Night Moves (1975)

The time of the film noir was long since past, its shadowy streets, scarred, flawed anti-heroes and dastardly villains gone the way of the do-do bird. The genre lived on into the 1950s some before moving on. Then...THEN, along came the 1960s and everything weird and drug-induced and dark and cynical. Here came a new type of film noir, almost as if it was on LCD or acid of some sort. A whole sub-genre of flicks came along, the private detective meets film noir meets general weirdness. That's today's flick, a 1975 neo-noir called Night Moves.

A former pro football player, Harry Moseby (Gene Hackman) is a mildly successful private investigator working in Los Angeles. He's a dogged investigator and good at what he does, stubborn to a fault to get answers, but there just isn't much money in the business. His home life with his wife (Susan Clark) becoming increasingly frustrated with that lifestyle, but now Harry has a case on his plate that's peaks his curiosity. A past her prime actress, Arlene Iverson (Janet Ward), wants Harry to track down her missing daughter, Delly, who's been gone for several days with no word at all. Delly is a teenager with a free spirit who's embraced quite the freeing lifestyle. Where to start though? Delly...well, she got around but Harry decides to start in Florida where her stepfather lives a life of ease (seemingly). Immediately though with anyone he talks to, Harry feels like he's getting the run-around. What has he stumbled into?

I recorded this movie on Turner Classic Movies a few months back and never got around to it, eventually deleting it. Just my luck, it popped back up on the schedule a few weeks ago so I gave it another shot. What to say? What an interesting, weird, off-the-wall movie in just about every description I can come up with. 'Night' comes from director Arthur Penn, he of Bonnie and Clyde, Little Big Man and The Missouri Breaks, among others. His movies were part of a New Wave in Hollywood, featuring European influences (mostly French) while also blending the general cynicism washing across America. Authority, the government, the system, all of it would come under question in the late 1960s and into the 1970s.

The filming style and technique used by Penn is a more natural effort. Scenes transition from one to the next in the blink of an eye. The story itself drifts along as Hackman's Harry meets one person after another, some he's met in the past, others he's meeting for the first time. There is some description or background of these people, but not a lot so pay attention or you'll miss the little tidbits here and there. There has to be a confidence within the story and the director and his crew to pull off something like that. Yeah, 'Night' has the idea of a story, but it is far from your typical, even straightforward story. So in that sense, this is a movie that drifts along in pretty easy-going fashion. It's also intensely frustrating at times because it slows down to a snail's pace where there's literally no story movement. The thing that holds it together...

Maybe you've heard of him. His name is Gene Hackman. The 1970s were Hackman's decade with one classic role and movie after another. Even when he hams it up a bit, he's still eternally watchable. When he plays things straight, you get movies like this. Hackman's Harry is calm and cool and exceptionally good at what he does. His personal life is a different story, like when he discovers his wife is having an affair (with Harris Yulin). Frustrated to no end, this P.I. dives back into his work, seeking some sort of solace in finding answers for his cases. He gets a lot of screentime with Jennifer Warren's Paula, a woman in her 30s with quite the checkered past that got her to this place. I didn't love the movie overall and struggled at time to stick with it, but Hackman helps get through the rough patches in a very solid lead performance.

The rest of the cast is okay, but nothing crazy. Not much in the way of big names so instead we get a lot of familiar faces in character actors. Along with Clark, Yulin and Warren, look for Edward Binns, Kenneth Mars, Anthony Costello, and John Crawford. In two of the best supporting parts, 17-year old Melanie Griffith plays the sexually free Delly while James Woods plays a mechanic who may be up to something who's also a friend of our young Delly. 'Night' caused a stir because the underage Griffith has several nude scenes and even had several love scenes cut from the final product. Woods is already brimming with intensity which works well in several scenes with Hackman.

It's been a week since I watched this 1975 detective noir story, and man, I still can't wrap my head around it. The second half of the movie does pack some surprises as Harry's investigation uncovers all sorts of shady dealings, but it never quite comes together. By the time everything is laid out....yeah, I'm still not sure what happened and why that person is dead or that person betrayed somebody. Confusing to say the least, but even with that said, there is still something oddly entertaining about this not so normal detective story. Flawed but interesting.

Night Moves (1975): ** 1/2 /****

White House Down

In 1993 and 1994, it was Tombstone and Wyatt Earp. In 1998, it was Saving Private Ryan and The Thin Red Line. In 2011, it was Friends with Benefits and No Strings Attached. All similar movies released in a tight window, forcing audiences to choose which one (because who sees both?!?) to go see. Well, 2013 had its own deja vu entries, Olympus Has Fallen, and now, White House Down.

