web
counter
 

mark_wahlberg3.jpg

Serpicrap

We Own the Night / Dustin Rowles

Film Reviews | October 12, 2007 | Comments (29)


Watching a film clearly modeled after the great crime dramas of the ’70s, especially one with as many epoch-sized lulls in it as We Own the Night, it’s hard not to let your mind drift and allow yourself to idly wonder whether actors like DiCaprio, Wahlberg, and Phoenix are taking the place of Nicholson, DeNiro, and Pacino as the men who fill the roles of cops and gangsters in these “gritty” crime films. If that is in fact the case, well, fuck me, that’s a depressing notion. It’s not that I don’t think that Leo, Mark, and Joaquin — even if they don’t necessarily measure up to their predecessors — aren’t fine actors or anything. It’s just a little dispiriting to know that today’s performances may be tomorrow’s caricatures, and that Mark Wahlberg’s arched-eyebrow smirk may soon become permanently etched upon his face, something he’ll exploit for laughs in 14th sequel to Meet the Parents, presumably entitled Meet the Dipshits. What’s perhaps even more painful is to watch Joaquin Phoenix, a dramatic actor with whom I have a modest amount of appreciation, actually run the DeNiro/Pacino/Nicholson gamut in a single film; he is, at different times in We Own the Night, a brooding mumbler, an over-the-top screamer, and, finally, a melodramatically off-kilter Shticklson.

It’s not entirely Phoenix’s fault, however. In fact, most of what’s wrong with We Own the Night — and make no mistake, there’s a lot wrong with it — can be directly attributed to writer-director James Gray, who, after The Yards, seems to be fashioning a career out of making mediocre films that waste the talents of Phoenix and Wahlberg. In this one, inexplicably set in the very “gritty” year of 1988 (a year that saw Terrence Trent Darby and Rick Astley top the charts, though it is Blondie featured in the soundtrack), Phoenix plays Bobby Greene, the manager of a Russian nightclub in Brighton Beach. Though no explanation is ever given as to why, he has a strained relationship with his family, composed of his father, Deputy Chief Burt Grusinsky (Robert Duvall), and his brother, Lt. Joseph Grusinsky (Wahlberg). Joseph is head of a narcotics task force charged with breaking up a drug ring run out of Bobby’s nightclub.

Initially, Burt and Joseph make overtures to Bobby, asking him to act as an observer for the police force in their efforts to break up the ring. Bobby, however, rebuffs them, though again there is little reason offered as to why he wouldn’t want to help his family. But after a Russian mobster shoots Joseph in the face, nearly killing him, and then puts his father on a death list, Bobby quickly changes allegiances. Because he uses his mother’s maiden name (how convenient) and the mobsters don’t know he’s related to the Grusinsky cops, he’s able to act as snitch, a setup, though predictable, that’s tailor-made for at least few uncomfortably tense situations.

Unfortunately, Gray would rather mask the intensity with an obnoxiously loud score and then completely drain the occasionally powerful performance with ridiculously stylized close-ups and slow motion shots seemingly stolen from public access television directors. He completely ruins the one truly exhilarating sequence in the film — a car-chase shoot-out set to the rhythm of windshield wipers — by capping it with a moment of grief so overwrought that even freshmen at the Brett Ratner Academy of Film would cringe with contempt. Add to that the many police movie platitudes (“All that matters is that we finish this!”), characters’ motivations seemingly driven by their horoscopes, and absurdly implausible mechanics (at one point, Bobby is deputized, as though the film were set in Mayberry), and what you get is one gigantic mess of a movie. And that doesn’t even include the many interminable dead spots, where I found myself not hushing the jackasses talking behind me, but actually becoming more engrossed with their conversation about dinner plans than I was with the film.

