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…

You’re never the same man twice.

The Man Who Haunted Himself (1970)
(SPOILERS) Roger Moore playing dual roles? It sounds like an unintentionally amusing prospect for audiences accustomed to the actor’s “Raise an eyebrow” method of acting. Consequently, this post-Saint pre-Bond role (in which he does offer some notable eyebrow acting) is more of a curiosity for the quality of Sir Rog’s performance than the out-there premise that can’t quite sustain the picture’s running time. It is telling that the same story was adapted for an episode of Alfred Hitchcock Presents 15 years earlier, since the uncanny idea at its core feels like a much better fit for a trim 50 minute anthology series.

Basil Dearden directs, and co-adapted the screenplay from Anthony Armstrong’s novel The Strange Case of Mr Pelham. Dearden started out with Ealing, helming several Will Hay pictures and a segment of Dead of Night (one might imagine a shortened version of this tale ending up there, or in any of the portmanteau horrors that arrived in the year…

Romulan ale should be illegal.

Star Trek: Nemesis (2002)
(SPOILERS) Out of the ST:NG movies, Star Trek: Nemesis seems to provoke the most outrage among fans, the reasons mostly appearing to boil down to continuity and character work. In the case of the former, while I can appreciate the beef, I’m not enough of an aficionado to get too worked up. In the case of the latter, well, the less of the strained inter-relationships between this bunch that make it to the screen, the better (director Stuart Baird reportedly cut more than fifty minutes from the picture, most of it relating to underscoring the crew, leading to a quip by Stewart that while an Actor’s Cut would include the excised footage, a Director’s one would probably be even shorter). Even being largely unswayed by such concerns, though, Nemesis isn’t very good. It wants to hit the same kind of dramatic high notes as The Wrath of Khan (naturally, it’s always bloody Khan) but repeatedly drifts into an out-of-tune dirge.

‘Cos I’m the gringo who always delivers.

American Made (2017)
(SPOILERS) This is definitely more the sort of thing Tom Cruise should be doing, a movie that relies both on his boyish™ charm and at least has pretensions of ever so slightly pushing the envelope of standard multiplex fare, rather than desperately attaching himself to an impersonal franchise (The Mummy) or flailingly attempting to kick start one (Jack Reacher: Never Go Back); remember when Cruise wouldn’t even go near sequels (for about 20 years, The Color of Money aside, and then only the one series)? American Made is still victim to the tendency of his movies to feel superstar-fitted rather than remaining as punchy as they might be on paper (Made’s never quite as satirically sharp as it wants to be), but it at least doesn’t lead its audience by the nose.

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…

By Jove, the natives are restless tonight.

The Avengers 4.17: Small Game for Big Hunters
I wonder if Death at Bargain Prices’ camping scene, suggestive of an exotic clime but based in a department store, was an inspiration for Small Game For Big Hunters’ more protracted excursion to the African country of Kalaya… in Hertfordshire. Gerry O’Hara, in his second of two episodes for the show again delivers on the atmosphere, making the most of Philip Levene’s teleplay.

Two hundred thousand pounds, for this outstanding example of British pulchritude and learning.

The Avengers 4.18: The Girl From Auntie
I’ve mentioned that a few of these episodes have changed in my appreciation since I last watched the series, and The Girl from Auntie constitutes a very pronounced uptick. Indeed, I don’t know how I failed to rate highly the estimable Liz Fraser filling in for Diana Rigg – mostly absent, on holiday –for the proceedings (taking a not dissimilar amateur impostor-cum-sidekick role to Fenella Fielding in the earlier The Charmers). I could watch Fraser all day, and it’s only a shame this was her single appearance in the show.

Old Boggy walks on Lammas Eve.

Jeeves and Wooster 2.5: Kidnapped  (aka The Mysterious Stranger)
Kidnapped continues the saga of Chuffnell Hall. Having said of 2.4 that the best Wodehouse adaptations tend to stick closely to the text, this one is an exception that proves the rule, diverging significantly yet still scoring with its highly preposterous additions.

Jeeves: Tis old boggy. He be abroad tonight. He be heading for the railway station.
Gone are many of the imbroglios involving Stoker and Glossop (the estimable Roger Brierley), including the contesting of the former’s uncle’s will. Also gone, sadly, is the inebriated Brinkley throwing potatoes at Stoker, which surely would have been enormous fun. Instead, we concentrate on Bertie being locked aboard Stoker’s yacht in order to secure his marriage to Pauline (as per the novel), Chuffy tailing Pauline in disguise (so there’s a different/additional reason for Stoker to believe Bertie and she spent the night together, this time at a pub en route to Chufnell Hall) and …

Cally. Help us, Cally. Help Auron.

Blake's 7 3.7: Children of Auron

Roger Parkes goes a considerable way towards redeeming himself for the slop that was Voice from the Past with his second script for the series, and newcomer Andrew Morgan shows promise as a director that never really fulfilled itself in his work on Doctor Who (but was evident in Knights of God, the 1987 TV series featuring Gareth Thomas).

Never compare me to the mayor in Jaws! Never!

Ghostbusters (2016)
(SPOILERS) Paul Feig is a better director than Ivan Reitman, or at very least he’s savvy enough to gather technicians around him who make his films look good, but that hasn’t helped make his Ghostbusters remake (or reboot) a better movie than the original, and that’s even with the original not even being that great a movie in the first place.

Along which lines, I’d lay no claims to the 1984 movie being some kind of auteurist gem, but it does make some capital from the polarising forces of Aykroyd’s ultra-geekiness on the subject of spooks and Murray’s “I’m just here for the asides” irreverence. In contrast, Feig’s picture is all about treating the subject as he does any other genre, be it cop, or spy, or romcom. There’s no great affection, merely a reliably professional approach, one minded to ensure that a generous quota of gags (on-topic not required) can be pumped out via abundant improv sessions.

So there’s nothing terribly wrong with Ghostbusters, but aside from …