Skip to main content

You get off this case or you don’t ever come home.

Someone to Watch Over Me
(1987)

(SPOILERS) It isn’t too difficult to see why Ridley Scott (Sir Ridders to you) was attracted to what has become one of his least conspicuous pictures. He had, after all, completed a trilogy of sci-fi/fantasy opuses, all of which had been criticised to a greater or less extent for favouring style and setting over substance. Here was his chance to respond to his critics, to deliver a fully-explored character piece, and set foot on solid contemporary ground (his first feature to do so). The problem with Someone to Watch Over Me is, while it is indeed a character piece through-and-through, certainly over the rather dissatisfying thriller elements when they sporadically surface, its characters aren’t all that interesting.


To be fair to Scott, he did receive some tempered praise in response, for making a low-key, atmospheric feature (albeit with copious dry ice drowsing a veritable cornucopia of lovingly framed architecture) that eschewed easy theatrics. And to be fairer still, not withstanding my comments in the opening paragraph, the project’s ties with the director extended back to 1982, so the tone and content may as much be coincidence as intent.


But Someone to Watch Over Me was a fizzle at the box office. Most damagingly, another tale of fall-out from marital infidelity, one also directed by a British former ad man, was the second most successful movie of 1987. One that engaged in the tawdry theatrics and superficial thrills of such illicit relationships and then some (both also feature the spurned wife slaying the antagonist, saving the helpless, culpable male). Fatal Attraction garnered all the column inches, captured the zeitgeist and even grabbed a Best Picture Oscar nomination. It seemed Scott, the great new name in cinema at the beginning of the decade (even in his 40s), was losing his touch.


The plot’s fairly straightforward; rich Manhattan socialite Claire Gregory (Mimi Rogers) witnesses an old chum being murdered by national monument-faced hoodlum Joey Venza (Andreas Katsulas, all one-dimensional despicability, although he’s got less to work with). Until the trial, she remains in danger if Venza can get to her (although the police don’t want her to know just how much danger), so she’s put under police guard, one of whom happens to be newly promoted NYPD detective Mike Keegan (Tom Berenger; his boss is resident Law & Order bloodhound Jerry Orbach). Keegan’s a blue collar guy, living in a cheap house in Queens with a salty wife (Ellie, Lorraine Bracco) and a precocious moppet of a son. It doesn’t take a genius to figure out that distraught, lonely Claire, who has a prig of boyfriend (Crazy Like a John Rubinstein) will end up involved with the guy from the other side of the tracks.


Claire Gregory: I never saw anybody killed before.
Mike Keegan: I never been a detective before.

Some of the class and gender commentary is shrewdly observed, from Mike attempting to temper his natural tendency to bravado in the face of someone genuinely terrified, to Claire picking out his ties and gradually weaving a cultured spell; in due course, Mike is complaining to Ellie about her trash mouth, and quite understandably she retorts that he never cared before.


Bracco is absolutely terrific, and this is surely where Scorsese got the initiative to cast her in Goodfellas; natural, vibrant, smart, we’re completely on her side througout. That doesn’t necessarily mean the affair can’t work, quite the contrary, but we have to feel invested in the parties if we’re to develop conflicted emotions and face a quandary over how it should resolve itself. Instead, we just don’t care.


Rogers has given numerous strong performances, not least on behalf of the Church of Scientology, but Claire is inaccessible, glacially coiffured but inert as a character. Berenger, coming off Platoon and with ultimately short-lived prospects as a next-big-leading-man-thing, is solid, and has an easy rapport with Bracco, but there are no sparks between Mike and Claire. It’s all rather subdued and formal, like the picture Scott has taken pains to produce.


The contrast with how the other half lives doesn’t really help Scott’s cause either, not when he shoots their crappy house as if it’s starring in a chic commercial. You can still see the Blade Runner lifeblood pulsing through his veins in the way he captures the night-time New York cityscape. Every nightclub has a tech noir chic, the introductory one possessed of a basement that appears to have been transported from an exotic future locale (it was shot on the Queen Mary). Interiors are immaculately smoky and Scott’s ever-dependably looking for that highly-prized, distinctive shot; Berenger is framed from above on a subway train, foregrounded handgrips resembling some kind of other-worldly artefacts from Alien.


The score is variable, either too obvious (uber-rich, classy Claire listens to opera, all the bleeding time) or inadvisably evokes Blade Runner (Memories of Green is reprised). Elsewhere we get Sting singing Gershwin’s Someone to Watch Over Me, and… Fine Young Cannibals. Michael Kamen’s contribution (his only collaboration with Scott) is okay, when he isn’t turning up the Lethal Weapon sax.


