Waiting for Kaye's counter-punch...

Rating: 7/10 (23 September 1999)

For a film that was clearly intended to be a jolting social commentary about the serious state of racial tension in contemporary America, I found it to be oddly lacking in any real dramatic `kick'. To be sure, it does have all the elements that should have added up to a classic tale of an `American Tragedy'---skinheads, guns, betrayal, and the final price of redemption---but somehow the end result seems all too neat and clear-cut (`black-and-white,' if you will) to be totally convincing.
The acting, as advertised, was very, very good. Edward Norton did a fine job of rendering a believable (despite the shortcomings of the script) portrait of a troubled, yet bright and sensitive young man, and does deserve all the credit he has received. Having said that, I must say that it was the other Edward who really gave me a pleasant surprise. Furlong's role as Danny is by no means as showy as Norton's, but his performance was every bit as impressive. By bringing a rich mixture of quiet intensity and genuine sense of innocence to the role, Furlong has made Danny into someone very `real', someone you would actually care for---the sweet boy next door who's going through a rough, confusing period.
Stacy Keach is one veteran who is always dependable, and in this film, he is chilling, dangerous, and oddly hilarious all at once. Good show for him! In fact, I liked everyone's performance with the exception of one: Avery Brooks as Dr. Sweeney. I do acknowledge the fact that he's supposed to be the strict-but-fair `guardian angel', and must therefore carry a certain measure of `weight of authority' in playing this role, but boy, there is such a thing called `overdoing it'. Frankly, he looked so stiff and uncomfortable that I began to suspect that maybe his suit was too heavily starched. It's a shame because Brooks is actually a good actor who hasn't been too lucky in getting meaningful roles such as this one.
All in all, the film is a solid one, the superb acting compensating for the lack of depth in terms of story development. It is a well-known fact that director Tony Kaye tried to get his name off the whole project due to `creative differences'. I have no way of telling, but I vaguely suspect that he was aiming for a direction that would have been more in line with what I had expected to see in this film. It would be interesting if he decides to tell his version by releasing a `director's cut' at some point.