javold Reviews

Blue Jasmine (2013)

The Elephant in the Room

[8/10 · 20 August 2013]

There is an interesting elephant in the room of Woody Allen's Blue Jasmine. If you go looking for it you will see it at every turn and start to enjoy its presence, but if you didn't know it was there you would like the movie all the same.

The elephant, for those who haven't heard, is Allen's source material: Tennessee Williams' A Streetcar Named Desire. And maybe it should not matter, even as we do not need to know the plays behind so many Shakespeare plays, just as we can watch Crimes and Misdemeanors without having recently read Dostoevsky, or as much as we can enjoy Allen's films in general without knowing much about his early hero Ingmar Bergman.

Blue Jasmine is another highlight in Allen's late career renaissance, alongside Match Point and Vicky Cristina Barcelona and Midnight in Paris. In all of these films, Allen adeptly balances the familiar and the fresh. He likes to start with the same black screen typescript and thirties jazz track and alphabetized cast list, then quickly shows us how adept he is at casting and bringing out the best in his actors. More and more, Allen's films are stepping away from their home setting, yet as we visit England, Spain, Paris, Rome and now San Francisco, each new film offers snapshots as impressive as Allen's earlier New York collages in Annie Hall, Manhattan and Hannah and Her Sisters. And the auteur is now regularly keeping himself off camera, and yet his writing skills have not diminished and his sense of comedy continues without his personal delivery.

About casting: How brilliant was it to give Andrew Dice Clay a serious role? Or to let Michael Stuhlbarg from a Serious Man play a bit role as a dentist! We might even grin at the resonant choice of Cate Blanchett as a modern Blanche Dubois, except that she plays her role so perfectly and is almost certain to be an Oscar contender this year. The rest of the cast is notable too, but here is where the Streetcar elephant looms a little more: Bobby Cannavale as Chili (Stanley) makes a noble effort in following the method acting footsteps of Brando; Sally Hawkins, playing Ginger (Stella) in the shadow of her sister does her best in the shadow of Blanchett; and Alec Baldwin does a good job, if not much of a stretch, as Hal (Blanche's late husband, completely rewritten);

About the setting: it is not only wonderful to see San Francisco on Allen's screen, it is refreshing to view the city without a trolley and with only one distant shot of the Golden Gate Bridge. But here comes the elephant again: the choice of the city is an intriguing revision to Williams's play, and not because it has streetcars: San Francisco moves Jasmine far (if not far enough) West from her Park Avenue/Wall Street East, just as the French Quarter of New Orleans contrasted with Blanche's plantation south.

But it is Allen's writing that makes the elephant irrelevant: unlike the original Streetcar, there is a subtle mix of comedy in Blue Jasmine. The blend of comedy and drama is well-developed, not as the back and forth experience of so many other Woody films, but as a dark humor that catches you laughing at the most unexpected moments: Jasmine's lunch with the kids and Chili's "Stella" moment, just to name two. The writing is also strong beyond the comedy: the flashback scenes are carefully crafted and wonderfully appropriate in how they show Jasmine as a static character despite all of her turmoiled past; but best of all, there is (I will not spoil this one) a surprise ending that leaves you wondering.

So how does Blue Jasmine compare to its Streetcar source? It is an interesting exercise, but we must be fair. Allen probably knows he can never be Williams, just as he is not Bergman, although he probably draws more laughs than either. But this is a serious effort on Allen's part, and despite all the liberties he takes (Stella/Ginger is in her second relationship and has two bratty kids, for instance), he produces a quality film, with and without the elephant, not because it tries to stand up to Elia Kazan's 1951 film (or, for that matter, tries to rehash a 1995 TV movie starring Alec Baldwin as Stanley), but because he makes it his own.

A word about the title. In the play, Blanche mentions how Stanley is not the type who goes for her jasmine perfume, and Williams has multiple stage directions for a background "blue piano"; he also allows at least one low clarinet to set an early scene. Meanwhile, in the movie, Jasmine is stuck on the song "Blue Moon" ("You saw me standing alone"), just as Blanche was fixed on the chorus of "Paper Moon" (It wouldn't be make believe..."). And there's that elephant again.

