free counter with statistics Pride and Glory | Scathing Reviews for Bitchy People

story.jpg

Cimino Wept

Pride and Glory / Ranylt Richildis

Film Reviews | October 25, 2008 | Comments (31)


Dan’s most recent article has done half my work already. Pajiba’s most fine-tuned reviewer (I only steal from the best) has captured the essence of Hollywood dramatic filmmaking in few words: too many directors think it’s enough now to “throw a lot of plot and emotion at the screen,” but in doing so, they “also throw up enough of a shield to keep anything from truly connecting.” Well said, Carlson — and I’ll take this further than you probably intended it to go, because I have a bone to pick with Hollywood that I can’t stop gnawing on. Whether it’s a lauded Oscar-winner like The Departed, or a loathed Oscar-winner like Crash, or something that sits somewhere between the two, like Mystic River or Gone Baby Gone, these movies suffer the same symptoms, to varying degrees. Some of these films are definitely better than others, but they sit on the same sliding scale. It comes down to how much pap individual viewers can stomach, and those who have a higher tolerance are the lucky ones, because they can enjoy what these movies otherwise do well; they can take pleasure in legacy Hollywood magic like sweet production values, technical competence, and narrative suspense while ignoring sham scripts and grotesque overacting. I risk the wrath of our readers — and of some of my colleagues — by admitting (not for the first time) that I’ve come to detest the big-star Serious Film. Gavin O’Connor’s Pride and Glory just strengthens my antipathy and my need to agitate against what American dramatic cinema has become.

I’m talking dramatic cinema of a certain stripe — film that mythologizes the Boston or New York working classes in cartoonish ways, that pits brother against brother in the world of crime or law enforcement, that crafts characters by violent act and shouting match, and that relies on a viewer’s sense of inclusion within the onscreen community to win him over emotionally. These films tend to be larded with doily-dotted family suppers and slow-motion funeral processions for dead uniforms. They are the bastard sons of The Deer Hunter and other great American films of a past era. They’re designed by and for USians, and while there’s nothing wrong with taking that prerogative (at all), directors shouldn’t be surprised — and domestic audiences shouldn’t be offended — when these movies fail to play to those born beyond the haze of the American mystique. Pride and Glory by its very title embraces this style of filmmaking and ticks off all the boxes. It swims in manufactured realism and stinks of ball sweat. It force-feeds us canned sentiment rather than stoke the real emotions already in our bellies — emotions that just need to be nudged a little to come alive and fill us, and that resent being smothered from above. These movies are the cinematic equivalents of Céline Dion songs: they’re considered high quality goods by their makers, who have no clue they’re drowning us in phony feeling. They’re all decibel and no heart. Though inferior, Pride and Glory is slightly lower in key than The Departed, and it gnashes a little less than Mystic River — but it, too, proves how hard it is to pull off real realism onscreen; it tries to conjure up a slice of life, but because even its calmest moments are over the top, very little about it feels authentic.

The movie opens on a cop league football game in New York City. Nothing’s more American than football and an Irish cop family, apparently — at least according to Hollywood (pairing the two offers us a double shot of patriot in case that first swallow doesn’t take). O’Connor films the game with a hand-held camera that can barely make out the players and spectators. There’s a lot of dark and a lot of grain and grime, all of which announces Reality and hints at the narrative darkness to come. Playing for the NYPD is Jimmy Egan (Colin Farrell), who’s married to the sister of fellow police officer Ray Tierney (Edward Norton). Tierney has cop in his blood — his father Francis (Jon Voight) is a retired officer, and his brother Francis Jr. (Noah Emmerich) is across town investigating the deaths of four other cops from their precinct, who went down in a tenement shoot-out. We’re less than five minutes into the movie before Farrell is pulling at his hair and breaking shit — he takes the news of the deaths badly and spends the rest of the film staring so intensely at other actors, he’s practically cross-eyed. Norton is serene relative to Farrell and relative to what we’ve come to expect from movies like these. Both Egan and Tierney are shallow characters indistinguishable from similar types we’ve seen over the years — there’s really not much to build on, here, so Farrell continues to mistake twitching for acting, and Norton forges through the story with as much dignity as he can scrape off the walls around him.