Scott handles the set piece moments – the initial murder, the shooter in the house (the hall of mirrors boudoir, which Mike initially got lost in, now allows him to outmatch the perp) – with agreeable precision, but the climax is the silliest and most OTT of developments, following all this measured composure; it’s as if it they decided to “fix it” in reshoots, so at variance is the excess with the preceding film. Venza kidnaps Mike’s kid and holds him hostage. Yeah, that’s a plan. Couldn’t they come up with something giving him a little more credibility? He had, after all, extracted himself from a fairly watertight arrest.


The screenplay came courtesy of Howard Franklin, who worked on the previous year’s The Name of the Rose and subsequently wrote and directed Quick Change. There’s nothing especially wrong with it – the climax aside – but nothing to suggest why it caught Scott’s eye. Working in less rarefied territory, where world-building can no longer disguise flaws, would increasingly shine an unforgiving light on Sir Ridder’s greatest weakness, his erring eye for a screenplay. Someone to Watch Over Me came at the wrong point for the director, showing that he could make a merely an “okay” movie if he set his mind to it.





Comments

Popular posts from this blog

She writes Twilight fan fiction.

Vampire Academy (2014)
My willingness to give writer Daniel Waters some slack on the grounds of early glories sometimes pays off (Sex and Death 101) and sometimes, as with this messy and indistinct Young Adult adaptation, it doesn’t. If Vampire Academy plods along as a less than innovative smart-mouthed Buffy rip-off that might be because, if you added vampires to Heathers, you would probably get something not so far from the world of Joss Whedon. Unfortunately inspiration is a low ebb throughout, not helped any by tepid direction from Daniel’s sometimes-reliable brother Mark and a couple of hopelessly plankish leads who do their best to dampen down any wit that occasionally attempts to surface.

I can only presume there’s a never-ending pile of Young Adult fiction poised for big screen failure, all of it comprising multi-novel storylines just begging for a moment in the Sun. Every time an adaptation crashes and burns (and the odds are that they will) another one rises, hydra-like, hoping…

We’re not owners here, Karen. We’re just passing through.

Out of Africa (1985)
I did not warm to Out of Africa on my initial viewing, which would probably have been a few years after its theatrical release. It was exactly as the publicity warned, said my cynical side; a shallow-yet-bloated, awards-baiting epic romance. This was little more than a well-dressed period chick flick, the allure of which was easily explained by its lovingly photographed exotic vistas and Robert Redford rehearsing a soothing Timotei advert on Meryl Streep’s distressed locks. That it took Best Picture only seemed like confirmation of it as all-surface and no substance. So, on revisiting the film, I was curious to see if my tastes had “matured” or if it deserved that dismissal. 

Rejoice! The broken are the more evolved. Rejoice.

Split (2016)
(SPOILERS) M Night Shyamalan went from the toast of twist-based filmmaking to a one-trick pony to the object of abject ridicule in the space of only a couple of pictures: quite a feat. Along the way, I’ve managed to miss several of his pictures, including his last, The Visit, regarded as something of a re-locating of his footing in the low budget horror arena. Split continues that genre readjustment, another Blumhouse production, one that also manages to bridge the gap with the fare that made him famous. But it’s a thematically uneasy film, marrying shlock and serious subject matter in ways that don’t always quite gel.

Shyamalan has seized on a horror staple – nubile teenage girls in peril, prey to a psychotic antagonist – and, no doubt with the best intentions, attempted to warp it. But, in so doing, he has dragged in themes and threads from other, more meritable fare, with the consequence that, in the end, the conflicting positions rather subvert his attempts at subversion…

My name is Dr. King Schultz, this is my valet, Django, and these are our horses, Fritz, and Tony.

Django Unchained (2012)
(MINOR SPOILERS) Since the painful misstep of Grindhouse/Death Proof, Quentin Tarantino has regained the higher ground like never before. Pulp Fiction, his previous commercial and critical peak, has been at very least equalled by the back-to-back hits of Inglourious Basterds and Django Unchained. Having been underwhelmed by his post Pulp Fiction efforts (albeit, I admired his technical advances as a director in Kill Bill), I was pleasantly surprised by Inglourious Basterds. It was no work of genius (so not Pulp Fiction) by any means, but there was a gleeful irreverence in its treatment of history and even to the nominal heroic status of its titular protagonists. Tonally, it was a good fit for the director’s “cool” aesthetic. As a purveyor of postmodern pastiche, where the surface level is the subtext, in some ways he was operating at his zenith. Django Unchained is a retreat from that position, the director caught in the tug between his all-important aesthetic pr…

If you could just tell me what those eyes have seen.