The Place Beyond the Pines (2012)

A Father Son Triptych

[8/10 · 10 August 2013]

This is a movie about fathers and sons. There are all too brief glimpses of wives, a mother, a daughter/sister and a stepfather —the last painted with broad strokes to be a strong character but, sadly, never fully developed —but there are three stories in this film that come together and share the theme brilliantly: an elder father and his impressionable adult son; that son, years later, and his prodigal child; and another father and son who barely, yet indelibly, get to know one another. It would be enough, perhaps, to have just one of these stories. The first one, of a judge who steers his son into politics in a do or die moment, hints at an L.A. Confidential plot, and while the direction and writing are not quite of the same caliber, this story has its own intrigue. The second, of a son who divorces and pursues a public career and all but forgets his own child and his father's example, is also compelling and well acted by veteran Brad Cooper and newcomer Emory Cohen. The third, of a son who grew up not knowing his father and a father who lived and died thinking only of his son, is the most wrenching of the stories, and this one, too, with motorcycle and money motifs, scenes from the circus and parries into the worlds of crime and drugs, could stand alone. But instead we get the stories in the form of a triptych.

Triptychs (Greek for threefold) are usually considered in the artistry of paintings (e.g. Hieronymus Bosch) or photography, with three panels presented side by side, but the term can also apply to films in which three separable plot lines are offered. And what better way to present this theme? After all, we who are fathers are also sons, and we fathers and sons will always be in parallel with others who walk the same path. This could, of course, get quite profound (the either/or dilemma of Abraham, Isaac, God and all future generations comes to mind) or muddled (see Bosch's depictions of Hell) and in the world of film triptychs could quickly trip up on the trickery of it, but The Place Beyond the Pines manages to make it work, maybe because it is neither as deep as Kierkegaard nor as detail heavy as the paintings of Bosch. There is not a complicated weave and we are not bogged down with imagery or allusions or heavy thought: we are simply given three examples, side by side, of the instance and pull of the father and son relationship.

There is more I would have liked to have seen in this film. I mentioned the stepfather. I could also complain about some of the pacing or a few plot contrivances or some of the unoriginality of the direction. What prevails, though, is the way the film captures the fundamentals of its theme: the duty of fathers, the humanness of sons and the destinies we struggle to find.

The Savages (2007)

Long, sad film.

[2/10 · 28 December 2007]

I am at a loss as to what to say about this movie. I feel like an old man with a blinded in the headlight stare. No, that's not it. I feel like I'm stuck in a middle-age rut. No, that's not it either. I feel like my ficus plant has died and it's not my fault. No? How about this: My dad treated me terribly, but at least he didn't completely abandon me like my mom. My sister is a liar who needs a good chewing out. My brother is a self-absorbed slob. My girlfriend's visa has expired. My cat is stuck under the couch. My dog is getting old. Sex has lost all excitement.

I was forewarned that this film would be depressing, but even a sad film, if it brings you to tears or thoughts too deep for tears, can have merit. But this one never did it for me. For a better institution film, see Diving Bell and the Butterfly. For better old age moments, see Albert Finney in Before the Devil Knows You're Dead. For a better father-daughter movie, see Sweeney Todd. And if death and dying is your thing, check out No Country for Old Men.

I was also lured in on the premise that at least this film would have good acting. Except that it didn't, really. Phillip Seymour Hoffman, consistently a good chameleon actor, was better this year in both Charlie Wilson's War and Before the Devil; he made the most of a couple of scenes in this film, but overall he never really got to show the full shades of his character. Meanwhile, Laura Linney's performance was only slightly less shallow than the way her character was written: one should have plenty to work with in a pill-popping, confidence-lacking, lonely hearted guilt-ridden daughter/sister/mistress, but between the writing and the acting her character was still pretty sketchy.

Finally, the director chose a plodding pace to get us to the inevitable end. All right, I did not really expect the final final ending, but that was still a small payoff for a long movie.

