Pechvögel

Louis Malle lived in the USA during the last part of his life. If there was anyone with enough talent to bring "Crackers" to the screen, it was him. Unfortunately, sometimes, even with the best intentions, no doubt, a great man produces a film that is well beneath himself. Of course, anyone is entitled to a mistake, but if there was anything wrong with this project it seems to be the Jeffrey Alan Fiskin's screen treatment of the classic Mario Monicelli film "Big Deal at Madonna Street".

The cast Mr. Malle assembled for the film is a first rate one, just by looking at the names in it. Donald Sutherland, Jack Warden, Sean Penn, Christine Baranski and the rest have enough experience to show much better than what comes out on the screen.

Let's just remember Mr. Malle for his greatness, and not by this misguided effort.

The general public greatly disappoints me. There is no way on Gods' green Earth this film wins a zero in any movie review media. This film was in the list of an online platform channel (Roku to be exact). It is a "feel-good" happy ending comedy, so how can you go wrong with that? I being in a nostalgic '80s film mood, and I knew it had to be enjoyable if Donald Sutherland was in it, and a fun '80's good deal when Christine Zalinksy (sp?) plays. The film starts out a predictable theme, but it does not detract from the storyline at all, in fact I found myself looking forward to what would be an unsurprising closure (probable happy ending, a little romance, and the inevitable resolution). The crooks of this film are the wise, crafty ones: "Ramon" played well by the 1980s "Latin gang member character" Trinidad Silva (tragically killed by drunk driver in 1988 I believe) - comes up with a preliminary plan using Sean Penn as " Dillard"-with a pathetically bad Southern brogue. "Broadway" character: Larry Riley plays a pimp that is forever carrying around baby Tyrone. Check out the darling outfits Tyrone is sporting in scenes he steals every frame. Viewers please have the courtesy to at least acknowledge how well this was directed. Ignore crummy accents, stereotypes and ENJOY the story for what it is: a feel-good, fun and memorable little movie.

Not all his work is equal, but at this point I've seen almost all the films Louis Malle directed, and I've loved almost every last one. The problem with this one, unfortunately, is evident from the start, and the impression never meaningfully changes. For all the flits of cleverness it boasts throughout a runtime of ninety minutes, it takes more than half an hour to come close to eliciting a laugh, and longer still to actually do so. Other opportunities arise, but one can count the number that bear fruit; by my estimation, that's a total of three. I don't dislike 'Crackers,' mind you, and in fact there is much about it to appreciate to one degree or another. Sadly, however, the one thing a comedy requires to succeed is to be funny, and this picture makes far too little of an impression to meaningfully earn one's favor. It's enjoyable, but only in a rather passive way, providing a lot of smiles but too little of the desired reaction.

A strong cast was assembled, and I really do like them all; beyond the most significant stars, Tasia Valenza, Larry Riley, and Trinidad Silva are all pretty swell, and everyone performs admirably. The characters Jeffrey Fiskin wrote for them all are minor delights, given plentiful personality and quirks to lay the foundation for a mess of humor as they all play a part in the tableau. Similarly, the scene writing is filled with wit, a host of fun gags and bits that are plainly primed for greater things. And the narrative is fine soup for all these facets to swim in as the characters come together, a burglary is planned, and things go wrong. Meanwhile, there's nothing wrong with the comedic timing, such as it is, and it seems to me that Malle maintains the appropriate tone (light and a little wry) that should allow all these qualities to flourish. Every shot and scene is orchestrated with just the right touch that ensures everything looks and sounds good.

So what happened? Why does 'Crackers' fall so very flat as it does? Why did I laugh so little? I can only surmise that despite all its strengths, advantages, and potential, the material just didn't possess enough vitality to really take off. It's more blithely amusing than anything else, a feeling that's reinforced as the last several minutes rather shift the tone. I don't think this is "bad" by any means, and it's quite well made, really. In addition to Malle's reliable keen eye, and an able cast, the stunts and effects came off well. The sets, costume design, and hair and makeup are all fetching. And still the feature just kind of limps along, as there just doesn't seem to be enough life in Fiskin's screenplay to make it count. Or maybe no one in particular can be held responsible, and this is simply a rare concatenation of circumstances where all the various pieces fail to align in the exact right way. Whatever the case may be, the end result falls well short.

I won't say that the movie doesn't offer a good time, but it's a very mild one at that - baseline satisfactory and passable, the type of fare one can "watch" without actively engaging. I won't say to avoid it, but unless one stumbles upon it, there is definitely no reason to go out of your way for it. I'm glad for those who get more out of 'Crackers' than I do, but I'm sorry to say that despite everyone's efforts, this might actually be the low point of Malle's oeuvre. Oh well.

"Crackers" falls into that category of films that have failed quite inexplicably - helmed by a great director, starring a cast of assured veterans (Sutherland, Warden) and talented newcomers (Penn, Baranksi) and written by the screenwriter of one of the best films of the eighties ("Cutter's Way"). Then why is it that no one talks about the film anymore? Firstly, the film has been made far more successfully on two other occasions in the guise of "Big Deal on Madonna Street" and then recently "Welcome To Collinwood". Secondly, Malle must have been going through an eighties dance music phase when he made the film because it is effectively ruined by an utterly dated and abysmal soundtrack - with a proper film score it would have been a far better film. Lastly, Sutherland gives what is probably his most broad and embarrassingly unfunny performance in the lead, subsequently hindering any sympathy for his character. There are other qualms (what exactly is the purpose of Baranski's character, lets throw in a slut for some wacky comedy?) but it is nevertheless still quite watchable. Shawn, who would collaborate with Malle on the acclaimed films "My Dinner With Andre" and "Vanya on 42nd Street", is very funny as the forever-eating Turtle and Penn is amusing in a dumb hood role he would practically resume for "We're No Angels", another film with a great director, writer and cast that would be a critical and commercial failure. No film made by Malle could be truly bad, and this isn't, but it is neither as quirky or funny as it wants to be.

The Watergate break-in ran smoother than the operation executed in this flick. Of course, to get an inexperienced crew from all walks of street life (a family pimp, a musical hick and his vato, a hungry bum, and a chief conspirator with a fantasy-fulfilling meter maid girlfriend) to work together to get a pawn dealer's suspected lode from a locked safe and not have the police bust you is dicey if the musical hick had not built the store alarm with the skill level he had to operate nitroglycerin on a building beam as if he were lighting a Christmas tree. This is why his vato doesn't want him near his sister as well as it being his sister. It is somewhat more understandable than the family pimp falling for a maid who pursues a chance at prostitution and is dissuaded by the pimp. "Crackers" is a business sector misadventure set in a not-so-bustling city .