Even if you haven’t seen the trailers, or somehow missed all the telegraphing O’Connor and Farrell thrash at us in early scenes, the fact that Egan is dirty is no spoiler. We’ve seen too many Brother Gone Bad movies to miss what’s coming. Tierney joins the taskforce set up to hunt the cop-killer, a dealer named Tezo (Ramon Rodriguez) who has every junkie, crook, and shop-keep in Washington Heights under his control; no one wants to rat on Tezo or the dirty cops who run with him. As Tierney works within the framework of the law, Egan’s corrupt blue line destroys evidence, beats up civilians, steals from tills, and intimidates whoever needs intimidating to keep the secret under wraps, and to locate Tezo — it’s in Egan’s interest, and in his blood, to kill the cop-killer before the taskforce finds him. O’Connor uses a template that’s seen a lot of use in the past decade: male bonding made acceptable thanks to uniforms CUT cozy family scene tinged with melancholy CUT scene of ultra-violence CUT poignant husband-wife moment CUT cozy family jeopardized by father’s crime connection … second verse, same as the first. Some scenes are competent if generic (like those fleshed out by Jennifer Ehle’s believable performance as Francis Jr.’s dying wife) and some practically spoof their own genre (Tierney’s interrogation of a junkie is laughable, especially after “The Wire” broke the freaking mould and made more meaning in two seconds than Pride and Glory does in its two hours plus). Not even the film’s most extreme moments — a hot iron brandished over a baby, a near-riot, a scene where a man’s throat is forced open by a police baton — hit like O’Connor wants them to hit. Nobody onscreen seems to believe in the violence or emotion they’re generating, and that lack of disconnection Dan wrote about washes everything out.

Expecting realism in a fictional product is a fool’s errand, but it can be done. My problem with the Pride and Glory school of filmmaking isn’t the use of exaggeration or sentiment or formula or oversimplification per se — these are good tools in capable hands, and they play roles in many of my favorite books and movies. My problem with this type of film is that it uses these in the service of realism — that it demands to be taken not just as realism but as Reality, even as it misrepresents it. It’s unaware that its own devices are so blatant (and the first rule of realism is Hide the Devices). It coats everything with a sheen and it overplays its hand while posing with faux nuances; directors can’t have it both ways without insulting our intelligence. It’s not so much the final product that irritates — which in this case is neither stinky nor stellar — but the dishonesty of the filmmakers’ intentions and their reliance on stereotype. The Irish-American cop bit sinks to new lows or rises to new heights of hilarity here, depending on how you look at it (spoilers follow). At film’s end, O’Connor milks a perverse heroism out of Egan that hits our throats like Ipecac: the dirty cop is exalted when he accepts death by mob while a banshee vocalist drips from the speakers. This Haggis-stupid piece of filmmaking is preceded by a fistfight between Tierney the Good and Egan the Terrible — the fight is meant to determine whether or not Egan will submit to being arrested by his friend. It takes place in an Irish pub. To the tune of Celtic reels. Och alas. The set-up is lazy and the pay-off is cheap, and it pains me to think that anyone could take O’Connor’s product as seriously as it takes itself.

Ranylt Richildis plays with words and ideas in Ottawa, Canada.









Saw V | Dumbocracy by Marty Beckerman


Comments

Hmm. I take your point. However, I will no doubt see it anyway as me and the hubs find this particular brand of faux-reality amusing.

Posted by: Goldie at October 25, 2008 2:18 PM

Jennifer Ehle!!!

Posted by: Mimi at October 25, 2008 3:33 PM

"...It swims in manufactured realism and stinks of ball sweat. It force-feeds us canned sentiment rather than stoke the real emotions already in our bellies..."


Well said.

I think it comes from being "product" there is no creative process involved. It is strictly done by numbers and proportions. That's why every time one of these "scripts" goes out there, it is pitched to the actors they want "attached." See, the actors are "product" as well. They are all put in there to fill their part of the formula, much like high fructose corn syrup.

Posted by: BarbadoSlim at October 25, 2008 4:33 PM

Oh, and before I forget, from what I can glean from the review and the trailers, there is NOTHING here that wasn't already covered in 1993's Striking Distance, at least that one had Dennis Farina.

Posted by: BarbadoSlim at October 25, 2008 4:42 PM

C.F. really needs to find a new line of work.

Posted by: Recondite at October 25, 2008 5:03 PM

I really enjoyed Colin Farrell in In Bruges. I had hope. Dashed, once again.

Posted by: BizzyBees at October 25, 2008 9:42 PM

Remind me again when Colin has been good?