Sin City (2005)

A Surreal Experience

[7/10 · 6 April 2005]

Saw Sin City tonight, and I can't remember a more bizarre movie watching experience. Five days after its release, at a 7 pm show time an hour north of Chicago, and the theater was dead. The same girl who sold my ticket also sold me my pop and popcorn. And this was a twelve screen theater complex. Two older kids walked up and asked for a a job application, but no one else was buying tickets or concessions. I walked down a short hallway to theater number twelve, and looked in. I was hesitant to sit down at first. The floor was sticky and the armrests greasy, and I saw a few broken chairs down one aisle, but what made me really pause was that it was five minutes before the scheduled run and nobody was there. I even started to walk out, just as the promos were starting, but then I saw trash left over from an earlier crowd and decided it must be a last minute kind of neighborhood. What the hell. I took the perfect seat, in the middle of the theater, two thirds of the way back from the screen. It was just me. I don't usually see movies alone, but the buzz was up. Buzz from IMDb, buzz from local radio shows, buzz from my wife who saw it on a girl's escape the night before. And still, an absolutely dead movie theater in Waukegan, Illinois. Lakehurst Theaters. Six bucks a pop, even though they charge ten bucks just a few miles down the road. Even odder, the promos were limited to one trailer, no ads, only three minutes long and suddenly the movie started. Two or three people drifted in during Bruce Willis's version of a Sam Spade narration. One person had a lights-up cell phone, even took a call about an hour into the film. She was courteous, though, and slunk down in her chair and talked quietly. Three more people walked in midway through the picture, apparently after their first choice ended. One of them was a kid, maybe eleven years old, the others his parents or guardians. They stayed ten minutes or so, which was longer than I thought they would considering the content they walked in on. Then it was back to just me and the first three, but by the time the movie ended and I got up to go, the others had already left before me. I left my trash and walked out in the hall, and still there was no one, no one in the halls between the twelve theaters, no one in the lobby but the one girl who doubled at the ticket and popcorn counter. "Have a nice night," she said, and as I responded in kind, "You, too," I considered that she might have been starved for social interaction. Me, too.

When the theater is more surreal and dark than a movie that depends on those characteristics, it's probably not fair to rate the film, but I'll give Sin City three stars out of four, all for its cinematography and make-up and caricaturistic style. My wife compared it to Pulp Fiction, but please, baby: The soundtrack sucks, there's nothing remotely like Pulp's humor or witty dialog, and for all the names in the cast there's really no acting that rises above the make-up and flash. There is also an air of misogyny in Sin City, and, yes, violence. Tarantino used to pride himself on how his violent shock shots were more suggested than actually on-camera, but I guess the standards have changed. And where the story loop in Pulp Fiction was absolutely cool and original, it felt a little stale this time. Sure, I'll want to see it again, to figure some of it out. But next time, even if it's ten bucks, I think I'll find another theater.

Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind (2004)

Good sci-fi romance but flawed

[7/10 · 25 December 2004]

It has been a few years since I've added a user comment, but after seeing this film and reading some of the reactions before mine, I can't keep quiet. As of now, the Db has 783 comments in all for ETOSM, and from the 30 or 40 I've read, it would seem this film is destined to be the next all time classic: think Godfather, Citizen Kane, Casablanca, whatever. There are a few commentators who lean otherwise, and generally they seem to simply hate the film. I can't agree with either side, though.

On the one hand, I liked the film on several levels. Underneath everything, it was an above-average average-Joe sentimental romance that keeps one hooked to the end. Overlying everything, it had technical appeal that almost erases any flaws. And throughout, Jim Carrey's acting nudges the film up another level, not just because Carrey is intriguingly out of character but because he actually makes a stereotypically boring nerd character more believable.

On the other hand, there are flaws. I'm not impressed with the newest science fiction premises, the loop around plot or the various altered realities of the script, not because they're confusing but because in the end they are not much more than an emperor's proverbial new clothes. Ultimately they do not hide the writing flaws of an overly contrived wrap-it up conclusion, they do not excuse the weak and shallowly scripted subplots and they do not make the film more than a sentimental sci-fi romance. To the extent that love is profound and prevailing, this film gives us something to chew on, but not much more than, say, An Affair to Remember.

In between the good and the bad, there is nothing really ugly about this film, although Elijah Wood's character, part of one of those weak and shallows, comes close. Kate Winslet's performance is respectable, although beyond the blue hair her character is not developed as much as it might have been. And the direction, with all the technical coattails is good, even if I'm not ready to burn the director's name to memory.

I'll watch this film again on a rented DVD but I don't want to run out and buy it. Three stars.