A veteran of the war in Afghanistan, a highly decorated one at that, John Cale (Channing Tatum) is now a Capitol Police officer assigned to the Speaker of the House, Eli Raphelson (Richard Jenkins). It's pretty straightforward, even boring, duty, John aspiring to be a Secret Service agent even though his credentials aren't quite there. He's also a divorced father, and he's managed to secure two passes for a White House tour, bringing his daughter, Emily (Joey King), to the President's home. While on the tour, John and Emily even meet the President, James Sawyer (Jamie Foxx), who even speaks briefly with the politically-obsessed Emily. Only minutes later though, a bomb goes off in the Capitol Building, and soon the shooting starts in the White House. A group of gunmen are trying to take the President hostage. Separated from his daughter, John must now try and find her and make sure she's safe while also doing his damnedest to save the President.

This action-heavy political thriller from director Roland Emmerich hit theaters last summer, just months after the similarly-themed Olympus Has Fallen. It did all right in theaters, struggling some in the U.S. but making over $200 million internationally. Why did it struggle? Was it released too close to 'Olympus'? My money is on 'no.' I saw Olympus, liked it a lot, admitting it was cheesy, pretty dumb, predictable, obvious and a hell of a lot of fun. 'White House' is all of those things except....well....it's awful. It isn't fun. It's stupid, mind-numbingly stupid. I guess I shouldn't be completely surprised. Emmerich is the master of the big, overblown but ultimately entertaining blockbusters -- Independence Day, 2012, Godzilla, The Day After Tomorrow -- but that trend seems on the downhill. 'Tomorrow' was just dumb, I didn't see 2008's 10,000 B.C., and 2012 was laughable. 'White House' most definitely continues that downhill trend.

Yes, I know this is a movie that's supposed to be fun and dumb and entertaining. It isn't meant to rewrite Film as an entire entity. But does it have to be so cliche-ridden? So forced? Much like 'Olympus,' the premise certainly has some promise. What's protocol when the President of the United States' home comes under attack, a house that is heavily fortified and seemingly impregnable? That's cool. The action is cool. A shootout on the White House lawn, a fortified limo being chased by armored and heavily armed SUVs? Yeah, I can get on board with that. But that's it. These really cool moments, some potentially great action scenes get shot right in the foot because of a script that absolutely refuses to try anything even remotely unique? Sorry, screenwriter James Vanderbilt, this script was the biggest reason this movie flops. Disappointing when I realized Vanderbilt wrote The Losers, Zodiac, Basic, all movies I really liked. Cliches in an action movie are one thing, but this tested me. Late in the movie, repetitive at 131 minutes, I only stuck with it for the sake of a review. Yeah, I'm pretty honorable like that.

I've come around on Channing Tatum. With the right movie, the guy can act. He's likable on-screen, is a solid presence and can more than carry his own in action sequence. I still don't think he's a great actor (potentially, he could be), leaning more toward the movie star angle. This is a mixed part for him. Again, the script does him no favors. He's a divorced father, his busy schedule making it hard to be a good parent for Emily (King is a solid, young actress), pissing off his ex-wife (Rachelle Lefevre). Oh, and he's kinda absent-minded, not detail-oriented, but aw shucks, he's an American hero and really, really wants to be a Secret Service agent!!! Wouldn't you know it? The Secret Service agent (Maggie Gyllenhaal) in charge of hiring agents is an ex-girlfriend! Trapped inside the White House, he's also the only trained personnel that thinks to dodge gunfire, the Secret Service agents just standing there and getting shot. Tatum is okay -- not great, not bad -- and is clearly doing his best to have some fun.

The rest of the cast comes from Stock Characters 101. Jamie Foxx is okay as President Barack Obama, um, I mean President James Sawyer, but I don't know if he was a great casting choice to begin with. James Woods is the bad guy because what else would James Woods be doing in this movie? He's okay, a little overdone, as Martin Walker, the treacherous head of the Secret Service. His small army of gunmen/terrorists are led by Jason Clarke's Stenz, a mercenary with vengeance on his mind. Clarke is over the top but at least interesting in the villain department. His fellow gunmen are pretty faceless, Jimmi Simpson providing some odd comedic relief as the hacker, Kevin Rankin the right wing nut, Killick, who's crazy because he has a thin mustache, doesn't wear a shirt, just body armor, and screams a lot. As for the assorted political types to go with Jenkins and Gyllenhaal (legitimate actors legitimizing the movie...to a point), also look for Michael Murphy and Lance Reddick.

There's just too many painful moments here, too much to prevent it from being tolerable. When you think you're safe, the ending feels like a Scooby Doo ending. "If it wasn't for you meddling Capitol police, I would have got away with it!" At one point, Woods asks Clark "Want some cake?" to which Clark answers "No!.....I've got diabetes!!!" What?!? Later, Foxx's President Sawyer, having opted for some Air Jordans for his getaway, kicks a terrorist trying to hold him down and yells "Don't....touch...my....Air....Jordans!" The attempts at catchy, fun lines are awful, especially Tatum's one-liner when he dukes it out with Clarke, as is the solution to the White House coming under attack. It's certainly one I questioned, but then again, by then, I was questioning a lot of things. I don't want to give away too much of the awesomeness. Feel the pain yourself.

This one stunk.

White House Down (2013): */****