

His friend Rayburn was evidently a tough guy also in the line of killing. We don’t see any character development in him, but we see the results of development from the past. He has chosen a path away from blood different from Creasy’s -- Rayburn finds solace in the love of his wife and children rather than in a bottle. This makes him the only stability in Creasy’s life though not enough to be life-altering. He hopes to help Creasy come to grips with life and thinks a job will be a step in the right direction. The hints of their history and relationship without actually explaining any of it adds a great level of development to events unfolding.

Pita doesn’t change much but does learn about life. Creasy teaches her to go beyond her current limits pushing her in ways that bring out her natural talent. She matures some but is more of a catalyst than anything else.

One interesting reflection of life in the movie is that motivations and actions are often detestable or justifiable depending on the point of view or the outcome. Creasy is the best example since others I would like to use will spoil some good plot points. From one point of view Creasy is a murderer. He’s acting as judge and executioner and doesn’t mind delivering a little torture to reach his end. From another point of view he’s on a justifiable mission of justice that will keep dangerous people from hurting others.

The acting is outstanding. If I tried to name all the actors that are good I’d be spending more time on it than I care to so I’ll just hit a few particularly high points. Denzel Washington is great as he so often is. Few people could have delivered the range of emotions he does and made them all believable. Dakota Fanning is impressive especially considering her age. The director does not rely on her cute factor to sell the role but uses Dakota’s talent to strengthen the plot of her developing relationship with Creasy.

Christopher Walken’s role is one of the best he’s ever done. One reason the movie was different for me the second time around was because I kept expecting Walken to end up a weird, twisted guy. Once I knew his character was honorable and even admirable I quit trying to see through the deceptions that weren’t there. Singer Marc Anthony shows decent acting ability. Mickey Rourke is quite good, etc. etc.

Tony Scott is an excellent director. There is definitely an unusual style that adds a great deal to the atmosphere of the movie. Some parts feel more like a documentary than fiction increasing the level of reality, and the many camera angles of the same scene add motion which creates a sense of urgency to the dialogue. He inserted the translation captions in a highly unusual way that I find visually appealing. The words interact with the scene - fading in and out, shifting, wiping away with the movement of a car or some other object – rather than just appearing at the bottom of the screen.

It’s a well written story. It has a large dramatic range delivering lovable sweetness and disturbing intensity with equal strength. So many movies lately seem to build up well only to be disappointing in the end. While certainly not feel-good, the ending is fulfilling and appropriate. It adds great weight to the events that precede it.