How the Grinch Stole Christmas (2000)

Why the Grinch lived by a mountainside garbage dump

[3/10 · 23 December 2000]

People seem to either love this movie or hate it. I am in the latter group, because I love the story by Dr. Seuss and I cannot understand what Ron Howard has done to it. In the original story, and in the cartoon that faithfully followed, almost no time goes by before the Grinch is cutting out his Santa outfit and trying to steal Christmas. But in the film, quite a bit of new story is told before we start seeing "How" the Grinch stole Christmas, so much so that the film might be renamed "Why," not "How." And it isn't even a very compelling tale. First, the Grinch moved to a mountain garbage dump because he was essentially driven away as a child by Whoville's mean-spirited youth. Then, when he was invited to return, he was driven back to the mountain by Whoville's mean-spirited Mayor. Where does all this come from? Maybe the film's title should also recognize that there are in fact several Grinches in Whoville now.

I much prefer Dr. Seuss's simple explanation, that the Grinch was mean because his shoes were too tight and his heart was too small. After all, the story is not really supposed to be about the life and times of the Grinch but about the spirit of Christmas that overpowers even one as mean as the Grinch, a spirit so purely demonstrated, with and without the trimmings, by all the Whos in Whoville.

The Whos in this film are not so pure: they drink booze, they envy their neighbor's Christmas lights, and they do say "Boo-hoo" on the morning after, at least momentarily, while the book's Whos are not even detracted from their singing.

But maybe I am just "bitchin'," as Carrey's Grinch said when he slid face first into a Who girl's supple bosom. Merry Christmas, indeed!

Léon: The Professional (1994)

Killed by bad writing

[7/10 · 24 November 2000]

Most of the IMDb commentators seem to find no fault in this movie, which I can almost understand. The acting, directing and dramatics of the picture are almost there, but not quite. Everything that could be good about this film is limited by faulty writing.

Acting: Aiello is great in a minor part, but bad writing kills all the efforts of Reno and Oldman and the twelve year old. Leon's character is very one dimensional, leaving Reno no room to stretch as an actor, unless you count his bad John Wayne bit or his plant stroking. Oldman plays a comic book character, so he can't help being over the top. As for the kid, she leaves an impression but her part is simply not believable.

Directing: Besson was writer and director, so any positive points one might give him for directing are canceled out by the completely implausible story and unmemorable dialog.

Dramatics: There were some very good action scenes, but the "tender" Lolita scenes I could do without.

I give the movie a 7 overall.

The Sixth Sense (1999)

Not recommended after Kilbourn and before "Tricks and Clues"

[6/10 · 4 April 2000]

The Sixth Sense ends with a twist that must have been thrilling to see for those who saw it unprepared, but that pleasure was denied me several months ago by TV's Craig Kilbourn, who purposefully gave it away for a laugh (I will not do that here). Beyond that, the director makes some interesting efforts at being stylish, but this too was partly ruined for me by his own somewhat pretentious `Tricks and Clues' commentary at the end of the video. As for the acting, Bruce was good but much more interesting in Twelve Monkeys and Haley has been overhyped if not overrated. And the overall story, especially the transitional section which precedes the twist, is weak and the pace is slow. Meanwhile, oddly enough, I still laugh at Craig Kilbourn.

Seven Samurai (1954)

A great "visual novel," and the definitive war movie

[10/10 · 30 December 1999]

Seven Samurai tells a classic story of a small town's struggle for survival in the midst of poverty and crime. A previous IMDb member called this a "visual novel", the perfect tag for a film that captures viewers for 3 1/2 hours in much the same way a great book will keep one turning the pages. The story is filled with many rich and diverse characters, the setting takes one to another time and place, and the plot develops in three distinct parts with increasing intensity. But more than just a cinematic page-turner, this is the definitive war movie, from the mustering of troops to the battle strategies played out to the punctuating comment of a warrior as he looks over the graves of the fallen. This movie deserves its place on the all-time best list.

The Matrix (1999)

Great fx, good thrills, okay acting, so-so story

[6/10 · 27 December 1999]

The Matrix is a pretty good film, but if one is introduced to it with high expectations, such as an IMDb ranking of 35th best all time might cause, it can be pretty disappointing. Sure, the movie has excellent special effects, perhaps even second to none. It is also good as thrillers go, though I reserve "best" for thrillers that rely on guns a little less and make me cheer on the hero a little more (e.g. The Fugitive). But the acting is varied, ranging from Fishburne (great) to Keanu (good) to Weaving (frequently annoying). The story is inconsistent, as Messiah parallels give way to new video game setups. I vote 6 of 10.

