|
 oor
Guy Ritchie. It could be argued that the bloke
single-handedly re-invigorated the British film
industry with his then-unique brand of criminal
mayhem, not to mention making people look at the
Brits as being capable of film genres other than
those involving stuffy people in corsets or
whimsical blue-collar everyday Joes yukking it up.
And then, just like that -- See you later, Guy. It
was bad enough ol Guy had to go and marry falling
star Madonna, but then he had to go and put her in
his movie. Now, the poor bloke can't even get
people to distribute his new movie
"Revolver". And the critics who were
falling over themselves to worship at his feet
when "Lock,
Stock, and Two Smoking Barrels" first
came out? Let's just say it ain't pretty.
It's a good thing, then, that
I never believed Ritchie was God taken human form
back in 1988 when "Barrels" first came
out, and as such his inexplicable fall from grace
has nary an impact on how I look at his latest
movie. That movie, "Revolver", stars
familiar Ritchie muse Jason Statham as Jake Green,
a gambler recently released from prison after a
7-year stint that has everything to do with casino
owner and low-life criminal Macha (Ray Liotta).
Determined to get some measure of revenge, Green
takes Macha for a healthy load of money in a
single gambling session, but later loses all of it
when a failed hit (courtesy of Macha) sends Green
to mysterious loan sharks Avi (Andre Benjamin) and
Zach (Vincent Pastore) for salvation.
The loan sharking duo claims
to know how to keep Green alive, and in fact they
do help him to survive past his current expiration
date. But in return, Green's saviors demand not
just all of Green's gambling winnings, but for him
to accompany them on their daily loan sharking
activities. Which, in either a bit of mean
spiritedness or a con Green can't quite figure
out, Avi and Zach are using Green's own money to
loan out, and are using him to literally hand the
cash over. It's a terrible thing to do to a
gambler in love with his winnings, and something
Green spends a great deal of time talking to
himself about.
The first thing you'll notice
about "Revolver" is the lack of
cinematic tricks employed by Ritchie this time
around. For those weaned on "Barrels"
and "Snatch",
the overall lack of slow-motion, bullet-time, and
other assorted editing gimmicks in
"Revolver" will seem almost unnatural.
"Revolver" is clearly an attempt by
Ritchie to shake his own image, although the
script (also written by Ritchie) would seem to
indicate that this is, nevertheless, still very
much a "Guy Ritchie movie". Quirky and
eccentric gangsters? Check. A long list of major
characters? Check. Intertwining plots that make no
sense until explained by movie's end? Check.
Alas, things take a major
tumble in the last act, when the film becomes
surreal and incomprehensible, and the script seems
written by a completely different person. In fact,
what transpires late in the film would fit more
with a psychological thriller or even a horror
movie, but certainly not a film where a casino
gangster walks around in playboy briefs showing
his package to the world. It's as if Ritchie
couldn't figure out where to take the movie after
the hour mark, so just decided to cram in all the
esoteric and New Age junk he had gathered up in
his travels. It's all very unwieldy, not to
mention derivative of "Fight
Club" and "The Usual Suspects",
from which Ritchie liberally cribs whole sections
of dialogue and only changing a word or two. And
if you can't figure out the true identities of Avi
and Zach after about 30 minutes, this world has no
need of your ilk.
At this point in their
respective careers, it could very well be that
Jason Statham is doing Guy Ritchie a favor by
taking the lead in "Revolver".
Permanently swathed in an unsightly beard, Statham
is barely recognizable from his other roles, and
he certainly doesn't get to do any of the things
that made his star rise considerably over the last
few years. I.e. no action scenes for Jason; not
even a fist fight, if memory serves. Although I
think he did get to fire a gun early in the film.
For the most part Statham's Green gets to walk
around, sit around, and drive around listening to
people talk, and occasionally talk himself. By
film's end, one almost wonders what was the point
of even having a Jake Green character, as he does
almost nothing of interesting throughout. Although
I suppose the existence of Jake is necessary,
since everyone gets to keep calling him
"Mister Green" about a gazillion times
for some odd reason.
And it's exactly because
Statham's Green gets to do so little of anything
that matters, or is mildly interesting (we don't
even see him gamble, something he's supposed to be
a master of), the rest of the cast has to supply
everything. Ray Liotta is mostly hilarious as
Macha, but like the film itself, his crime boss
devolves into little more than a mouthpiece for
Ritchie to indulge in more faux existential
musings. Andre Benjamin ("Four
Brothers") is convincing as one half of
the mysterious loan shark duo, although Vincent
Pastore is basically playing yet another clichéd
Italian gangster in sweat pants. The best
character in the movie is Mark Strong as Macha's
deadly (and predictably a tad eccentric) hitman.
Too bad he doesn't get nearly enough screentime.
It's not hard to see why
"Revolver" had such trouble finding a
distributor. It fails on most levels, and while it
delivers on some elements of "a Guy Ritchie
film", it flounders more often than it
succeeds. The film's last act, in particular,
sinks the film under its own bloated
pointlessness. What could have been enjoyed as a
semi-decent Ritchie gangster effort is instead
torpedoed by 30 minutes of internal ramblings by
various characters and some painful New Age mumbo
jumbo. It really is incredible just how bad
"Revolver" eventually gets, and is
surely one of those things where you have to see
for yourself to believe. |
