"
system\nclassify the user's feedback by responding with only a single number: 1 for positive or 0 for negative
\n
user\nby Dane Youssef
I was kind of looking forward to this one. I enjoy Eddie Murphy and I love it when a star hand-makes a vehicle for themselves or when someone who writes decides to mark their own directorial debut. But when the star's head gets too big for the rest of his body, there's always a danger of a big-budgeted Hollywood vanity production.
Will the filmmaker keep it real or will he just waste amounts of money (the studio's, ours) and time (the studio's, ours & his own) patting himself on the back for an hour in a half? Sadly, it's the latter here.
Another thing I really like is when someone breathes new and fresh life into an exhausted and dried-out genre. None of that here. The warring nightclub movies have become so worn-through that even the parodies of it are dreary and done to death.
Murphy does neither. He does the most clichéd: He plugs into a routine conventional formula gangster picture and plays it as seriously as if it were \"The Godfather.\" It's like a script where the next draft, they put in the jokes and the new ideas. But it seems like someone with clout just looked at it and went: \"No this is fine.\"
Probably Murphy. He is credited all over this. In the opening shot of beautiful white satin sheets, his name headlines across the credits about five times.
THE PLOT: A young orphan saves Pryor's life and Pryor adopts the little ragamuffin.
20 years later, Pryor's dump has become a first-class hot spot. They're pulling down big money and a gangster wants their action. He's even got a dirty cop in his employ. But Pryor comes up with a scheme, a la \"THE STING.\"
Murphy's screenplay plays like an unfinished first-draft that nobody had the pair to call him on. The actors aren't really allowed to stand-out much, if at all. Even the almighty Murphy seems to be on auto-pilot.
Pryor shows class and gentlemanly manners as Sugar Ray (perhaps it would have been better to name his character BROWN Sugar Rayfurther evidence that this one needed a polish), but everyone here is basically just on vacation.
The Oscar-nomination the movie received is richly deserved (Joe I. Tompkins' Best Costume Design), but the production values are the only part that makes the '30's feel authentic.
Some sets look somewhat fake, but this is supposed to be a comedy of sorts. It's rare one movie gets nominated for both a Razzie and an Oscar (unless it's one of Lucas' new \"Star Wars\" chapters).
It's 1938 and everyone is talking like it's 1988, particularly the comedians. This is a prehistoric white man's formula. And with all these black comedians and satirists, you expect them to skewer the genre or at least bring new life to it. Nope. Murphy is pretty much just coasting here.
The great Roger Ebert summed it up perfectly when he remarked in his review: \"Murphy approaches his story more as a costume party in which everybody gets to look great while fumbling through a plot that has not been fresh since at least 1938.\"
Jasmine Guy is perfectly cast and seems to be indulging herself in her role and Michael Lerner has all the looks, evil and mannerisms of the prototypical mob boss down pat. And there are moments where Pryor gives you an idea of what a more interesting leader and authority figure would sound like. He gives every scene he's in a feeling of dignity.
Would it have been too much to ask that Della Resse sing? Or at least quit embarrassing herself with all her \"Kiss My Ass talk?\"
And the late Redd Foxx doesn't get to leave much of a swan song here. He has some back-and-forth with Resse which could have been some great stuff. Nope. Murphy wastes another opportunity again here.
Murphy's Quick is charismatic and likable. But those moments are few and far between for sure. Murphy has never looked better and never been duller. His character made me laugh twice throughout the whole movie.
Stan Shaw's boxer with a horrible speech impediment isn't just painful and embarrassing, it's annoying. There's more to comedy than simply showing something unpleasant. You have to incorporate some kind of light touch and funny situation. Watching him strain even the some of the easiest words just makes us feel sorry for him and annoyed with Murphy.
Can Murphy write a screenplay? Well there was \"Raw,\" but that was really stand-up material. He wrote the outline for \"Boomerang\" and \"Coming to America\" for sure. But her didn't have the last word there. Maybe a team of ER-like script doctors could've revived this one.
Murphy's direction is so slow and quiet, you'd swear he was asleep at the wheel some of the time. He has too many static shots and doesn't seem to know how to build and release suspense. On some level, I think Quick is the real Eddie Murphy. Angry, young, hot-headed and ambitious. But occasionally charming. Now if he were only funny sometime.
There's a scene in which Murphy has a femme fa-tale in bed who plans to make love with him and kill him. You can probably guess how it turns out. Like everything else in the movie, this could have been better, but
\"Surprisingly,\" Murphy has not directed another movie since (he got a Razzie nomination). And he no longer writes the finished draft for his films either (he WON the Razzie for writing this!)
It's great to look at and the music is beautiful, and there are a few really nice scenes. But that just falls under the category of \"gems among all the junk.\" Not enough of them.
Couldv'e been. Shouldv'e been. Wasn't. Oh, well.
by Dane Youssef
\n
assistant\n0
\n"