Still, for all his efforts to do so, Gray couldn’t quite kill the lead performances. Wahlberg, playing another sullen badass, does well with what he has to work with, while Robert Duvall — even when he mails it in, as he does here — is better than most dramatic actors. As for Phoenix, I’m convinced that his best performance was left on the cutting room floor; I think that, at times, Gray asked him to ham it up for the blooper reel and then he ended up using that footage in the final cut, because there are three or four uncharacteristic scenes in We Own the Night in which Phoenix goes apeshit for no reason at all, unless he’s angling for Sean Penn’s Oscar. Surprisingly, the real stand-out effort comes from Eva Mendes as Bobby’s girlfriend, who — despite opening the film with an unnecessary masturbation scene that makes it seem as though we’re about to watch a Disco-era film about the porn industry — actually creates a female character strong enough to temporarily trick me into believing she was secretly the mastermind behind all the drugs and violence. She isn’t, of course, but that would’ve made for a helluva much better film.

Dustin Rowles is the publisher of Pajiba. He lives with his wife and son in Ithaca, New York. You may email him, or leave a comment below.









Each Time You Like, Share, Tweet or Stumble a Pajiba Post, An Angel Does the Paul Rudd Dance



Michael Clayton | Elizabeth: The Golden Age









Comments

You had me until, "...Surprisingly, the real stand-out effort comes from Eva Mendes as Bobby's girlfriend, who -- despite opening the film with an unnecessary masturbation scene..." Good Lord! An Eva Mendes matsturbation scene! I find it quite necessary, thank you very much.
Anyway, I am hoping you are wrong about this movie because I was amped up about it. But the more I think about it the more I think how completely absurd it would be for a police force to allow a father -- with the help of one son, no less -- to investigate his own son.

Posted by: JP at October 12, 2007 7:23 PM

capping it with a moment of grief so overwrought that even freshmen at the Brett Ratner Academy of Film would cringe with contempt.

What about sophomores enjoying the Sean Penn "Is That My Daughter in There?" Memorial Scholarship at Ratner -- are they inspired?

At this point, Wahlberg is well down the icon-turned-stereotype path you posit, though I'm not sure his resume merits the comparison to the elder statesmen mentioned. But is this not the exact same character -- brooding, emotional, riddled-with-integrity cop working in a corrupt city -- that he played in The Departed? Ay carumba, I really think I prefer the other Wahlberg brother.

Good Lord! An Eva Mendes matsturbation scene! I find it quite necessary, thank you very much.

Heeeeeee, JP, did you mean unnecessary, you little minx? The exclamation points left it ambiguous. Personally I'd be up for some gratuitous Rosario Dawson masturbation or some gratuitous Penelope Cruz masturbation or some gratuitous Eva Longoria masturbation (sorry, got lost in my latinareversehandshake.com membership for a moment), but Eva Mendes just does not do it for me. I'd rather see Barbara Babcock masturbating any day.

Posted by: socalledonlycousins at October 12, 2007 8:36 PM

[*palm to face, hard*] D'oh! Sorry, JP, I'll try not to step all over your lines next time. Bwuh on me.

Posted by: socalledonlycousins at October 12, 2007 8:40 PM

EVA beating off, maybe jennifer love hewitt could lend a hand, feelin that SLIM??

Posted by: pasadenamike at October 12, 2007 9:53 PM

Mark Wahlberg a "fine actor"? I beg to differ.

Posted by: Arthur Dent at October 12, 2007 10:45 PM

Nicholson, DeNiro, and Pacino - which one exactly is Marky-Mark taking the place of again?

Posted by: madego at October 12, 2007 11:29 PM

i'm not sure i'm prepared to shell out money for a movie where EVA MENDES is the saving grace.

i'm not sure what it is about her, but i can't stand her...i find all her performances a little "haughty."

Posted by: citizen_cris at October 12, 2007 11:52 PM

I think she was once a man.

Seriously.

She looks just like this transsexual I used to know.

Posted by: Scarlett at October 13, 2007 6:13 AM

Scarlett, in the immortal words of Meatloaf, you took the words right out of my mouth. Girlfriend is a tran-tran-TRANNY (I know some object to this term). I was actually trying to decide who looks like more of a dude: Mendes or Dawson (who I have maintained is mannish on this very website).

" Sean Penn "Is That My Daughter in There?" Memorial Scholarship"

Hysterical. You guys are so frigging funny.

Posted by: Samantha T at October 13, 2007 8:29 AM

Tranny masturbation! Possible Jennifer Love Hewitt participation!

Oh, I'm definitely feelin' this alright.

