Film Pairings — Tough Cops Up Against The Glass Ceiling

As regular readers know, the choices here are not necessarily the best crime fiction films ever.  In some cases, I look at movies that might have slipped under the radar for good reason.  My thinking is that even a mediocre crime film might be more entertaining than an evening of reruns or the fifth time through a Suzie Orman money management lecture, when in fact, you have no money to manage.  Here are two flawed movies, each with some interesting moments.  The two movies provide an interesting study about how two female cops (and the people who play them) can fight gender bias and their own demons get the job done.

Andy Garcia and Ashley Judd

Twisted — Ashley Judd takes the lead in murder investigations that somehow lead back to her.  She must fight against the department’s entrenched beliefs that women are less capable of dealing with such tough assignments and that she, in particular, may not be up to the task.  Samuel L. Jackson plays her mentor, Andy Garcia her partner, and David Strathairn her mental health counselor. The director Philip Kaufman and cinematographer Peter Deming make the best of San Francisco’s dramatically photogenic locations to set the noirish mood. Twisted was released in 2004

Sandra Bullock and Ryan Gosling

Murder By Numbers — I’ve mentioned the famous Leopold and Loeb case as the basis for a number of films in earlier posts. This is another one, though the focus here is on he crime solver, not the criminals. Sandra Bullock gives a more credible performance than Ashley Judd as the somewhat complex, troubled homicide detective. Young Ryan Gosling and Michael Pitt provide Bullock with ample challenge.  Gosling is charmingly obnoxious, portraying a character just as maddening and difficult as the character Bullock portrays.  Murder By Numbers was directed by Barbet Schroeder and released in 2002.

A casual night.  You probably won’t be biting your fingernails, but perhaps enjoying a crime film not driven by testosterone. How about some Cabernet or a café au lait?

Film Pairings — RoboCop, Double Bill, Double Take

1987

While I’ve read a few science fiction classics, I’ve gravitated toward crime fiction. The same is true for film.  Quite often though a work is a beautiful amalgam of the two. Blade Runner, for example, tops my list of all-time favorite movies. I also remember watching  RoboCop years ago, and how surprised I was that I liked it. I googled it and found out that not only had that been 27 years ago, but that there had been a RoboCop 2 and a RoboCop 3 and all sorts of Robos. Then, as if I needed further proof that I’ve slept through a decade or two, I discovered there was a big-budget RoboCop released this year. Really? Next you’ll tell me the Republicans have taken the Senate.

I decided to watch the original from 1987 again as well as the most recent remake.  I skipped 2 and 3 because reviews, including those from Rotten Tomatoes, suggested the two sequels might not be worth the time.

The 1987 original RoboCop is compelling.  It is a bit more cartoon-like (as Seinfield says, “not that there is anything wrong with that”).  The lines of good and evil are clearly drawn. The emphasis is on action-adventure.  Blood, explosions and chases dominate, yet they’ve made some room for not so subtle satire.  The setting is a crime-ridden Detroit, where we see a greedy high-tech security corporation, in collusion with police, politicians, property developers and the media who benefit at the expense of an unaware, easily led public. Why are we calling this fiction? 

The original classic, directed by Paul Verhoeven gets extra points for being the original and for its earlier warning about the corruption of the authority we have blissfully allowed. It also pointed to the many issues having to do with high-tech and what it means to be human.  Peter Weller is excellent.  Because he is the first RoboCop and he did it so well, it makes it difficult for anyone else taking the role.  The supporting cast does a great job with dialogue lacking in subtlety.  We can thank Nancy Allen, Dan O’Herlihy, Ronny Cox, Kurtwood Smith and Miguel Ferrer for their solid work.

2014

If the 1987 RoboCop told us what was coming, the 2014 version said, “it’s here,” though perhaps not as convincingly as it could.  On the other hand, what the story lost in terms of edge and humor, it gained in creating more depth for its characters and the story beneath the action.  Because it is a high tech-film, we expect the special effects to be better now. They are. There are also more timely tie-ins. Think NSA spying, the use of drones, the regular and publicly accepted  purchase of politicians, not to mention the emergence of partisan media claiming to provide balanced reporting.  You know who you are. 

