Crackers

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.

"Crackers" has to be one of the coolest and unusual films on Louis Malle extensive career, which goes from "Elevator to the Gallows" to "Vanya on 42th Street" with masterpieces such as "Goodbye Children" and "Atlantic City". Here, he tells the story of a group of misfits who work or spend some time to score some money on a pawnshop led by greedy Garvey (Jack Warden). They are poor and desperatly broke trying to do weird jobs or just going from scheme to scheme until the wisest of them all Weslake (Donald Sutherland) invites to break into the safety vault from the place when Garvey's out visiting his mom. They are played by Sean Penn, Larry Riley, Trinidad Silva and Wallace Shawn and they all play in a cool fashion as this bunch of low-life characters who might finally find their place in the sun with lots of money or whatever is in the safe.

Some people see the movie as a social commentary on America's economical situation with this group of odd men trying to make it big with the score of the century, where the poor take advantage of the wealthy one. I don't go that far because the movie plays it simple and safe as an adventure comedy, without making any political statements. It's just humor of the best quality. Those guys have limited imagination, pros and cons but somehow they make it like regular joes of whom we feel empathy and we like them in the way they are. Wheter Sutherland plays the smart lead, Penn plays the charming dude who wants to date Ramon's sister; and Shawn doesn't talk much but only keeps thinking on how to score some free food, they're all interesting and cool to see how they conduct things until the highly expected robbery (which is hilarious, when they met several challenges on the way.

I loved their routines, the movie takes its time to develop and we have the opportunity to get to know all of them and other characters as well (like the police officer Maxine, funny role for Christine Baranski), to live with them in that small town where they keep bumping on each other in several ways. "Crackers" has a fine sense of humor and goes as a near perfect comedy, a terrain Mr. Malle hardly ever explored. It was a different experience for him, who at first thought he was the wrong man for the job but in the end he came to enjoy the experience. It's an enjoyable movie and one that entertains a lot, undeserving of its low ratings and low audience viewers. Criminally underrated.

And it's another case of a movie that is so good, with many great characters that I could imagine it as being a TV series. I'd certainly watch that. 9/10.

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.

While most sane adults will find this movie pointless and without any merits,I still would like to point out a great deal of movies released to this day are far more repugnant...This movie features Sean Penn in his pre-Madonna youth,and Sutherland in his prime.OK,I admit that as a 10 year old boy,I fondly recall watching this movie over and over and over again on HBO....I suppose dozens of screenings,along with a nostalgia for one's childhood memories can make even Ishtar great..Nevertheless,the final 30 minutes are quite entertaining,with a pretty good ending.The love stories can drag out in this type of movie,and do.