Posted by: BarbadoSlim at October 13, 2007 10:39 AM

Scarlett -- Come on. Admit it. By "used to know", you really meant "used to be married to". Well at least her nude scene in Training Day dispels any argument that she still has man tubing. Now, Robert Duvall. Thats a tranny if I ever saw one.

Posted by: JP at October 13, 2007 11:53 AM

Scarlett, in the immortal words of Meatloaf, you took the words right out of my mouth. Girlfriend is a tran-tran-TRANNY (I know some object to this term). I was actually trying to decide who looks like more of a dude: Mendes or Dawson (who I have maintained is mannish on this very website).

Is that you, Samantha T? The well-spoken, always nice lawyer with a hot hubby and cute new baby? If so, then let me say: you are awesome. That is all.

One more thing:

socalled - I need for you to be hired by Pajiba and write a review - like RIGHT NOW. You're killing me.

Posted by: Daphne at October 13, 2007 11:57 AM

Once again, I must submit that I must either watch too much 'Maury' or live in the only place filled with the most busted people on the planet, because I still cannot comprehend these accusations of transsexuality. Am I missing something? Did the rules get changed? Are my standards suddenly that low? And why is it you have to pick the ones that have actually showed the goods?

That said, I must agree with JP. An Eva Mendes masturbation scene is quite necessary.

Posted by: Vermillion at October 13, 2007 12:55 PM

Whoa, this comment section is just full of a bunch of sort-of creepy horndogs, haha (don't worry, I'm not going to freak out about the comments or anything). I'm the lesbian-est lesbian this side of the Mississippi, but ever since I saw that disturbing, traumatizing Naomi Watts masturbation scene in 'Mulholland Dr.', I pretty much never want to see a masturbation scene ever again. I don't care who it is.

In non-masturbation news, this movie sounds like a pile of crap.

Posted by: stacy at October 13, 2007 1:30 PM

Whoa whoa WHOA, stacy. I'm the ostensibly straight-est straight girl (which means not really, but who's labeling) this side of the Mississippi, and while that Mulholland Dr scene was disturbing and emotional, traumatizing it was not. It was definitely on the hot side of disturbing, and it's actually one of the most important scenes for making sense of that film.

But I second your assertion that this movie sounds like a pile of crap. I saw the previews and thought lazily that it was some Departed sequel or something.

Posted by: Brianne at October 13, 2007 5:24 PM

Daphne - aw, you're embarrassing me.

Posted by: Samantha T at October 13, 2007 5:46 PM

Ok well I'd admit it--I have a huge crush on Eva Mendes, so now I'm DEFINITELY seeing this movie. At least the first twenty minutes or so, which I will etch on my brain then go home for private time.

ROFL.

Posted by: Kathy at October 13, 2007 9:02 PM

Brianne - Granted, I haven't watched 'Mulholland Dr.' in quite a while. Perhaps my memory of that scene has been influenced by watching the Inside the Actor's Studio episode with Naomi Watts, where she expressed that she was quite traumatized by it all (can't blame her, having to do that over and over again in front of an entire film crew). But I definitely agree that the scene is enormously important to the film and really needs to be there. I wouldn't change it at all.

Guess I should watch 'Mulholland Dr.' again - at the very least, I'll get the sex scene out of it, haha. Man my head is in the gutter today.

(Clearly this film seems like snooze-city/waste of time since all anyone is talking about is masturbation and Eva Mendes.)

Posted by: stacy at October 13, 2007 9:21 PM

JP--you're absolutely right. I couldn't take it anymore when i came home one day all set to make Tuna Helper and there s/he was dancin' around in m'drawers.

Stacy--oh. my. god. that scene! As a woman who happens to enjoy her own naughty bits, that scene just look like it hurt! I know it was intrinsic to the plot, but seriously. If a guy ever touches me like that down there we're going to seriously revisit the good touch/bad touch conversation Sister Margaret and I had in kindergarten.

Posted by: Scarlett at October 13, 2007 9:45 PM

I'd rather see JP in Reservation Road...with the Ruff.

Posted by: Kevin Longrie at October 14, 2007 4:12 AM

This is the sort of thing God made netflix for.

