The Flock

So there you are, in a car, driving after a guy who is running down a back-street and who has just been doing nasty things to a girl who was tied up by her wrists to a wall. You really, really, want to catch this guy 'cause he's a mean bugger. So you're driving and he's running, and as you get close to him he has the cheek to pick up a rubbish bin - you know, one of the small metal "trash cans' that you see in every back-street.

So when this desperado throws the trash can at your car, what do you do?

I'll tell you what I would do. I'd keep going straight and run the bugger down! But what does Richard Gere do? He's turns sharp left and crashes into a pile of rubbish, gets out of his car and lets the guy get away.

Who the hell wrote that piece of this pathetic script? Too unbelievable. I guess that's why I've never heard of this film.

Please try to choose better scripts, Mr Gere. You're a great actor - you just need to be more picky.

The Flock was nothing too original, but a movie doesn't have to be original in order for it to be good. For its few, if any, forgivable flaws as a by-the-books detective/Seven thriller, the Flock as a whole is still a taut, brooding, gritty, intense and fun little popcorn flick. Like I said, the material isn't exactly fresh but it is still far from stale and Richard Gere, who act as though he were a man possessed, elevates the script and the film that much higher in terms of overall quality. This is not bargain basement entertainment, nor did it deserve to go straight-to-video in the US, especially given the talent involved both in front of and behind the camera. The list includes: Richard Gere (in his prime), Claire Danes, Andrew Lau (director of Infernal Affairs), and of course, the Weinstein Company (who need no introduction seeing as they are Hollywood.)Despite the lack of hype, the Flock deserves recognition for its solidity, or at least a watch. trust me, its a hell of a lot more thoughtful and entertaining than 99% of the garbage that continues to get released on a daily basis.

It does not seem that this movie managed to please a lot of people. First off, not many seem to have seen it in the first place (I just bumped into it by accident), and then judging by the reviews and the rating, of those that did many did not enjoy it very much.

Well, I did. I usually tolerate Gere for his looks and his charm, and even though I did not consider him a great actor, I know he can do crazy pretty well (I liked his Mr Jones). But this performance is all different. He is not pretty in this one, and he is not charming. His character is completely different from anything I had seen from him up to that point---old, ugly, broken, determined. And Gere, in what to me is so far his best performance ever, pulls it off beautifully. I guess it is a sign of how well an actor does his job if you cannot imagine anyone else doing it instead---think Hopkins as Hannibal Lecter, or Washington as Alonzo in Training Day. That is how good Gere was here.

The rest of the cast were fine by me, too. I guess I would not have cast Danes in this role, mostly because I think she is too good-looking for it. But she actually does an excellent job, holding her own with a Gere in top form, which is no small feat. Strickland easily delivers the best supporting act, in a part that requires a considerable range from her. I actually think she owns the key scene with Gere and Danes, and that is quite an achievement.

So what about the rest of the movie, apart from some excellent acting? The story is perhaps not hugely surprising, some 8mm-ish aspects to it, but adding the "veteran breaks in rookie" storyline to the who-dunnit, and also (like Silence of the Lambs) adding a sense of urgency through trying to save the girl and the impending retirement of Gere's character. All that is a backdrop to the development of the two main characters, as they help each other settle into their respective new stations in life. That's a lot to accomplish in a 100 minutes, but it is done well, and we end up caring for the characters and what happens to them.

Direction and photography were adequate. I could have done without the modern music-video camera movements and cutting, but then I am an old curmudgeon, and it really wasn't all that bad, in fact I think it did help with the atmosphere of the movie, which as you might have guessed, by and large isn't a happy one.

Worth seeing.

I have just seen this movie. It just opened today (November 9th 2007) in Spain. Let me say that I understand the bad word of mouth the movie is having, it deals with a difficult subject (sexual abusers) and its tone is as dark as say "9 MM", if not darker.

But all things considered it's a pretty good film. The investigation angle makes for a very tense thriller, but where the film really shines is in the depiction of Richard Gere's characters, as well as the villain's, which I won't reveal.

Gere is really all stops go here, it's easily his most intense role since "Internal Affairs". Even if you are not Gere fans, you're gonna love him in this.

On the minus side, I didn't like the way the film is edited. It's full of flashes, freeze frames and all those "arty" stuff they cram into your TV series and direct-to-DVD movies. I understand they wanted to give the movie a hard edge, but it's often too distracting. The film is already dark and gritty enough as it is, and this bells and whistles don't add a damn thing.

And then there's Claire Danes. look, she's an OK actress, but she was like a fish out of water here. They give her character some interesting background, but she's constantly out off key. She looks like a raving lunatic when she tries to act quirky or vulnerable, and not very convincing when the script calls for her character to toughen up a little.

So, it's an interesting movie if you can go beyond the surface of its visual trickery, but not as good as it could be. I would say it earns a 6'5 - 7 in my scale.

The films starts of good: the premise is intriguing and there are some scenes that get you dragged into the movie. As the movie progresses, the script starts making less and less sense and the last twenty minutes felt incredibly rushed and out of tone.

The direction wasn't good at all. What bothered me for instance was the camera-work. Too many different styles are mixed and it all ends up looking incredibly sloppy instead of the intended 'modern/flashy' effect. The music should have been better too. There were numerous examples of scenes that should have been silent that had music playing in the background and vice versa. Also, the music played was not of the highest quality.

The film is somewhat engaging, it deals with a sensitive subject and tries to deal with it in an honest yet confronting matter. At least, in the beginning. In the 2nd part of the movie there's little left of the objectivity in the script. I won't name any concrete examples because I don't want to spoil it for anyone but I'm sure you'll know what I'm talking about if you ever see it.

The acting was all right in my opinion. Not top notch but not horrible either. Gere is average like always and Danes doesn't really leave big impression either. The supporting cast should've been better, the example of Miss Avril Lavigne immediately comes to mind. She manages to ruin the only scene she has.

Many people will compare this movie to 8mm, because of the similar harsh theme but they have little in common. 8mm is a lot more powerful,darker and shows more guts(not literally). It's easily the better film. There are some shocking scenes in 'The Flock', one of which resembles a scene in 8mm a lot but this time they lacked the nerve to go all the way.

To summarize, is this movie bad? No, but it won't blow you away. The ideas are interesting but after a while the script feels uninspired and formulaic. The acting is mediocre and the score is bad. It's not really worth seeing but it'll briefly entertain you.

5.4/10