Sein Name ist Mad Dog

A terrifically good little film with a slick and funny script, consummate actors allowed to strut their stuff, a tight edit, and a wonderful sort of black humour that had me laughing out loud. Yes, it's fairly predictable, but I didn't mind knowing where it was heading because it was so much fun getting there.

That said, it's not a film for everyone. It's sort of a "Pretty Woman" meets "Fargo". If that combination doesn't appeal, then this film probably won't either. But I thought it was a real gem. Two big thumbs up.

First time I watched this film I was so perplexed by it that I had to watch it again, and on the second viewing I loved it. What had initially confused me about the film was the packaging that suggested a typical Hollywood romantic comedy. That's not what it is at all. What it IS, is a fascinating character driven drama with some very funny moments. It also features some of the best work of the three leads respective careers.

This is one of De Niro's best performances ever and definitely his most underrated. He has too often slipped into the thug for hire role (The Untouchables, Cape Fear, The Fan) but here he creates an extraordinarily well-rounded character that you can completely understand. He says more about Wayne with his facial expressions, the way he holds himself, and his pattern of speech then any of the dialogue in the movie.

Thurman matches him all the way. She perfectly captures Glory. There's really not much more you can say about her performance than that, it is faultless. She never reveals Glory's true intentions AT ALL during the film, make your own mind up. Does she really want to be with Wayne or is she just using him to get away from Frank Milo. Even right at the end, there's a hint that she is still just 'doing Wayne a favour'.

Bill Murray is the big surprise. He effectively balances the menace and humour of Milo. You feel his frustration in the life he leads , by the way he looks at his henchmen, the way he tries to befriend Wayne. It is a strong yet subtle performance and Murray proves he is far more than just a funny man.

David Caruso and Mike Starr are also excellent in their respective supporting roles.

Scenes to watch out for are a touching "bad sex" scene. How often do we see this, usually sex in the movies is either terrific for those involved or played for laughs but Mad Dog and Glory dares to be realistic. Also watch for Wayne singing along to the dukebox and the scene when Wayne refuses to give back Glory to Milo.

The film is always intellingent and never sinks to gimmicky resolutions. It's slow and low-key which may turn some people off. But if you like character driven movies then you'll love this. This film seems to get better every time I watch it. It's truly one of the hidden gems of 1993.

9/10

Most things in Mad Dog and Glory work. The film uses humour, a love story, cross casting and a scrape of suspense well and at various different intervals. What doesn't work are the overall frustrations that bog the film down. The premise is so simple, watching it might make you think you've seen it a hundred times before but that doesn't detract too much. De Niro plays a role that I hadn't seen him play before and must admit, I didn't think he had it in him following other such performances like Taxi Driver, Raging Bull and Ronin where he played various different roles with various different aims. Here he pulls off the nervous, shy photographer whom just goes about his business and although it takes some getting used to, it's a pleasant surprise.

He can be contrasted with Bill Murray's character of Frank Milo who is a criminal/mob boss that is saved by De Niro's character following a gun point robbery. What's clever about this fact is that Murray is playing the character De Niro normally plays and vice-versa. Throughout the film, the script is consistent. Mad Dog (De Niro) gets to confess some jokes to Milo since he also works as a stand up comic; something we're more familiar to Bill Murray doing, and the awkward exchanges between Mad Dog and Glory (Thurman) also evoke some emotions.

Uma Thurman is just about 'put-upable' in this film. Her character is right on that fine-line you get that separates 'likeable' and 'annoying' in a very distinct way. Once more, the overall treatment of the female characters also stands out in a rather obvious way. At the bars, it's all women who run around serving the men who sit there and enjoy themselves; the character of Glory, as I've said, has a dopey, annoying voice and is someone whom is to phone Milo on instructions. Glory isn't very smart either and when, nearer the end in a heated exchange between Mad Dog and Milo, Milo yells 'You love her? I OWN her!' it's really made to seem like the screenwriter has something against the female side of our species.

Although the film is pretty much consistent throughout in its subject matter with Mad Dog and Glory spending enough time with one another to begin to like each other, Frank Milo remaining a constant, background friend and foe alike; it falters towards the end when certain characters try to raise money and the ending is such a horrible, happy, un-realistic ending – it actually leaves a bad taste in the mouth when the feeling should be very different. Sure, I was happy for the characters involved but it was too generic. Reading up on it, I found that there were two endings meaning that even the makers were undecided.

Regarding Uma Thurman, this is a film of hers I feel I never would have seen had it not been for some dedicated searching and I was certainly very surprised when the sex scenes with De Niro came along since I'd always assumed she'd done Dangerous Liasons in 1988 and then nothing until 1994's Pulp Fiction which then, kick-started what was a series of successful, well known films. The reason for my surprise is that I never hear anyone mention this film as one of either Thurman's or De Niro's best. It's true that it's far from great but the sheer surprise at realising both had done this film in their careers is enough to realise and to respect the acting talent involved. From now on, when people speak of Uma Thurman or Robert De Niro, this is a film of their's I will bring up and probably recommend.

If you don't like movies that are adequately summarized in a 20 second spot, if you do like to see actors work against stereotypical expectations and do it well, if you don't believe people or endings are all good or all bad and you're OK with that, this might be a movie you will want to add to your collection. DeNiro is doing the expected only in that he is practicing his patented shape shifting technique -- I found his characterization both believable and involving. Murray gives his first great serious performance -- who knew he could be menacing? Uma is hard to figure, in the way conflicted people often really are. David Caruso gives the most out-there performance I have seen from him, and in this movie it works. (I didn't know him in his first TV cop series, but this character is nothing like the one he plays in CSI Miami.) You might even find yourself rethinking what really happened, and liking that, too.

I suppose the best thing about this movie is Robert De Niro and Bill Murray both playing against type, and doing so very well. Uma Thurman was good also, looking very pretty even when also looking a bit mousy. I have never been a fan of David Caruso, but once you get past the fact that it is David Caruso, you can't help but enjoy the way he played his part. Long time character actor Mike Starr was sufficiently menacing while also showing a bit of a goofy side. Some people complained about this film being placed in the comedy genre, and that seems legitimate, but it is a film rather hard to characterize. You might call it a character study. It had amusing and wry moments, but it is hardly a comedy. Anyway it is an OK film, worth a look.