Jackie Brown (1997) – A down on her luck stewardess has to outsmart
a gun smuggler who has decided she is a threat to his business.
a gun smuggler who has decided she is a threat to his business.
Directed by Quentin Tarantino Starring
Pam Grier, Samuel L. Jackson, Robert De Niro
Pam Grier, Samuel L. Jackson, Robert De Niro
Why You Will Like It – A couple solid
performances make up for an uninspired version of a good story.
performances make up for an uninspired version of a good story.
I knew I there was going to be a problem
with this movie from the opening sequence. While various credits
scroll on the screen we get a long dolly shot of Jackie Brown (Grier)
doing nothing. She is making her way to through the airport on her
way to work. But Tarantino gives Grier nothing to do. She stands,
stiff as a board with no expression on her face for several tedious
minutes. No indication of who she is, what she’s thinking, nothing.
To my eyes Grier looks like she has no idea what is going on either.
The director told her to stand still while the camera dollies along
next to her. Finally, she begins to run. Again, no motivation for it
shown. Turns out she’s running late for work.
with this movie from the opening sequence. While various credits
scroll on the screen we get a long dolly shot of Jackie Brown (Grier)
doing nothing. She is making her way to through the airport on her
way to work. But Tarantino gives Grier nothing to do. She stands,
stiff as a board with no expression on her face for several tedious
minutes. No indication of who she is, what she’s thinking, nothing.
To my eyes Grier looks like she has no idea what is going on either.
The director told her to stand still while the camera dollies along
next to her. Finally, she begins to run. Again, no motivation for it
shown. Turns out she’s running late for work.
That sums up my feeling about the whole
movie. Things happen. No one in the movie seems to be overly involved
in them except the gun runner, Ordell (Jackson). One of the great
actors of the second half of the 20th Century has nothing to do. The
love interest shows as little interest as is possible for someone who
isn’t dead.
movie. Things happen. No one in the movie seems to be overly involved
in them except the gun runner, Ordell (Jackson). One of the great
actors of the second half of the 20th Century has nothing to do. The
love interest shows as little interest as is possible for someone who
isn’t dead.
The weird part is that I got to the end
of the movie feeling there was a good script here. Based on a Leonard
Elmore book, the movie would seem to have a great foundation.
Tarantino is a director that I don’t always like but he’s usually
interesting. The movie is a tribute to the blaxpoitation movies of
the ‘70s. This is the director dipping into his personal movie
passions which can bring some depth to a movie. The cast is solid.
Jackson and Grier plus () as Grier’s love interest, De Niro as a
prison buddy of Ordell’s, even Chris Tucker in a restrained role as
one of the other henchmen. It’s all the ingredients for a fun time
at the movies.
of the movie feeling there was a good script here. Based on a Leonard
Elmore book, the movie would seem to have a great foundation.
Tarantino is a director that I don’t always like but he’s usually
interesting. The movie is a tribute to the blaxpoitation movies of
the ‘70s. This is the director dipping into his personal movie
passions which can bring some depth to a movie. The cast is solid.
Jackson and Grier plus () as Grier’s love interest, De Niro as a
prison buddy of Ordell’s, even Chris Tucker in a restrained role as
one of the other henchmen. It’s all the ingredients for a fun time
at the movies.
It never happened for me.
Grier’s flat aspect in the opening
scene never lets go. There are several changes in intensity and
emotion, but they all struck me as flat and lacking honesty. I never
felt the desperation when she faced the police or the pent up anger
facing down Ordell. () plays the love interest with as little energy
as I’ve ever seen. It left their final scene together rather limp.
scene never lets go. There are several changes in intensity and
emotion, but they all struck me as flat and lacking honesty. I never
felt the desperation when she faced the police or the pent up anger
facing down Ordell. () plays the love interest with as little energy
as I’ve ever seen. It left their final scene together rather limp.
Then we have De Niro. I love Robert De
Niro. Big role or small, you know you will get a crafted gem of a
performance, with every facet perfect. If the role was to be passive
and dull, he hit the mark . My feeling is that De Niro was miscast
here. The issue is that he’s Robert Freaking De Niro. You see him
and you expect something brilliant. Something that never comes. This
role would have been better played by a veteran character actor as
the lost and drifting character. If you’re not going to let a star
be a star, even for a second, then they are a distraction. Sadly,
that describes De Niro here.
Niro. Big role or small, you know you will get a crafted gem of a
performance, with every facet perfect. If the role was to be passive
and dull, he hit the mark . My feeling is that De Niro was miscast
here. The issue is that he’s Robert Freaking De Niro. You see him
and you expect something brilliant. Something that never comes. This
role would have been better played by a veteran character actor as
the lost and drifting character. If you’re not going to let a star
be a star, even for a second, then they are a distraction. Sadly,
that describes De Niro here.
In the end, I find myself where I often
do with Tarantino. Wondering why so many people rave about much of
his work. There is less of my usual feeling that he chooses style
over substance here. The director chose to hold back in response to
criticism that his previous movie (“Pulp Fiction”) was too
violent. Requiring a little more subtlety improves the movie in some
wasy. I’m bored with his fixation on using obscene words as many
times as possible. Here the prime culprits are “M-F” and the “N”
word. Even Spike Lee took exception to the 30+ uses of the latter
here. Tarantino seems to believe that the negative value of these
words is best challenged by using them till the audience’s mind grows
numb. I’m not a fan of the concept. With so much at his fingertips
for this movie, he lets it all slide between his fingers. What makes
it to the screen is so much less than it could have been.
do with Tarantino. Wondering why so many people rave about much of
his work. There is less of my usual feeling that he chooses style
over substance here. The director chose to hold back in response to
criticism that his previous movie (“Pulp Fiction”) was too
violent. Requiring a little more subtlety improves the movie in some
wasy. I’m bored with his fixation on using obscene words as many
times as possible. Here the prime culprits are “M-F” and the “N”
word. Even Spike Lee took exception to the 30+ uses of the latter
here. Tarantino seems to believe that the negative value of these
words is best challenged by using them till the audience’s mind grows
numb. I’m not a fan of the concept. With so much at his fingertips
for this movie, he lets it all slide between his fingers. What makes
it to the screen is so much less than it could have been.
Rating – *** Worth A Look
Stories Are My Life 
Leave a comment