Posted by: jvon at October 14, 2007 12:18 PM

This film will do nothing but make you curse God for the $9.25 and 117 minutes you just wasted. You'd do better to take the $9.25 and spend it on five minutes with an actually tranny.

This movie should be billed as a tragedy because James Gray took a descent idea and absolutely butchered it. It figures that he wrote it too. Some of the dialog could have been written better by a preschooler.

Describing the acting as mailed-in just doesn't do it enough credit. Stoic comes off as cold and the meant to be powerful scenes come off as nothing short of laughable. Eva really is the only one you won't hate by the end of the movie, which I think says loads.

You'll probably miss most of the supposed-to-be-artsy, James-thought-amazing but were really just forced, awkward and emo-hack scenes because you can't stop shaking your head. Of course, that's only if you can make it though the unbearably dull droll between action scene that comprise most of the movie.

Oh yeah, and the Eva masturbation scene, whether you think she's a tranny or not, is, in fitting with the rest of the film, tame, lame and extremely disappointing. You don't see much other than two uncomfortable actors and a right breast. Don't waste your time.

Posted by: Calitri at October 15, 2007 8:29 AM

Damn, the left one's the much nicer of the pair. Guess I won't go see this after all.

Posted by: ASterisk at October 15, 2007 12:17 PM

I'm surprised no one's mentioned how close the storyline is to that fabulous Michael Keaton movie Johnny Dangerous. You fooking iceholes.

Posted by: Renee at October 15, 2007 8:00 PM

Renee--Actually it was Johnny DangerousLY, you fargin bastage! But I see your point. Now if you'll excuse me I have to see the doctor about my ESS.

Posted by: Nick at October 16, 2007 1:29 PM

wow I totally disagree with your review. I was in this movie in the club scenes, the drug raid scene and some other ones and saw James directing pretty much the whole time I was on set. I think he is a phenomenal director and to read that your saying he's trying too hard is just bullshit. I can maybe see where your coming from but don't even try and compare it to a movie like the Godfather just becuase it was a "gritty" crime film. This movie was not supposed to be like the other movie's you mentioned. Phoenix, Mendes and Wahlberg are phenomenal actors and prove it in this movie. Wahlberg and Phoenix already proved they are two of the best actors in the industry for the past 5 years or so with almost everything they have done. If this movie came out before the departed, you would be saying the departed was another wahlberg cop thing. James was NOT trying to channel Wahlberg from the departed. So what, just because Wahlberg's playing a cop and the departed came out not even a year ago your going to assume that? He's not an fucking idiot. He definately doen't "waste" their talents at all. Blondie sounds better in a club anyway and I thought it sounded perfect for the 80's. Who want's to hear Rick Asley anyway? What are you thinking? Do you even need to know why a relationship is strained at the beginning of the movie? Hell no. Figure it out. It's unneccesary.

Posted by: sara at October 17, 2007 3:52 PM

My friend accuses me of wasting an entire day of his life after I ordered a couple of rounds of unnecessary shots one night and he spent the entire next day in bed. This is something he never lets me forget! After he insisted we see this movie, we both agreed that we were even.

Posted by: jill at October 18, 2007 4:54 PM

Dustin I know you are probably right, but I've got to see it. I just have this little thing for Mark Wahlberg.

Posted by: LuvGems at October 19, 2007 7:56 PM

Must. Disagree. Eva Mendes annoys me no end. All she does is the play the sexpot and she's not even sexy in my opinion. Also, and this is perhaps a more general gripe, why the hell did she have to sit on Joaquin's lap during a card game? Arrrrrgh. Pet peeve, hate it when chicks do that, there are chairs in the room chickie.
I was really into the premise of this movie, once I started watching it, not so much. It reeks a little of The Departed and Mark Wahlberg who owned me in Departed is very low key here. The movie is basically about Phoenix and normally he can carry it off. This time, it's all weird and he's squinty and looks a bit like The Joker. The scenes feel choppy, Wahlberg's character becomes a scaredy cat (which does not work at all), and Eva is pouty and annoying, Robert Duvall looks tired, and why the freaking hell can nobody enunciate?

Phoenix sounded like he was alternately mumbling and chewing stones, Wahlberg was only slightly better.

A disappointment.

Posted by: snarkella at March 10, 2008 1:34 AM