Alita: Battle Angel (2019)
(SPOILERS) Robert Rodriguez’ film of James Cameron’s at-one-stage-planned film of Yukito Kishiro’s manga Gunnm on the one hand doesn’t feel overly like a Rodriguez film, in that it’s quite polished, so certainly not of the sort he’s been making of late – definitely a plus – but on the other, it doesn’t feel particularly like a Jimbo flick either. What it does well, it mostly does very well – the action, despite being as thoroughly steeped in CGI as Avatar – but many of its other elements, from plotting to character to romance, are patchy or generic at best. Despite that, there’s something likeable about the whole ludicrously expensive enterprise that is Alita: Battle Angel, a willingness to be its own kind of distinctive misfit misfire.

Mountains are old, but they're still green.

Roma (2018)
(SPOILERS) Roma is a critics' darling and a shoe-in for Best Foreign Film Oscar, with the potential to take the big prize to boot, but it left me profoundly indifferent, its elusive majesty remaining determinedly out of reach. Perhaps that's down to generally spurning autobiographical nostalgia fests – complete with 65mm widescreen black and white, so it's quite clear to viewers that the director’s childhood reverie equates to the classics of old – or maybe the elliptical characterisation just didn't grab me, but Alfonso Cuarón's latest amounts to little more than a sliver of substance beneath all that style.

Life is like a box of timelines. You feel me?

Russian Doll Season One
(SPOILERS) It feels like loading the dice to proclaim something necessarily better because it’s female-driven, but that’s the tack The Hollywood Reporter took with its effusive review of Russian Doll, suggesting “although Nadia goes on a similar journey of self-discovery to Bill Murray’s hackneyed reporter in Groundhog Day, the fact that the show was created, written by and stars women means that it offers up a different, less exploitative and far more thoughtful angle” (than the predominately male-centric entries in the sub-genre). Which rather sounds like Rosie Knight changing the facts to fit her argument. And ironic, given star Natasha Lyonne has gone out of her way to stress the show’s inclusive message. Russian Dollis good, but the suggestion that “unlike its predecessors (it) provides a thoughtfulness, authenticity and honesty which makes it inevitable end (sic) all the more powerful” is cobblers.

We’re looking for a bug no one’s seen before. Some kind of smart bug.

Starship Troopers (1997)
(SPOILERS) Paul Verhoeven’s sci-fi trio of Robocop, Total Recall and Starship Troopers are frequently claimed to be unrivalled in their genre, but it’s really only the first of them that entirely attains that rarefied level. Discussion and praise of Starship Troopers is generally prefaced by noting that great swathes of people – including critics and cast members – were too stupid to realise it was a satire. This is a bit of a Fight Club one, certainly for anyone from the UK (Verhoeven commented “The English got it though. I remember coming out of Heathrow and seeing the posters, which were great. They were just stupid lines about war from the movie. I thought, ‘Finally someone knows how to promote this.’”) who needed no kind of steer to recognise what the director was doing. And what he does, he does splendidly, even if, at times, I’m not sure he entirely sustains a 129-minute movie, since, while both camp and OTT, Starship Troopers is simultaneously required t…

Even after a stake was driven through its heart, there’s still interest.

Prediction 2019 Oscars
Shockingly, as in I’m usually much further behind, I’ve missed out on only one of this year’s Best Picture nominees– Vice isn’t yet my vice, it seems – in what is being suggested, with some justification, as a difficult year to call. That might make for must-see appeal, if anyone actually cared about the movies jostling for pole position. If it were between Black Panther and Bohemian Rhapsody (if they were even sufficiently up to snuff to deserve a nod in the first place), there might be a strange fascination, but Joe Public don’t care about Roma, underlined by it being on Netflix and stillconspicuously avoided by subscribers (if it were otherwise, they’d be crowing about viewing figures; it’s no Bird Box, that’s for sure).

You use a scalpel. I prefer a hammer.

Mission: Impossible - Fallout (2018)
(SPOILERS) The latest instalment of the impossibly consistent in quality Mission: Impossible franchise has been hailed as the best yet, and with but a single dud among the sextet that’s a considerable accolade. I’m not sure it's entirely deserved – there’s a particular repeated thematic blunder designed to add some weight in a "hero's validation" sense that not only falls flat, but also actively detracts from the whole – but as a piece of action filmmaking, returning director Christopher McQuarrie has done it again. Mission: Impossible – Fallout is an incredible accomplishment, the best of its ilk this side of Mad Max: Fury Road.