The supporting cast is top notch.  Michael Keaton doesn’t bother with a cardboard cutout of evil.  Instead, as the slippery CEO, Keaton almost convinces me that he means well.  Smooth as a Wall Street banker.  In director José Padilha’s version, Gary Oldman plays a character not in the original — a doctor who exemplifies the moral dilemma of creating a crime-free city (and make billions for Keaton’s corporation) but also allowing computers to override human judgment and hinting at the slippery slope that implies. Samuel L. Jackson portrays a pro-corporate political commentator with his own show. The Peter Weller role went to Joel Kinnaman, who did a fine job of walking the line between robot and human. His performance was understated as was the movie itself, compared to the original. Both movies are recommended.

Not particularly romantic or especially profound, both Robocops are at least thought provoking and certainly entertaining.  For those who like to imbibe while taking in movies at home, beer and popcorn are just fine.

Film Pairing — Famous, Contemporary Fictional Lawyers, From Books To Screen

I never saw what the deal was with Matthew McConaughey. Perhaps it was because he played unintentionally unsympathetic characters in the kind of movies I wasn’t inclined to see anyway. However, twice that I know of, McConaughey gave performances so clearly on the mark, I can’t imagine another actor pulling them off as well. Both times — in roles years apart — he played an attorney. Both films were based on characters and stories created by deservedly best-selling novelists, who — surprise — liked the movies made from their books. And both times the actor, most famous for taking his shirt off in films, didn’t need to carry the films on his bare shoulders, but could rely on a highly talented supporting cast.

The first is A Time to Kill, based on John Grisham’s novel by the same name. We go back to 1996. A black man kills the two white men who raped and killed his daughter. The movie controversially sets up the conflict of letter of the law against righteous revenge. Are we a nation of laws? We’d like to think so. But what if the law won’t exact justice? Is vigilantism ever justified? The film was panned by some critics because the film appeared to take a side in the argument.

On the other hand there is no argument about the cast. It is stellar. Samuel L. Jackson played the pivotal role of father. He was nominated for a Golden Globe Award for “Best Supporting Actor.” One could make a case that it should have been for “Best Actor.” Among the others who contributed to this solid drama were: Kevin Spacey, Donald Sutherland, Kiefer Sutherland, Sandra Bullock, Ashley Judd and Chris Cooper. The background, as you might have guessed, is the Deep South. The KKK is featured. The problem is that while the white sheets rarely make appearance these days, the attitudes haven’t disappeared. The film remains timely.

The second feature is The Lincoln Lawyer (2011). An older, somewhat weathered as well as appropriately wizened McConaughey plays Mickey Haller who plays all sides to get what he needs. One has the sense that the only people he won’t game are his daughter and his private investigator, played by William Macy. On the other hand, Haller lives and works in a world where trust is dangerous and playing it straight is unprofitable. Again McConaughey is backed up with a talented cast. In addition to the always incredible Macey, we see Marisa Tomei, John Leguizamo. Bryan Cranston does a great job of playing a tough, veteran, cynical cop. And Ryan Phillippe creates perfect pretty boy sociopath.

Haller is the lawyer whose office is in the back of Lincoln Town Car. He is the creation of best-selling crime writer Michael Connelly (see last week’s post) and this is the first of what promises to be a major series of books and if the news last updated in August holds true, will follow Grisham’s The Firm onto the small screen in a series proposed for ABC-TV.

Finding an appropriate drink to accompany the movies is made difficult by the small-town Mississippi setting for A Time To Kill and the L.A. fast lane for The Lincoln Lawyer. I’m thinking that we look at something good in hot weather. Never mind that many are still enduring March, that cruel month. How about a gin and tonic? If you’re feeling particularly Southern, put in a mint leaf.