| [BACK]
THE BIG BOUNCE by Tom McCurrie
Lesson for the ages here: if you're going to shoot a narrative film, make sure you have a narrative to shoot. This seems to be the first thing THE BIG BOUNCE forgot.
(Warning: Spoilers Ahead!)
OK, OK, maybe I'm being a little too hard here. After all, it's not as if THE BIG BOUNCE has no story -- it just seems to have as little as possible. Written by Sebastian Gutierrez, and based on the novel by the perennially optioned Elmore Leonard, THE BIG BOUNCE tells the tale of Jack Ryan -- no, not Tom Clancy's CIA spook, but a goofy drifter played by Owen Wilson (does Wilson play any other kind?). While bumming around Hawaii, Wilson falls under the spell of babelicious Sara Foster and her scheme to steal 200k from shady developer Gary Sinise.
Now the movie has a great cast but gives them absolutely nothing to do. The primary culprit, as always, is the script. The story is all set-up -- it takes a half-hour to even mention the scheme, and another fifteen for the protagonists to set it in motion...this for a movie barely ninety minutes long! No wonder the film seems so sluggish.
And what are we watching till the plot decides to kick in? A lot of belabored character intros, topped off by the growing "relationship" between Wilson and Foster as they bond over a series of petty crimes. (Foster digs the "bounce" [a.k.a. the thrill] of breaking the law.) Unfortunately, since these two characters aren't very deep, and since the actors who play them don't have much chemistry, a little bonding goes a long way. And we get a lot of it, which is a problem since all this guff fails to advance the narrative (the scheme to rip off Sinise). The movie spins its wheels, never seeming to move forward until well into the Second Act, or about when we've lost interest completely.
Making things worse is the scheme itself, which is pretty freakin' banal. No elaborate STING-like shell game here. The plan is to simply walk into someone's house and steal 200K from a safe! I've seen episodes of MAGNUM P.I. with more punch. This "plot" is not only boring, it's incredibly thin, barely lasting a half-hour on its own; it's no wonder the film cuts to stock footage of surfers every two seconds -- it has to do something to pad out the running time.
There are some solid twists at the end (one involving Morgan Freeman and an illicit relationship that comes so out of nowhere it feels like a cheat), but it's really too little, too late. And because all the double-crosses and twists are squeezed into the last ten minutes, they produce more confusion than pleasure anyway.
This is definitely a flick that looks like it was more fun to shoot (after all, who wouldn't want to hang out on the North Shore of Oahu) than actually slap your buns down and watch. So here's another lesson for the ages: seeing THE BIG BOUNCE won't give you one.
But let's not end talking about the bad movies of 2004; let's end talking about the good movies of 2003. Since it's award season, we should all have our Best Pictures by now: mine is MYSTIC RIVER. Let me know yours and I'll post the flick that gets the most votes in the next newsletter -- Oscars be damned!
Responses, comments and general two-cents worth can be E-mailed to [email protected].
(Note: For all those who missed my past reviews, I've archived them on Hollywoodlitsales.com. Just click the link on the main page and it'll take you to the Inner Sanctum. Love them or Hate them at your leisure!)
A graduate of USC's School of Cinema-Television, Tom McCurrie has worked as a development executive and a story analyst. He is currently a screenwriter living in Los Angeles.
|
