L'impossible témoin

James Caan is Tom Hacklin Jr., a Buffalo factory worker whose divorced wife Ruthie has custody of their kids and is dating a Mafia thug Jack Scolese who goes into a witness protection program after getting busted for a poorly-executed bank robbery. When Ruthie and Scolese disappear into the program, they wind up taking Hacklin's kids with them and from there on out Hacklin has little recourse but to plead his case in court or pick up what little clues he can find in ascertaining his children's whereabouts.

Caan is quite good here as a respectful, hardworking ordinary guy who finds himself up against a combination of bureaucratic inertia and determined government stonewalling, not to mention the Mafia's menacing presence. In this emotionally charged struggle, he rarely loses his cool. The film's only major flaw is a pacing that occasionally feels too leisurely for a story about an aggrieved father trying to find his kids, although eventually it does pick up and become quite suspenseful. Recommended.

Now, I'm a big fan of car chases and big action, and I do love style for style's sake. But it's getting so it's hard to find anything but these things, even in a 'small' dramatic movie. This movie is quite genuine, it's got that 70's slower pace - a very natural build-up of the drama. James Caan's direction is clean and clever, and he plays that working class good man so well. The story is well handled, especially considering that it's based on true events, and without the overbearing score or dramatic character or situational embellishments that this film would have if it was made today. So refreshing.

One of the great unsung directing debut's from a versatile character actor with stat status. I remember the mid to late 70's cinema scene with fondness and the prospect of James Caan directing as well as starring in a character-driven piece was like manna from heaven to me. Living in the UK I never got to see this release in the cinema (despite excellent coverage in UK's Films and Filming magazine), but I caught up on it during the 80's video revolution (in an un-hired ex-rental video). Unfortunately the video was panned and scanned to 4:3 thus diminishing the composition and I had to wait until the late 90's to catch this excellent drama on TCM where it was regularly screened in it's correct aspect ratio. Since purchasing a DVD recorder last year this title has not popped up on UKTV so I wait with baited breath for the return of "Hide In Plain Sight" to the TV screens.....hey! maybe someone will lobby for a DVD release because you've got to admit it's far superior the 95% of the dross that gets released every week of the year!

This film DID get a theatrical release, but it quickly disappeared. It's unfortunate, because it's very thoughtful film. As a director, Caan made some interesting choices.

As a side note, I saw Caan discussing it in an interview a long time ago. He said the studio had no faith in the film, so they dumped it without much advertisement. And then they were shocked when it received great reviews. But by then, it was already dead. He also mentioned that the pan & scan version that was on TV changed a lot of wide-screen two shots into separate shots! I'm not sure if the same thing happened with the VHS, but I'll bet it did. Hopefully, a proper version will come out on DVD one of these days.

I thought the naturalism of the settings worked well for Caan. It's got that gritty 70's look. It's also interesting to see a film shot in Buffalo, NY during that period. The extras are good and some of the hairstyles and fashions are hysterical. I thought Caan did a good job considering this was the first and last movie he shot. Jill Eikenberry's acting is very natural. The climax is not exploitative and thus is believable. Not played very much on cable although the topic is timely, I forget which station I caught it on fairly recently. The character is played well by Caan and I identified with the working class element. I was also wondering why Hollywood never gave James Caan another directing job, was it because this fared poorly at the box office?