Bad Turn Worse

B.J. (Logan Huffman), his book-loving girlfriend Sue (Mackenzie Davis) and best friend Bobby (Jeremy Allen White) live in a small Texas town. Sue and Bobby are looking to leave for college. B.J. is acting up. He's jealous of them leaving and angry at their unspoken sexual chemistry. He had stolen money from their local criminal boss Giff (Mark Pellegrino). Giff starts beating on the Mexican guard and Bobby falsely confesses to the theft. Giff kills the guard anyways. Bobby is shocked that it turns out to be $20k from Big Red (William Devane) and Giff wants Bobby to repay it. Giff tells them to rob Big Red.

I like the young threesome. I'm a big fan of Jeremy Allen White in Shameless. Mackenzie Davis has a powerful energy about her. Logan Huffman grows on me with his creepiness. I do wonder why either of them likes B.J. but that's not out of the question in a small town. My first problem is Bobby's false confession. Bobby is not an idiot. He knows it's at a minimum $2000 and he couldn't pay that back himself. At first, I thought he was related to Giff and therefore not afraid of being killed by him. It simply doesn't make any sense other than the need to advance the plot. It could have been done in a different way. The Mexican could have falsely fingered Bobby before being killed. B.J. could have double-crossed Bobby. I don't buy Bobby volunteering to take the fall. I still like the threesome and I love the pulpy hard-boiled noirish style but it's hard for me to overcome the misstep.

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.

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.

The film opens with a quick and easy robbery. Then come the bright-yellow seventies-style credits. However do not be fooled, whilst film-quality may also suggest a seventies setting, the only other similarity with that era, is a brooding foreboding and grim realism.

The film is set in modern-day Texas. Earlier scenes are light but as the film progresses grimmer and grittier adult scenes make this uncomfortable viewing that goes right up to the edge. This is not a film for the faint-hearted.

The story revolves around three young adults who are caught up in the aftermath of the robbery. They become involved in the criminal underworld and the situation soon escalates.

This film is a modern film-noir so as is typical for the genre there are lots of twists and betrayals. Some plot twists are shown to us the audience before they are experienced by the characters, thus giving suspense, others are not.

Mark Pellegrino has a meaty role, rather like that of James Franco in 'Homefront' (2013) or even 'Tommy' in 'Goodfellas' (1990). The younger Logan Huffman plays a character like 'Tommy' in 'The Butterfly Effect' (2004). Both convince in their roles. Mr Pellegrino's character is cold, even while he pretends to be friendly and playful. Mr Huffman's character by contrast is a brooding presence. His mental machinations and robust physique make him intimidating and scarily unpredictable.

Mackenzie Davis and Jeremy Allen White play two college-student-types who get caught up in the mayhem. The two young thespians act their socks off as they struggle in the situations their characters are plunged into.

There is also good support from Jon Gries. Veteran actor William Devane, in a cameo, got it just right, and shows, as he did in 'Marathon Man' (1976), that a small role can be played to make an effective and lasting impression.

The film was directed by Simon and Zeke Hawkins. They captured great scenes of the flat Texas landscape as well as taking scary and tense scenes to the very limit of the audience's endurance. They should be rightly proud of this full-length film. Hopefully, we will see many more films from this talented pair in the future.

If you liked the 2012 films 'Mud' and 'Everybody Has a Plan', or the 2013 films 'Cold Comes the Night', 'The Counsellor', 'Love Is the Perfect Crime' or 'Homefront', then this similarly dark film-noir will appeal to you.

A grim and gritty 9/10 but a strong stomach is needed.