He was sort of competent, I guess, in Minority Report, although, ironically, that role would have had more impact with someone like Norton.

And now that I think about it, Forest Whitaker or, mmmmm, maybe Timothy Olyphant could have done better.

And yeah, yeah, I KNOW, he was in Tigerland.

Posted by: BarbadoSlim at October 25, 2008 10:21 PM

A-fuckin-men.

Posted by: sarah at October 26, 2008 3:26 AM

I don't understand why people liked Mystic River so much. It felt like a heist movie with no heist.

Posted by: Lucas at October 26, 2008 12:01 PM

Majestic review. Prime Anthony Lane levels of passion and erudition without the narcissistic whimsy. Thank you.

Posted by: Lee at October 26, 2008 12:54 PM

"It's unaware that its own devices are so blatant (and the first rule of realism is Hide the Devices). It coats everything with a sheen and it overplays its hand while posing with faux nuances; directors can't have it both ways without insulting our intelligence."

That about summarizes my beef. And I particularly enjoyed your jibe at "dirty/grime = realistic". That cinematic ploy has been beaten to death over and over and over...

Fantastic review. I really expect more from Norton these days.

Posted by: Lady Whiskers at October 26, 2008 4:52 PM

"Haggis-stupid"

what a fantastic adjective!

Posted by: icecreammang at October 26, 2008 7:45 PM

I couldn't identify why I am so apathetic about seeing the Oscar-buzz/serious actor movies for the past 5 years, but you have magnificently voiced that agitated feeling I get whenever I see trailers for emotionally-charged/you must feel emotion NOW movies.

The comparison to Céline Dion is verily apt. And yet, I'm seeing her in concert tomorrow (300$ for a ticket)...and I'll bet it's money better spent than going to see any Oscar-nominated film. I'm hoping that one of her fists will snap a rib and punture her heart, making it a real heart-wrenching experience.

Posted by: popejenn at October 27, 2008 1:59 AM

$300 to subject yourself to Celine Dion? Forgive me, popejenn, we're mostly all friends here, but: Are you fucking nuts? When I think of how much good beer I could buy with $300 ... I can't wrap my brain around that.

Isn't there a good band in your town you could see 60 times instead, that would entertain you just as much each time and appreciate the money far more? I could think of a dozen wonderful and original bands in my town who play for peanuts and gas money, and it's not a very big town.

Jeebus. Giving people like Celine Dion that much money to assault your ears for an hour just encourages them to keep on living, rather than overdose on pills or shoot themselves in the head.

Well, sorry ... this wasn't meant to be about Celine Dion. It was meant to be about the utter absurdity of $300 concert tickets and $2,500 tickets to see the Yankees at their new stadium and on and on. I keep hearing about how hard many people have it, how many families struggle day to day to get by blah blah blah all that election-year bullshit, and then I read that Celine Dion is asking, and getting, fucking $300 from someone who I take it doesn't even really like her much, and I just have to wonder if we're all so hard-up then where the hell does all this money come from? Who has that much to just piss away a big chunk of it on a concert or a ballgame?

Millions of us, I guess. Cause I'm sure Celine's show will sell out, just as I'm sure the Yankees will sell all their tickets.

I don't know if we're in a recession or depression, but this sure depresses me.

BTW, the greatest live rock and roll band I've ever seen in more than 50 years of seeing (Drive-By Truckers) is touring, and asking about $25 a ticket. Just for comparison purposes.

Posted by: bucdaddy at October 27, 2008 9:15 AM

Jennifer Ehle's in this?

Is she only allowed to appear in movies that begin with "Pride and?"

Posted by: BWeaves at October 27, 2008 10:01 AM

popejenn, this is Canada, we're sorry. Wait.....what? $300.00! Really? On purpose? Un-forced?
Well then....popejenn this is Canada, fuck you, you asked for it.

Posted by: Admin11 at October 27, 2008 10:23 AM

Admin11, hey, I'm Canadian too. I'm bringing this on myself and enjoying every second of masochism.

Posted by: popejenn at October 27, 2008 12:15 PM

bucdaddy, don't get too depressed about the ticket prices. If people are willing to pay those absurd prices - my mother was just so that she didn't have to go alone since my father would rather shove a pencil through his eye than go to this - then it's absolutely their perogative.

Personally, if my ticket weren't free, I wouldn't be going. My credit card is over it's limit and I'd use that 300$ to pay it down.

