Best Men
(1997)
Director: Tamra Davis
Cast: Luke Wilson, Sean Patrick Flanery, Drew Barrymore
Although I am
a movie critic, and you the reader are most likely not, I think that I
still share the same desires when it comes to the world of film. Most
of the time, when I dip into the motion picture industry, I look for
success. For example, when I sit down to watch a movie (whether I
intend to review it for this web site or not) , my usual hope is that
it will be a success in whatever way it was aimed at, and that I don't
feel like I've wasted ninety minutes of my life when the end credits
start rolling. That's most of the time. But I must admit that there are
times when I am interested in something in the world of film that ended
up being a failure. Once again, a lot of those times have to do with
movies I sit down to watch. Sometimes I find a movie that fails in its
intentions to be very interesting. Often the failure can teach me
something about the making of movies, and can be an interesting
educational experience for someone who wants to make their own movie as
a lesson as to what not to
do. Another reason why a movie failure can be interesting is that the
things that make a movie fail can actually end up making the movie very
entertaining to watch, though in ways the filmmakers did not intend to
make their movie so entertaining. There are several examples of this on
my web site, including Troll 2 and Blood
Freak.
But another kind of failure found in the motion picture industry that
interests me is the failure of certain movie studios, movie studios
that made a number of costly mistakes over a period of years that in
the end forced the permanent closing of the doors of these certain
studios.
Even if you are not as big of a film industry buff as I
am, I am pretty sure you know of the failings of a few certain studios,
even if you are unfamiliar with the details that explain what made
these studios fail. One failed studio that has given me enough
interesting stories and events during the years has been of Orion
Pictures. The studio got its start in 1978 after several frustrated
heads of United Artists quit so that they could have their own company
that would give them more freedom. Orion Pictures started very
promising, but as it turned out, thirteen years later they would file
for bankruptcy. What went wrong? Well, I once read the memoirs of a
former Orion executive who gave some of the reasons why Orion failed.
He noted that in the first few years of Orion making movies, Warner
Brothers was their distributor, and as a result of that kept a good
share of the money Orion movies made at the box office. Orion later
started distributing their films themselves, but they made some big
mistakes. One mistake was not creating their own video label until late
in the game, instead selling the video rights to their movies to
others. If they had created their own video label years earlier, they
would have made more cash in the end. Another mistake was generally
ignoring the youth market, where studios typically make a lot of money.
Orion was kind of snobbish and generally didn't make youth-oriented
films. (And the few times they did, they usually failed at the box
office, because they didn't understand the youth audience.) One of the
biggest reasons Orion failed, however, was that they never did quite
have enough money to promote their movies. For example, while Robocop
was certainly profitable (a $53 million gross on a $13 million budget),
it wasn't a blockbuster gross, since the movie wasn't as heavily
advertised as blockbusters from other studios.
There were other mistakes Orion made, that individually
might not have given much harm to the company but all together lead to
their bankruptcy. Orion actually survived for several years after
declaring bankruptcy, but they were never the same. The completed but
shelved movies they released several years later didn't make much of a
ripple at the box office. And when they
got around to being involved
with making and/or distributing new movies, they did even worse. Some
of these movies (like Retroactive)
didn't even get a theatrical release, and that includes Best Men, the
movie being
reviewed here, despite having famous stars like Dean Cain (Lois & Clark), Andy Dick, Sean
Patrick Flanery (Boondock Saints),
Luke Wilson (3:10
To Yuma) and Drew Barrymore (Charlie's Angels)
in its cast. The cast of this movie intrigued me enough to buy the DVD
from the thrift shop I found it in, but I was also interested to see if
with this movie, Orion managed to shut its doors with a big hurrah. The
events of Best Men
center on a group of five friends (played by Cain, Dick, Flanery,
Wilson, and Mitchell Whitfield.) When the movie opens, Jesse (Wilson)
is released from a three year stretch in prison, where he is met by his
four friends. The plan of the five men is to immediately head to the
church in town where Jesse can marry his sweetheart Hope (Barrymore).
When they get into town, Billy (Flanery) asks if they can first stop at
the bank so he can get some money. What his four friends don't know is
that Billy is the notorious bank robber nicknamed "Hamlet" by the
press, who has been busy for the past few months robbing banks in the
area while quoting Shakespeare. When the robbery takes longer than
usual, his four friends enter the bank to see what is going on. In
short notice, the bank is surrounded by the police, who think all five
men are bank robbers. The five friends now have to put their heads
together to think of a way out of the situation.
