A Little Legal "Misconduct"

Misconduct (2016)

Rated R

Starring Josh Duhamel, Anthony Hopkins, Al Pacino, Malin Akerman, Alice Eve, Byung-hun Lee, Julia Stiles,

Directed by Shintaro Shimosawa

The Story:

Ben (Duhamel) is caught in a legal struggle between a pharmaceutical executive (Hopkins) and his firms Senior Partner (Pacino). As the snare of conspiracy draws ever tighter, Ben must uncover the truth before he becomes the latest victim.

So, did you see Misconduct when it debuted in theaters earlier this year?

Yeah, neither did anyone.

Earning $ 97.00 during the opening weekend, you'll be forgiven if you missed the debut.

So, what did you miss exactly?

Pretty much a straight to video generic thriller that hopes the allure of Hopkins and Pacino will get you to sign up.

They were probably well compensated for about a day or two of work on this movie, probably with 10 minutes or less total screen time each.

Duhamel does all the grunt work for the film, he is the actual star, and he does just fine.

In fact, the whole cast does just fine.

They're just saddled with a mediocre story that's been told before, many times, and usually much better.

So just fine rarely is reason to celebrate anymore.

Guilty of not being better with this pedigree of a cast.

Final Grade:  C-

Vigilante Justice...or "Righteous Kill"?

It's gotta be a cop!

The Story:

Veteran New York detectives Turk (Robert De Niro) and Rooster (Al Pacino) are on the trail of a serial  killer who is offing scumbags.  Now, while killing scumbags wouldn't seem like such a bad thing, when several of the other detectives, including Corelli (Carla Gugino), Perez (John Leguizamo) and Riley (Donnie Wahlberg) all begin to think it's a cop, naturally tensions start to rise.  But when they accuse Turk of being the killer...

Well things are going to get ugly.

Remember back when the movie "Heat" came out, and it was the first time that DeNiro and Pacino had ever worked together onscreen?  People were wild for that film...

Meh, I didn't much care for that one either.

: )

I mean, there's nothing inherently wrong with this movie, it just never kicks it up to that next level of thriller/drama/cop movie that a cast like this deserves.

First you have the serial killer, and the cops are hot on the trail.  He leaves poems explaining that these victims are bad people that somehow escaped justice, so now they face vengeance.

Cool.  I get it, and I'm with you.

Then all signs seem to point to one suspect, and so you know it can't be that guy... right?

So yes, it almost becomes a paint-by-numbers exercise in who-really-dunnit?

However, you probably figured that all out about 10 minutes after the movie started and know who the killer really is...and isn't.

But coming nearly 13 years after Heat, well, Pacino and DeNiro aren't exactly at the top of their games anymore.  Don't get me wrong, they're still good, but maybe no longer great.

So now it isn't about how great it is to have these 2 actors together, it's a nostalgia trip down memory lane because these two can play hard-nosed cops in their sleep.

Don't believe me, watch the movie.

; )

Final Grade:  C+... maybe a B- if I'm being generous.

Rewatchability/Purchase Factor: Nope, I'll be passing.

No Comedians Were Harmed In the Making of "Stand Up Guys"

I want him dead... you hear me... dead!

The Story:

Val (Al Pacino) is released after a lengthy stint in jail.  He's picked up by his friend and accomplice, Doc (Christopher Walken) and taken home.  It seems that a local crime boss wants Val dead, because years ago Val apparently killed the son of said crime boss.  Doc is supposed to do the deed.  But how can he take the life of his best friend?  So with one night left on earth, all Val wants to do is party and have fun.  This includes springing their other partner, Hirsch (Alan Arkin) from his retirement home so the three can take on the world together, one last time.  But with time winding down, Doc's got some hard choices to make on whether to turn on his pal, or to forfeit his own life instead.

You know, I intentionally write short summaries of the movies, because I hate giving away everything that happens in them.

Movie trailers used to serve to whet the appetite to wanting to see the film.  You see just enough, and you're interested and want to see that film.  It sounds good...it looks good.  Too often lately, the trailer seems to give away too much, often to the point of "well, why bother seeing this one?"

I write this caveat, because as I re-read it my plot description.... it actually sounds like it should be a good movie that I would want to watch.

And it almost is...

It's a little slow... and the performances from 3 master scene stealers... well amazingly, they are all rather subdued, and rarely steal much of anything throughout, especially Walken.

I don't know if that's to the overall detriment of the film or not.

But as I watched the film, I never felt engaged with the characters until the movie was probably roaring...okay...strolling... into the third act.

And no offense to movies, but waiting until the end to begin making an emotional investment with the audience and characters is a bit too long.

The movie is wrongly categorized as a comedy, but it's not a comedy, though it is humorous.

However, it is probably too light to be considered a drama.

It's a movie that for me, should have been more.  Something is missing, and I still don't know what that ingredient is. 

That's a shame.


If you want to see these three great actors in better, recent films, try Christopher Walken in "Seven Psychopaths"; Alan Arkin in "Argo" and Al Pacino in... uh... hmmm... I'm not sure Pacino has made a good movie recently...

: /

Final Grade: C+

Rewatchability/Purchase Factor: Once was enough for this one.