Proximity

"Proximity" tells of a convict (Lowe) who thinks the prison staff is out to kill him. This very ordinary film is an action/drama with a weak plot; stereotypical, poorly developed characters; and a one dimensional performance by Lowe. A forgettable film not worthy of further commentary.

Proximity is the low-budget sister of The Fugitive, involving a man on the run from the law to see that justice is served, an endless marathon through back streets to avoid being seen, bad guys who always aim the gun at the good guy's feet - these are just a few of the sorry clichés Proximity uses to construct a story. The dialogue is a bad combination of three-line sentences and meaningless diatribes. We've seen and heard all this before, except this time an unknown director puts a moderately pleasing thumbprint on it.

Proximity challenges our notions of justice. William Conroy (Rob Lowe) certainly is OK. The former lawyer threw back a few too many drinks, grabbed the car keys, and his beautiful mistress was dead before the sun rose. Conroy walked away from the crash, but was sent to jail for six months, convicted of vehicular manslaughter. For whatever reason, he's in jail with the worst of them: murderers, drug dealers, career thugs. Conroy is no threat to commit another crime because he's the hero of a relatively well-constructed film that suffers from a nowhere script.

As far as questioning justice, Proximity shows that not all the bad guys are really that bad, while the ones who are supposed to be good can sometimes have an ugly side to them. This is true of the movie as well, as this bunch of clichés should have been bad. Those involved probably knew it too. Stil l, a relatively unknown director has at least deflected some of the flaws with commendable camera constraint and a good dose of always-dependable eye candy.

As the conclusion that this movie is a fair movie. As you know this out-of-Hollywood movie is an action, but an Ok action. I mean the action is actually a bit low. So more cool action might improve the score of this movie. So only if you're bored you might get lighted with this action.

I saw this alleged B-level movie on a sleepless night. Although these conditions hardly qualify to say that a movie caught your attention because it was so good, I must admit I found it very intriguing, not because of its quality, but because of half its quality. I'll explain.

The strange thing about this movie is that it appears to be made in two stages, clearly distinct in cinematography, script and acting. I'm not saying it was, but it would explain why these two parts are so different.

In the "background part", the mechanics of the Justice For Victims movement are displayed, with victims and relatives lamenting the abstracted judicial system which is too lenient on perpetrators and does not care about the victims' justice. The movement's chief sets up an alternative circuit, where perpetrators are killed or "sentenced to death" so to speak, paying the killers with money financed by the victims, while some of it sticks to the hands of the movement's chief and the corrupt prison manager. This whole idea of restoring the old "eye for an eye" has been crafted very well, with sublime acting by the victims in an almost documentary fashion, and the intense characterization of the chief, whose motives are revenge, money, power and some true sense of justice altogether. It installs a double bind with the viewer, who sympathizes with the victims but struggles with the morals of revenge outside law.

The "foreground part" however, starring Rob Lowe, is your way below average stupid "escape, run and get shot at" B-movie, with only a handful of villain guards and a mole inmate running and shooting about, complete with a romantic happy end, pulling the movie away from reality entirely.

I could not help but feel that this movie was initially based on a sublime script, when half way some box office oriented but lame producer entered the scene, replaced the story writers with cheap off-shore scenarists and added a bunch of stars to turn it into an easy going action movie. It must have gone like that. How else to explain the discrepancy between the two parts?

I missed the first half hour of this, while watching something else on cable. Nobody has yet reported on it, so here's what I can contribute. The film was certainly better than average for its genre, which is pretty top-heavy with trash. The story-line is definitely imaginative, escaping quite well from the same-old-same-old. It should come as no surprise to anyone that James Coburn did not become a better actor during his absence from the screen, but he was not badly cast in his role. In general, a watchable film. With 20-odd choices on my digital cable, anything I watch is at least in the 95th percentile, which makes it about *** out of five.

I'm sorry but who put this thing together? This is a very sad example of something. Um, could it be nepotism? I dunno. It's difficult to imagine anyone putting money behind a production of such low, stunningly inept calibur. I simply feel shocked that this film was made. "Proximity" is an incredibly empty attempt, in every filmic aspect. Very sad. Give me the money and stop wiping your bums with it, LOL! Was this written solely by the computer program Dramatica?