Burnt by the Sun (1994)

Warm tribute to the director's daughter

[8/10 · 16 December 1999]

Burnt by the Sun pays warm tribute to a Russian summer in the sun, pastoral yet blind to the coming upheavals of Stalinism. Even higher tribute is paid to the character of Nadya, a six year old who loves life and everyone around her but especially loves, and is loved by, her father. Director Nikita Mikhalkov paints all of the main characters and their inter-relations with charming strokes, but especially in the father-daughter relationship portrayed by himself and his own daughter Nadezhda. Mikhalkov has a similar quality tribute, and further focus to the upheavals in Russian history, in Anna: 6 to 18.

Before the Rain (1994)

A simple three-part plot with complexities worth absorbing

[9/10 · 10 December 1999]

Before the Rain begs a second viewing as boldly as any movie I've seen, which is both a strength and a shortcoming. It is intriguing to feel so compelled to rewind and replay a video, but also frustrating when the objective is to decipher a purposefully confusing plot. That said, the plot is worth absorbing and the movie is worth reviewing. Manchevski delivers a strong message with interesting visuals and metaphors and a unique use of two languages and three stand-alone stories, which are simply told by themselves yet complexly, and confusingly at first, intertwined.

The Sweet Hereafter (1997)

A Pied Piper parallel in reverse

[8/10 · 8 December 1999]

The Sweet Hereafter draws several analogies to the Pied Piper of Hamelin, including one reverse parallel of a lawyer visiting a tragedy stricken town: Your kids have been taken from you, you deserve retribution, so now let's go after the rats. Ian Holm (the lawyer) and Sarah Polley (a kid left behind) provide great acting in this beautifully intriguing film, but there are a few dumb lines and one poorly conceived scene, the candles in the hayloft episode, which could have been easily left out or replaced with more subtle suggestion. Otherwise, this is a strong movie and I look forward to seeing more from Atom Egoyan.

Naked (1993)

The Emperor has no clothes

[3/10 · 4 December 1999]

Naked gives viewers a diversity of characters, a string of subplots, witty banter, proletarian satire, philosophies of evolution and apocalypse, a running analogy to The Odyssey, shades of sexuality, and an overall mood of bleakness and cynicism. But when all is said and done, the movie is just too dark and hopeless to get excited about. Fans of this film might say that I didn't get it, but I think I just got too much of the devil in the barcode commentary and "bite me" sex scenes. Depressing. Maybe the movie worked better before the planet alignment in August 1999.

The Spanish Prisoner (1997)

Things are not always what they seem

[8/10 · 24 November 1999]

The Spanish Prisoner is a thriller that ranks as one of my top-shelf films of 1998, even though it was given little shelf space in my local video store. David Mamet's twister of a tale is intriguing and more than once surprising, a la "Usual Suspects", and Steve Martin plays his part with just the right degree of understatement. The film seems a bit unpolished at times, as if the budget and shooting schedules were restricted, which only adds to the disguise of an ostensibly simple tale.

The Apostle (1997)

Duvall's performance makes the movie

[8/10 · 24 November 1999]

The Apostle is a showcase movie for Robert Duvall, who gives a flawless, intense portrayal of a flawed tragic hero. It may be Duvall's best performance, and he makes this a movie worth seeing. The Apostle is not so notable for subplots or side characters or social commentary, but the film works as a character study of a charismatic preacher who dramatically falls from grace and tries to pull himself up again, and with Duvall it works remarkably well.

Three Colors: White (1994)

Kieslowski a masterful painter in Blue, White and Red: see all three!

[8/10 · 6 November 1999]

It is not only difficult to comment separately on the three parts of Kieslowski's trilogy, it seems obvious that the filmmaker wants us to do just the opposite: view them in order, Blue, White, and Red, and consider them together as one complete work. It is true they are distinct stories with distinct themes: liberty, equality, fraternity, and each them is developed with unique applications of intrigue and artistry. They are each well worth seeing independently, but I believe they are best seen as one work. Collectively, I would rate the trilogy as a 9; separately, I place each in my top ten for the years 1993 and 1994.

White is the fabric of a bride, chaste and pure at the outset of her marriage; later it is the flash of an orgasm in the dark; and then .... But any more said of the instances of white in this film might spoil it for the first-time viewer. Unlike Three Colors: Blue, White is a more plot-oriented movie, with two main characters to Blue's one. And this is as it should be. Blue's theme of Liberty, the first word of France's motto, is an individual's principle, while White's theme of Equality, the French motto's second word, requires at least two people. The central quest for liberty is personal; the struggle for equality is fundamentally social. White is the most conventional of the three Color films, and while it is still one of my ten top films of 1994, I rate it an 8, slightly less than the highly visual Blue and the mind-bending Red.

