Edward Norton is the saving grace for this film

Rating: 7/10 (23 April 2012)

On my gallant, noble, and impossible quest to see every movie that has ever been deemed to be good, I happened on the title American History X. It was indeed a good film, but that's just it. It was only a good film. It did not give me chills or astound me like many of the other great films that I have seen.
The most wonderful aspect of this film was the acting. When I heard what the film was about, and that Edward Norton was going to play the raving Neo-Nazi brother Derek Vinyard, I was initially disappointed, due to Norton's style of largely plain and deadpan delivery. I didn't think he had it in him to play a raving, deluded racist. I am glad to say that Norton's performance proved me very wrong. The way in which he delivered his lines was so convincing, that I actually experienced some amount of anger at his character, and not just the ideas he espoused. The convoluted logic behind his racism was so thought out and realistic, that it made it very easy to see how people who hold racial prejudices come to hold them. In addition, Ethan Suplee demonstrated impressive versatility in his acting. The first time I saw Suplee in a film was in Remember the Titans, where he played the slightly comical offensive lineman Louie Lastik. His character in this film, Seth, was incredibly dark, singing his White Supremacist songs and saluting Hitler. In general, the acting absolutely blew me away.
The downside to this movie is that the plot sets itself up for much depth in the story, but never takes the dive. In the beginning, Danny's teacher tells Danny that he will be a part of a new class, called American History X, designed to prevent him from going down the same Nazi path as his older brother. This is the title of the film. I think it's fair to expect the film to go into significant depth as to what the substance of the class is, and what Danny would have been learning in the class. But, because of the nature of the film, we never find out. I'm not saying that the film should be changed. I'm just saying that the writers of the film should have made it such that Danny was just given an extra assignment by his teacher, as opposed to having an entirely new course constructed for him.
Another aspect that goes undeveloped is the nature of the character, Lamont, who is Derek's Black friend in prison. Lamont is largely responsible for Derek's epiphany that Black people are, in fact, treated unfairly by law enforcement, and further more that racial hatred is a wasteful way of life. With such an important role in the story, one would think that Lamont's character would have been better explained. Instead, we never learn anything about him, other than the reason that he is in prison.
Another large missing link in this story is the reason for Derek's racism. In Danny's paper, he writes that Derek claims his racism was rooted in his father's murder. Danny claims to believe that his hatred for non-Whites began at an earlier age, when his father told him about affirmative action policies. The film introduces this question, which seems to be a large and significant question, but really only spends about five minutes answering it.
The final large missing puzzle piece, which is a problem that is slightly difficult to solve it whether or not Derek reverts to a life of racism at the end of the film. Not to spoil the film completely, but something happens to Danny at the very end of the film that would force Derek to question what he had learned from his experiences in prison. But, the film simply leaves us hanging there. We do not know whether we should feel happy or sad, for Derek, at the end of this film, when we feel the need to feel some sort of emotion in that regard. There really isn't a way to solve this problem, but it is worth noting.
Overall, this is a good film, with excellent character portrayal. However, it definitely leaves some questions unanswered.