The Big Empty

This is a movie that tries to be cliched. That's a little weird because most if not all movies try to be different. A lot don't get to be, but they try, and would certainly like to be. Not this one. Why would a movie want to be just like the same thing we've seen a hundred times before? To prove that it can be done better. Nicer shots, cooler characters, better scenery, and a stranger mystery. The Big Empty succeeds on some of these grounds. The shots are terrific and so is the scenery. But the rest of it is bizarre. The main character is a tiresome, beat up kind of guy and yet he's young. He never smiles and probably doesn't know the meaning of fun. The case he gets involved in starts out just like the classic cases of movies like Chinatown and then gets really weird. I think the point of this movie was to take classic formulas and see if they could vary them to such a degree that we would never expect it. The detective is usually a cool, tough talking, never smiling, experienced guy. Here he's tough talking and never smiling, but he is far from cool and completely inexperienced. So it's sort of a spoof on detective stories. A black comedy. On the grounds that it is creative it works. But the story is certainly not that good and overall it is just okay.

I feel I learned something from this movie. It is a unique, evocative investigation of intimacy, throwing light on the dark side of human nature. MacManus and Goldwasser conjure up compelling original characters, but the relationship they bring to life is the haunting portrait one is left with.

The fixed and penetrating gaze of the posturing-while-frequently-motionless Mr. McManus was too too much much. I kept watching because I really wanted to find out what happened to Pablo Bryant's character, about whom I cared tremendously, but not enough to rank the movie as better than awful. I will look for Mr. Bryant's work elsewhere.

This movie needs some editing. Otherwise it is a quirky, funny-sad look at the downside of life. From the outset, there is worse than gum on the bottom of Lloyd Meadows' shoes, and he is destined to step in more of it before the end of the movie. All of the philosophizing is to be taken with a grain of salt. H. M. Wynant, as a crusty old private eye, puts it best: They are head cases. The audience is definitely meant to overlook reality. For example, in California, where the story is set, you can't just go out and hang a shingle and call yourself a private eye. It's almost that easy in some states, but not there. The movie is really about--and is at its best when--looking at the whacky ideas of the characters. That said, everyone who is honest will admit that these characters suffer from anxieties which are only exaggerations of ones we have seen or experienced. Lloyd is too cynical, Peter and Jane are too open-hearted. They change positions to greater or lesser extent as they confront each other. Jim Perez is a good director, and this low budget movie is very professionally photographed. The acting is adequate, though writer/actor James McManus may have given himself too much to chew. In that regard, McManus is in good company. Citizen Kane kicked his furniture around too much, too.

This movie is totally brilliant. Every aspect of a classic film noir is in it, humor, drama, strong characters. This movie makes you think, about yourself, about life and loneliness. If you are not open (like me the first time I watched this) you won't like this movie. If you want to see action, you won't like this movie. Although this is a low budget movie the acting is brilliant and the camera work is very refreshing, especially the car scenes!. This little gem needs a lot of attention but will give you the real film noir feeling!. But of course only when you are looking for the film noir feeling. This is a movie for fans of the genre, they will understand what this movie wants to tell and why this movie is refreshing and uses the film-noir formula in a whole different way!.

9 out of 10