I first became aware of this film probably 20 years ago or more. I've simply never seen it anywhere to buy or rent. So when it came up on one of the streaming services, I decided to check it out. The film was a mixture of strengths and weaknesses. I think where the film went wrong was in not making Charlie Sheen's character of Daniel/Sid, interesting or likable. That's not to say that he didn't have redeemable qualities. He was much more of an anti-hero, than he was a hero though. There was as much to dislike about the character as there was to like about him. Every time he did something that made you want to empathize with him, and start to reason with him, he'd turn around and do something to make you dislike him again. It was an interesting character study, one that I feel could have been done better.
It's also interesting to go back and watch something from nearly 32 years ago. Charlie Sheen would have been about 28 years old when this film came out. Probably 26 or 27 when it was filmed. It's amazing to see how much he's grown and improved as an actor over the years. While his performance was by no means bad here, it wasn't going to win him any awards either. There were kinks in the armor, and it'd be fun to see him tackle such a project now, as he's had three decades to perfect his craft.
I think what really saved this film was Michael Madsen's performance as Blood. Madsen was born to play such characters. While the film kept a very serious tone throughout, with no moments of comic relief or levity, Madsen added something to keep it from becoming too monotonous. As to the other performances, I didn't think there was enough given screen time to make much of an opinion. Especially that of Linda Foriento. She simply seemed to be there in order to give Sid a love interest, with little substance.
Not something I'd go back to again. While the film had some good parts, it dragged in others.
No comments:
Post a Comment