But since I've got this lovely opportunity to bond with my mother over Céline's sonic masterbation, I'll check it out.

Posted by: popejenn at October 27, 2008 12:21 PM

popejenn if Canadians are willingly going to see Celin 'Sleeping With My Grandpa Isn't Creepy' Dion, then I'm afraid our country is lost.

America, please take her back. We were so happy.

Posted by: Admin11 at October 27, 2008 1:15 PM

Perhaps my fondness for truly bad movies has colored my opinion, but I thought it was well acted. I'm finding that I'm particularly fond of Noah Emmerich. However, I thought the acting was the only highlight. It was a story that's been done to death, I never really cared what happened to the characters, there was never any real tension and I'm so very over the shaky camera thing.

Posted by: Smello at October 27, 2008 2:19 PM

I gotta say, the reason I keep coming back to this here community is the uncanny ability of the reviewers and general populace to knock me out with your writing and insights. Using Celine to illustrate empty, emotionless, over-spectacled tripe that masquerades as Important and True was pure fucking genius. Summed it up better than I ever could have.

Well played Pajibaland. Well played.

Posted by: Roaddog at October 27, 2008 3:56 PM

you should only judge movies against their genre and the audience they are intended for and by that standard, this film is just fine. forget all the gibberish in the review that goes on and on about " reality " and let yourself in for 2 hours of entertainment. sure, it may be forgettable but the pacing rivets your interest and the acting is excellent across the board. the reviewer mentions jennifer ehle who was outstanding but ed norton fans will not be disappointed and noah emmerich/ jon voight shine.
" the departed " garnered the oscar to reward scorcese for films that were much better but the cartoonish performance of jack nicholson playing himself and the over-the-top ending where everyone in sight gets killed was as far removed from reality as it gets.... and how about the universally lauded " there will be blood " where daniel day-lewis starts hurling bowling balls at his adversary in a preposterous ending. that's reality ?
my advice is to forget trying to decipher this tortuous review and buy a ticket to " pride and glory ".

Posted by: snake at October 27, 2008 5:15 PM

Admin11, I think you may neglecting the Crazy Cat Lady/Mothers over 50 year old demographic of Canada. They have an enduring love for all things over-emotional.

Céline, along with Terrance and Phillip are 2/3 of our economy according to South Park. That statistic seems completely reliable.

Just so you all know: My review of Céline's show is this- Not enough aneurisms. On her part or on mine.

Posted by: popejenn at October 28, 2008 1:20 AM

1-may *BE* neglecting.
2-mothers of 50 *years* old
Apologies; I am still trying to shake the ringing from my ears.

Posted by: popejenn at October 28, 2008 1:23 AM

Wow, whatever happened to "constructive criticism", I work in the film business and know the involvement of the Studios is sometimes overbearing to the almighty dollar. No matter what direction the Writer may have initially taken the plot, story lines will always be manipulated by Producers. They add cheesy shit. I see it everyday and laugh about it. Comparing this film to The Departed is like comparing Copper to Gold. It doesn't make sense.
Scorsese is a seasoned, successful director. He has free reign and respect. Its a movie, the point is to escape your pathetic life. If you know so much about screenwriting how come you are writing reviews instead of the 3rd Act?

Posted by: atrane at October 28, 2008 11:30 AM

There's a dying wife in this thing?

{Eyes roll back in head}

Posted by: Lee at October 28, 2008 3:32 PM

Haven't seen this yet but let me say this:

Ranylt's reviews annoy me....

Commenters - try making up your own minds, you are sheep and agree with whatever the reviewer writes. Its sad.........

Posted by: Buddy Boy at October 28, 2008 8:20 PM

Haven't seen this yet but let me say this:

Ranylt's reviews annoy me....

Commenters - try making up your own minds, you are sheep and agree with whatever the reviewer writes. Its sad.........

Posted by: Buddy Boy at October 28, 2008 8:21 PM

Haven't seen this yet but let me say this:

Ranylt's reviews annoy me....

Commenters - try making up your own minds, you are sheep and agree with whatever the reviewer writes. Its sad.........

Posted by: Buddy Boy at October 28, 2008 8:21 PM

I'm sorry, could you please repeat that, Buddy Boy?

Posted by: meaux at October 28, 2008 9:09 PM

So much film and tv seems so inferior after the experience that is the Wire.

Posted by: Devo at October 29, 2008 7:30 PM



searchthesite.jpg