Mad Dog and Glory

A surprisingly strong script and solid acting performances saved what could have been a mediocre story involving cliché stock characters. As it turns out, the movie features a sensitive portrayal of a wanderlust cop, his wirey and scrappy colleague, an off-key loan shark, and a vulnerable girl. Each of the characters was subtly amusing and unique-- but not framed to be cartoonish. If the script had attempted to go in for more jokes, the movie would have suffered-- how many movies involve a disgruntled cop and a mob guy who sees a shrink? Too many... Many that often rely on overplayed cliché and slapstick to deliver. Or they go in for the melo-drama. Instead, the film just hopped along, taking the quirky story seriously, producing a film that is neither screamingly funny nor powerfully dramatic but instead small, light, and mildly interesting. Picture a just slightly-darker Mickey Blue Eyes, with a happier ending, a more interesting set of characters, and less humor.

Time and time again I try to see movie comedy try to transcend its material to create some sort of comic lunacy. They take all their characters and exagerate them to the point of being caricatures instead. MAD DOG & GLORY could very well have done that to Milo, Glory and Wayne. But instead of making a mockery out of their world for simple laughs and guffaws, director McNaughton plays the comedy at human level, in turn making this little gem something different. Every project John McNaughton takes on seems to be effectively low-keyed. He made HENRY one of the most frightening and violent films of the 90's by playing down the glorification of violence. He did it this time with the comedic material in MAD DOG & GLORY, making us laugh with its characters, and not at them. As for the acting? Impeccable.

Most things in Mad Dog and Glory work. The film uses humour, a love story, cross casting and a scrape of suspense well and at various different intervals. What doesn't work are the overall frustrations that bog the film down. The premise is so simple, watching it might make you think you've seen it a hundred times before but that doesn't detract too much. De Niro plays a role that I hadn't seen him play before and must admit, I didn't think he had it in him following other such performances like Taxi Driver, Raging Bull and Ronin where he played various different roles with various different aims. Here he pulls off the nervous, shy photographer whom just goes about his business and although it takes some getting used to, it's a pleasant surprise.

He can be contrasted with Bill Murray's character of Frank Milo who is a criminal/mob boss that is saved by De Niro's character following a gun point robbery. What's clever about this fact is that Murray is playing the character De Niro normally plays and vice-versa. Throughout the film, the script is consistent. Mad Dog (De Niro) gets to confess some jokes to Milo since he also works as a stand up comic; something we're more familiar to Bill Murray doing, and the awkward exchanges between Mad Dog and Glory (Thurman) also evoke some emotions.

Uma Thurman is just about 'put-upable' in this film. Her character is right on that fine-line you get that separates 'likeable' and 'annoying' in a very distinct way. Once more, the overall treatment of the female characters also stands out in a rather obvious way. At the bars, it's all women who run around serving the men who sit there and enjoy themselves; the character of Glory, as I've said, has a dopey, annoying voice and is someone whom is to phone Milo on instructions. Glory isn't very smart either and when, nearer the end in a heated exchange between Mad Dog and Milo, Milo yells 'You love her? I OWN her!' it's really made to seem like the screenwriter has something against the female side of our species.

Although the film is pretty much consistent throughout in its subject matter with Mad Dog and Glory spending enough time with one another to begin to like each other, Frank Milo remaining a constant, background friend and foe alike; it falters towards the end when certain characters try to raise money and the ending is such a horrible, happy, un-realistic ending – it actually leaves a bad taste in the mouth when the feeling should be very different. Sure, I was happy for the characters involved but it was too generic. Reading up on it, I found that there were two endings meaning that even the makers were undecided.

Regarding Uma Thurman, this is a film of hers I feel I never would have seen had it not been for some dedicated searching and I was certainly very surprised when the sex scenes with De Niro came along since I'd always assumed she'd done Dangerous Liasons in 1988 and then nothing until 1994's Pulp Fiction which then, kick-started what was a series of successful, well known films. The reason for my surprise is that I never hear anyone mention this film as one of either Thurman's or De Niro's best. It's true that it's far from great but the sheer surprise at realising both had done this film in their careers is enough to realise and to respect the acting talent involved. From now on, when people speak of Uma Thurman or Robert De Niro, this is a film of their's I will bring up and probably recommend.

I suppose the best thing about this movie is Robert De Niro and Bill Murray both playing against type, and doing so very well. Uma Thurman was good also, looking very pretty even when also looking a bit mousy. I have never been a fan of David Caruso, but once you get past the fact that it is David Caruso, you can't help but enjoy the way he played his part. Long time character actor Mike Starr was sufficiently menacing while also showing a bit of a goofy side. Some people complained about this film being placed in the comedy genre, and that seems legitimate, but it is a film rather hard to characterize. You might call it a character study. It had amusing and wry moments, but it is hardly a comedy. Anyway it is an OK film, worth a look.

...but why?

My first guess would be...Uma Thurman. She's one of the most beautiful and talented actresses, that gives a special touch to a romantic movies.

Second guess? Always good Robert DeNiro, nice romantic story and some laughable moments.

All in all, this is one of the movies, which won't make a big change in the history of cinematography, but because of a special love story and Uma, will always have a special place in my heart. That's why a

7 out of 10