Influences

With 'People I Know' Dan Algrant tells a story of how the rich and powerful can get away with anything and everything. In the film, it is an actress, Jill (Tea Leoni) and a PR (Al Pacino) who fall victim as they threaten to expose the shady potentially scandalous secrets of the rich elites. Algrant's portrayal is very one-sided because he shows all the wealthy characters as big bad wolves and the lesser fortunate people in a more humane light. Examples include the scene where Tea's face lightens up as she thinks of a house in the country, and the sequences between Pacino and Basinger where we see a vulnerable side of Eli. It is the performances that stand out. Al Pacino displays a very intense performance, of a vulnerable and relatively weak character. It is entirely different from the kind of roles he has played earlier and one of his best parts. Kim Basinger lightens the screen as the supportive and loving Vicci. I liked how Algrant demonstrates the special relationship between Eli and Vicci. Their scenes together were some of the best moments of the movie. Tea Leoni is superb despite having a small role. Ryan O'Neal and Richard Schiff are adequate. 'People I Know' is a small film and the ending perhaps may not appeal to many but I thought it was an interesting, even though somewhat partial, take on how power corrupts and destroys.

Furthermore has "People I know" nothing to offer. The writing was very messy and the characters aren't very well written as well. The movie is a mess and a huge disappointment. There are some other famous names relied to this movie, except from Pacino. Kim Basinger and Ryan O'Neal (the guy we now from "Love Story") are also starring this movie, as well as Téa Leoni.

What the director was trying to say wasn't bad, the point he wanted to make was good, but the way he has done it wasn't good at all. I don't see why Al Pacino has chosen to play this role, but as a true Pacino fan, I think this was the worst movie I've ever seen him in.

Not exactly worth watching.

5/10

Jon Robin Baitz, the writer of this film, needs to check his facts a little more carefully. The story, as I perceived it, takes place in today's New York with today's personalities of the moment.

At one point of the film when Eli Wurman, played by Al Pacino, is talking to his widowed sister-in-law, Victoria Gray, and he asks her if she remembers when they had marched in Selma? Helloooo Mr. Baitz, how old is Victoria supposed to be? I made her out to be in her early 40s. Now, wouldn't that have been a miracle? The only way she would have been around Selma at the time of the march on that city would have been in the womb of her mother, if that was so! Well, then again, I could be wrong, she really is in her late 60s!

This film tries to do too many things; it goes in all directions without making sense, most of the time. The idea of presenting the Eli Wurman of Pacino, who was obviously gay, playing against a straight woman is laughable. Even more ridiculous when the one making the passes is a beautiful woman like Ms. Bassinger, in wild contrast with this washed out person.

Mr. Pacino might be a great actor. He has given us many interesting and diverse characters that will be cherished by all his fans, but lately, he has appeared in a series of duds that one wonders who is the person behind his decisions, since many of his choices haven't added any substance to his body of work.

This Eli Wurman, being compared to the Burt Lancaster's character in Sweet Smell of Success by many critics, kept reminding me of the Clifton Webb's tragic role in The Razor's Edge. This Eli has seen better days and no one cares about him at all.

The subplot having to do with the cause Eli is working to promote racial justice to people being deported, sounds empty and not true. It shows a side to this character that deep down inside all he cared for in his life was being at the right places, surrounded by the same celebrities he stooped to serve.

How about the other aspect of the film about the rich, possible would-be-sponsors of the cause, as libertines and swingers in an opium den on a Wall Street club? Is that supposed to be a metaphor? Oh well, I guess some of us, so out of touch with the powerful people of New York, will never know what we are really missing in those "fun" places.

I'd never heard of this 2002 film until Ebert and Roper reviewed a few weeks ago and I was pleasantly suprised since I don't think Al Pacino has been doing his best work lately. In this film, he's right on target and the film is pretty fascinating. He looks haggard, overworked, and struggling with all kinds of things. Even Ryan O'Neal is believable for a change (of course, the character he plays fits him to a tee).

I don't know if this one went straight to video or what, but search it out (especially Pacino fans). A definite 7 out of 10. Tea Leoni is sharp as a tack playing a flake. The entire supporting cast blends in nicely and this resembles a David Mamet script.

Pacino is extraordinary. The much-lamented accent is sorta a bisexual/Georgian/"Noo Yawk" ... it represents a complex mixture of dialect for a complex character perfectly portrayed by Pacino - balls and all. His work seems to become increasingly esoteric over the years, and outside of his character, the storyline is uneven and downright wretched in some parts.

But Pacino redeems even the drek and delivers a landmark performance that one wouldn't expect as he nears closer to being able to collect Social Security. Gutsy, bold, and brilliant. The script and direction needed quite a bit of work- but Pacino's performance is compelling enough to wonder exactly what he will do next. A must-see for Pacino fans.