Three Colors: Red (1994)

Kieslowski a masterful painter in Blue, White and Red: see all three!

[9/10 · 6 November 1999]

It is not only difficult to comment separately on the three parts of Kieslowski's trilogy, it seems obvious that the filmmaker wants us to do just the opposite: view them in order, Blue, White, and Red, and consider them together as one complete work. It is true they are distinct stories with distinct themes: liberty, equality, fraternity, and each them is developed with unique applications of intrigue and artistry. They are each well worth seeing independently, but I believe they are best seen as one work. Collectively, I would rate the trilogy as a 9; separately, I place each in my top ten for the years 1993 and 1994.

The color red is most memorable in the third movie as a backdrop in a billboard ad, the profiled model of which is the central of the movie's three main characters. The other two characters do a double-take of a varying degree of recognition when they first come upon the ad, posted larger than life alongside a busy city intersection. This ad is not a major part of the plot of this movie, yet its image becomes striking and is one of the reasons I have called Red a `mind-bending' film. This is the third of Kieslowski's Three Colors trilogy, based on the Blue-White-Red of the French flag and the three parts of its motto, `Liberty, Equality, Fraternity.' The films stay primarily focused on these themes, keeping with the basic levels of one, two, or three main characters, yet with each film the complexity of plot escalates as the three principles move from fundamentally personal (Liberty, Blue) to relational (Equality, White) to social (Fraternity, Red). Red is my favorite of these films, and I give it a 9. It stands by itself as a great film, but one should see Blue and White first for the fullest effect.

Three Colors: Blue (1993)

Kieslowski masterfully paints all of the colors, Blue, White and Red: see all three!

[9/10 · 6 November 1999]

It is not only difficult to comment separately on the three parts of Kieslowski's trilogy, it seems obvious that the filmmaker wants us to do just the opposite: view them in order, Blue, White, and Red, and consider them together as one complete work. It is true they are distinct stories with distinct themes: liberty, equality, fraternity, and each them is developed with unique applications of intrigue and artistry. They are each well worth seeing independently, but I believe they are best seen as one work. Collectively, I would rate the trilogy as a 9; separately, I place each in my top ten for the years 1993 and 1994.

Blue is the mood of a grieving woman who lost her husband and daughter in a rural car crash; it is the shadows playing on her face in a cold hospital room as she watches television coverage of the funeral; it is light shining into an empty room of her house. Blue is the color of her dreams and memories, which she tries to erase after the tragedy, and of the liberty she seeks after the disappointing turn in her life. Liberty is the ultimate theme here, corresponding to the three worded French motto, `Liberty, Equality, Fraternity.' Of the three Color films, Blue is the most stunningly photographed and conceptualized. The plot is almost secondary and the dialogue is sparse, which gives all the more emphasis on the visual and on the thematic. With excellent acting by Juliette Binoche, this movie rates a 9.

L.A. Confidential (1997)

Elroy delivers: crisp characters and a classic noir plot

[9/10 · 1 November 1999]

L.A. Confidential is my top pick among American films of 1997, rating second only to Roberto Benigni's Life Is Beautiful. Both movies can attribute their success to one person's efforts; in the case of L.A. Confidential, practically everything is owed to the story's original writer, James Elroy.

Elroy crafted a sharp story around four excellent main characters and several notable multi-dimensional sub-characters. Of the main characters, three protagonists and a central villain, each one had become a policeman for a different reason, each one was markedly different from the other (brought together only by crafty writing) and, with one exception, each steps disturbingly out of character at some point in the story. It is by their stepping out that this movie is a classic film noir and not just another cop and gangster flick.

I give the movie a 9 overall: 10 for the writing and 8's and 7's for everything else. The director, partly as a co-screenwriter, commendably captured the era and added visual crispness to Elroy's story, but I will need to see more from him before I take notice of his own merit. Likewise, the actors stepped neatly into their characters but do not especially stand out: Spacey's good, but better in Usual Suspects; Bassinger's surprisingly good, and most of the other actors were unremarkable. The writing, though, speaks for itself.