After watching Best Men,
I can say that Orion didn't go out with a bang with this movie.
However, at the same time I can't say that they made a forgettable or a
really bad movie here. What they did manage to create is one of the
strangest movies I have seen in a long time, a movie that is so
misguided at times that it almost - but not quite - deserves to be seen
because it's unlike any other movie you or I have probably seen. I
can't say I liked it, but I will definitely remember it for longer than
many of the other movies on this web site. How is this movie misguided?
Well, I will start with the five central characters. Although the
events of the movie center on them, they never become particularly
compelling. More often than not, the only thing that really
differentiates them from each other is their physical features. All of
their backgrounds are vague and seldom touched on. For example, the
character of Buzz (Cain) is revealed to be an ex-Green Beret who was
discharged from the service because he was gay, which the other
characters in the movie find humor with on several occasions. (Ho ho,
someone with a
hard core occupation who is homosexual!) Yet this background of his
never
really influences what goes on around him. If this background were
completely eliminated, little of the remaining screenplay would have to
be altered. Because all five characters have been given very little to
make them each unique individuals, their interactions with each other
have no spark, no feeling that there are different opinions. Although
you see five men, it sounds like one individual having a conversation
with himself. It's as strange as it sounds.
This sameness is even there when the cops surround the
bank. You might think that there would be different and strong feelings
and opinions from each man, but there really isn't. There's never
really a point when the men strive to plan what to do next or what to
do to get
out of the situation. It should come as no surprise that the five
actors playing the friends seem to realize they have a hopeless task on
their hands, with such little substance to work with. I guess if I had
to choose the best performer, it would be Andy Dick, since he manages
to give his character a slight nerdish personality that marginally
makes him stand out from his co-stars. Though the screenplay gives him
no favors, including the fact that he exits the movie halfway through
with an eventual fate that is never
revealed. In fact, other characters in the movie are poorly written as
well. Barrymore isn't seen until more than thirty minutes of the movie
have passed. When she does appear, she immediately slugs her fiancé in
the face, and then the movie quickly cuts to other characters elsewhere
before we get to see her character and Wilson's have a serious talk
about the
situation, a talk that is really needed but we never get. The town
sheriff (played by Fred Ward) happens to be the father of Flanery's
bank robber character, but the movie puts off dealing with this fact
properly for so long that near the end, when Ward and Flanery finally
have a decent conversation, it feels both too late and unsatisfying. (I
feel I should also add that Ward's character disappears not long after
this point, and is never brought up again.) However, the most
unbelievable (and annoying) character has to be the chief F.B.I. agent
on the case, played by Raymond J. Barry. He is not only nasty to
everyone working under his command, his various plans for diffusing the
hostage situation are so risky towards the bank hostages and so
unprofessional that even those
with little to no knowledge of F.B.I. tactics will know that there is
something very wrong with his behavior.
The unbelievable characters to be found in Best Men by
themselves make the movie somewhat strange, but the movie makes
other actions that make the viewing experience very bizarre. Many times
there seems to be scenes missing from the movie. It's not explained how
Flanery's character enters the bank with just a tuxedo on, but manages
to pull out a ski mask, gun, black jacket, and a duffel bag out of
nowhere. During the hostage taking, we suddenly get a scene of the
hostages eating pizza - where did it come from? Later in the movie,
Whitfield's character says he made a deal with the F.B.I., but there's
no way he could have done this without his friends knowing about it.
And near the end, a character that has managed to evade police custody
(just how is never explained) somehow not only gets a helicopter out of
the blue, but knows the exact location to bring it to. But probably the
weirdest thing about the movie is its tone. At this point, you are
probably thinking that the movie is more or less a comedy, possibly due
to its cast. Indeed, the movie is often very light-hearted, with plenty
of wisecracks and other kinds of attempted humor. Yet the movie also
contains scenes of people being graphically shot, people dying, and
serious themes such as people who were neglected by a parent as a
child. As you can probably guess, this deadly serious stuff doesn't fit
very well with the lighter parts of the movie. Mixing equal parts
comedy and seriousness is very risky in the world of moviemaking, and
it needs a sure hand to pull it
off. Best Men
probably would have worked better if it had played it mostly comic, or
like Dog Day
Afternoon, mostly seriously. In fact, one character in the movie
mentions Dog Day
Afternoon at one point, seemingly telling us where the
screenwriters got their inspiration for Best Men. If you
ask me, they didn't study the Pacino movie close enough.
Check
for availability on Amazon (DVD)
See also: Cold Turkey, Free Money, Retroactive
|