Bad Turn Worse

"We gotta get out of this place" ... that's the title I saw this movie with at a Festival. It's a nice little thriller, where the inciting incident can be smelled a mile away (at least). If you can get over that bump, you are in for a nice little ride. It has a few nice twists and turns along the way.

The acting is good enough and the movie has a nice pace. Are there flaws/clichés along the way? Yes there are, but like with the initial bump, they can be overlooked to a certain extent. Relationships are almost drawn and are heading to an obvious (from the start) direction. But if it's done right ... like here, you can forgive the movie. If you do, is up to you

Now, this is disappointing only because it seemed like it was going to go in more interesting places. The first act is definitely stronger than what follows. Everything before it turned into this crime thriller really, really worked. Its pacing was really well balanced and it seemed like, I don't know, I would be more original? Everything after the money really was just another run-of-the-mill crime story. The acting is fine, Pellegrino is a lot of fun, but really, less and less interesting as it went on. The climax is all kinds of predictable, hokey, cheesy, clichéd, overdone... you name it. Despite the contrivances, I still liked it. The pacing is really well done and it has some nice moods.

Three Texas teens hope to make a break for it and escape their dead-end existence in a cotton-mill town but get sucked into the seedy underbelly of organized crime when one of them steals from the wrong man.

The general plot of this is pretty good, and fans of crime or heist movies will probably dig it. There is a really cool scene with the heist run-through that really makes the film for me, and if nothing else, solidified this as a better-than-average movie.

What are we to make of the "32 ways to tell a story" theme? Is that a hint of how we should interpret this plot? It seems like yes, but exactly what we are to take away from it remains unclear. Perhaps a second viewing is in order?

This film is an example of that very specific sub-genre, the Texas neo-noir. That American state seems to have all the right ingredients for modern noir, with its sun-baked, dusty, dead-end towns, restless people in them trying to get out of them and places seemingly so remote that the law is run by its own set of rules. We Gotta Get Out of This Place is certainly a movie that exists in the twilight world of this sub-genre. Its story revolves around three young people caught up in a situation. Bobby and Sue plan to leave for good to go to college, while B.J. chooses the faster route of crime. He steals money from a local thug and all three of them pay the price for his actions. They are coerced into stealing money from an even bigger gangster putting themselves in grave danger in the process.

This product of the American indie scene is typified by a fine script. It's helped even further by being acted out by a talented cast of actors. A couple have some pedigree but the three kids are all impressive newcomers. The name actors are Mark Pellegrino, whom I remember from being the bungling hit-man from Mulholland Drive (2001), in this picture he's still a violent criminal but a good deal more threatening; we also have veteran William Devane, star of several 70's classics like Marathon Man (1976), who here has no more than a cameo role. But its arguably the three younger actors who make the most impact, namely Mackenzie Davis as Sue, Logan Huffman as the reckless B.J. and finally the young Chris Penn lookalike Jeremy Allen White as the dim-witted but good natured Bobby. The strengths of this film lie predominantly with the dialogue and performances, both of which are impressive. The cinematography is often fine too with some dusky shots of wind turbine landscapes being particularly standout, while the moody score put me in mind of the one used in Blood Simple (1984) and any comparison to that masterpiece of the Texas neo-noir sub-genre is of course a very good thing. The story itself is maybe a little over-familiar for those who have seen their share of neo-noirs and it doesn't necessarily pan out into anything too unexpected by the end. Still, that doesn't change the fact that this is still well worth your time and is a quality product overall.

I seldom write reviews - especially about forgettable films, but I can't understand why every prior review for this film is either so adulating or lambasting. I thought the film wasn't that bad, but it's not all that great either.

It's not a nonstop adventure like "30 Minutes or Less." Its pacing is more like that of "Near Dark" or "A Simple Plan." And the pacing very fits well with the story and its setting.

The script was pretty well-thought out and well-written, if not exactly moving or memorable. The direction and cinematography were excellent. They used the flat, bland, decaying Texas coastal plains marvelously - kind of like John Ford used to use the American west. When the film is over, you may forget the characters, but you'll remember the scenery.

Mark Pellegrino has fun with his role as a charming and self-wise sociopath. William Devane makes the most of his minute on camera.

Mackenzie Davis affects more of a middle Tennessee accent than a south Texas accent but at least she tried. Logan Huffman sounds just like Bruno Kirby and somebody apparently thought he would be more believable as a Texan if he simply called everybody "Hoss" or "Podner." I doubt that annoys anybody outside of Texas (I see most of this movies rave reviews came from Canada, Scotland and Ireland) but sure annoys the hell out of people who know better.

But my biggest complaint, however, is that I haven't heard so many racial insults since "Django." Again, maybe this is the stereotypical Texas that people elsewhere want to imagine, but people in south Texas haven't spoken like that since the '40s or '50s. There's so much intermingling of ethnicities in that area that to think or speak like that would offend the overwhelming majority of ones' family and friends.

Now granted, fictional stories deserve a wide latitude for artistic license, and people involved in nefarious activities can be offensive and without conscience. But so much of the characterization was simply cartoonish and ultimately I think that undermined the film.