Killing Them Softly

Watching Killing Them Softly put me in mind of the great crime caper film of the Seventies, Charley Varrick. That's the one where Walter Matthau and some accomplices pull off a bank heist in a small out of the way bank in an obscure New Mexico town. Only the bank is a place where syndicate money is held and laundered. Joe Don Baker is the hit-man sent after them and he loves his work. Fortunately at least for Walter Matthau he's smart enough to outwit Baker. Killing Them Softly has no Matthau among the targets as the tale is told from hit-man's point of view.

The hit-man or at least one of them is Brad Pitt and he gets no pleasure in his work, it's a business like any other. He wants to be well compensated for his services. In fact he wants to Kill Them Softly which to him means taking them out with a rifle with scope because he doesn't want to hear their pleadings. Or by surprise in one case where everyone knows its coming, but the victim.

Two real criminal losers Ben Mendelsohn and Scoot McNairy are hired by Vincent Curatola to rob an illegal gambling establishment run by Ray Liotta. With Liotta you can see a bit of his Henry Hill from Goodfellas, with Hill running just this kind of place as he headed into middle age in the mob.

The reason for this target is that several years earlier Liotta ripped his own card game off, but eventually was forgiven when the gambling started booming again. Curatola is sure the mob will look right at Liotta again. Not that they don't look at Liotta again, but they're smarter than that. They always are.

Once the caper goes down in comes Pitt, but also with a few competitors, James Gandolfini being one. That's where Pitt starts negotiating his deal.

Brad Pitt gives a good performance here, but for me the real stars are McNairy and Mendelsohn. You will rarely losers with a capital "L" portrayed on the screen as they are with these two. In a way they ought to be put out of their misery for their own good. Still you feel sorry for them somewhat.

Interesting mob movie with some deep black comic overtones.

The idea of film being used as a medium for political themes and socio-economic commentary is nothing new, even recently with films such as Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps and Margin Call aiming to tackle the 2008 financial crisis. But few films have been as unsubtle as Killing Them Softly. Set to the backdrop of the 2008 election, the criminal underworld of an American city has been hit by its own financial crisis after a mob poker game is robbed by two criminals (Scoot McNairy and Ben Mendelsohn). With no trades or money being moved, a mob manager (Richard Jenkins) brings in a fixer, Jackie Cogan (Brad Pitt), to solve the situation. But none of his actions brings back confidence, whether right or wrong. Writer/director Andrew Dominik admirably uses a gangster story as a metaphor for the financial crisis, but the handling was atrocious. Dominik has no faith in his audience to draw these connections, and even worse, come away with its own conclusions; he opts to spoon-feed us the cliff notes as we watch. This is most evident with the constant use of speeches by George W. Bush and Barack Obama made at time, enforcing the parallels Dominik wanted to make. There are constant references to terminology used at the time, particularly the theme of bringing back confidence to the world, the theme that public perspective is more important than actual actions and we are reminded that the gangster world's situation is the same as the financial world's one. This forceful approach does not allow us to see a natural story. Killing Them Softly is a very dialogue-driven film that breaks the old cinematic maxim of "show, don't tell." We are told that the mob has turned corporate and that there is a crisis, but we do not get to see it. It would have been more interesting to see mob bosses arguing and coming up with theories and seeing that gangsters were unwilling to make any deals in the midst of the crisis. Killing Them Softly ends up rather dull as a result. There are some moments that show what Dominik is capable of: the robbery scene was filled with tension and things felt like they would actually kick off. Whenever violence was used in general, it was incredibly grim and brutal. There is a highly stylised moment when Cogan commits his first assassination, completely played out in slow motion — a brilliant little sequence. The film hits hardest in these scenes. The big saving grace of Killing Them Softly is the acting. There is a great cast with Pitt, Jenkins and James Gandolfini being the biggest draws. They were committed actors doing the best they could, elevating the dry material provided with excellent delivery and chemistry. Pitt and McNairy played the most likable (and I use that term loosely) characters, and were the most well-drawn and conflicted characters in the film. McNairy was the most human, reacting naturally to his situation, and Pitt is able to be cold-hearted and professional when he acts upon his deadly task. Killing Them Softly is a film that feels its political parallels are enough of a mask for it to be seen as an intelligential masterpiece, but it feels too demeaning to have everything spelled out like that, which was made worse given the story played second fiddle to these political parallels. There was potential for a great film if there was a good re-write, but it ends up being one of biggest disappointments of 2012.

Killing Them Softly (2012)

** 1/2 (out of 4)

Three idiot, wannabe thieves rob a mob run cards game and make off with a ton of cash. Then Jackie (Brad Pitt), a hit-man, is called in to figure out who was behind the robbery and to take care of them. KILLING THEM SOFTLY is being called by many a masterpiece and by many others as one of the worst films of the year. I think most people are really going to hate this film because it's just so different from other stuff out there but I'm going to fall somewhere in the middle of the two groups. While I enjoyed the style and the performances, at the same time the film just takes way too long to really get to where it's going and there are some other questionable things that I'll comment on in a bit. What I did like about the picture is that it's pretty brutal and ugly in regards to its violence and characters. The film really doesn't show any of the characters in a good light as the "good" guys are bad and the bad guys are really bad. There's never an attempt to make you connect with these people or enjoy what they're doing. The film also benefits from some wonderful characters actors. Pitt, James Gandolfini, Richard Jenkins, Scoot McNairy, Ben Mendlesohn and Ray Liotta all fit their roles nicely and deliver very good performances. This is especially true of Gandolfini and Liotta. The problem with the picture is that it just has way too many moments where things seem to really get dragged out. Another major problem is that the film tries to be too much like Tarantino. The scenes early one with the two thieves talking dirty about a wide variety of objects is just going to remind people of PULP FICTION. The dialogue here offers up some funny stories but it's not good enough to really grab one and bring them into the picture. KILLING THEM SOFTLY certainly has a unique look and feel to it but in the end it adds up to very little. The Bush-Obama bits of dialogue thrown in throughout the movie also add up to a big nothing, although I'm guessing the point was that even low-life criminals have bit hurt by the economy.

This is a film that looks outstanding. It has that feel of the best seventies cinema. The acting similarly is outstanding but still, a few things stop it from being the stone cold classic it could have been.

The cracks started to show when Cogan(Pitt) has his first talk with Mickey(Gandolfini). It's the latest in a long series of head to heads that play out more like acting master-classes than anything relating to the film. That scene effectively breaks the spell and reminds us that we are watching "good quality acting" combined with "a good script".

The film seems to go off the rails after this. Any charm or involvement is soon stopped by another showy scene from the director who seems more concerned with showing off his film making skills than actually making a good film.

The final thing that jars is Brad Pitt. He had the same effect on Fight Club. Pitt is too big a star for a film like this. He simply doesn't convince as the cynical cold blooded killer. Why would such a man spend that much time on his physical appearance for instance?. A more earthy, hard boiled actor could have made the character believable.

Not a bad film but overbearingly condescending at the finale (which I won't spoil here). The film that went before doesn't earn that pay off and its impact isn't felt on the screen. Which makes the end deeply unsatisfying.

Shame really as with more editing and less egos involved, this could have been so much better.

With all the dragging on of some scenes, the constant soundbytes of the 2008 presidential campaign, the abrupt ending, a lot of pointless dialogue, I'm just not sure of what to think of this movie.

There are two separate scenes where James Gandolfini's character is just dragging on and on and on about his ex-wife for what felt like 20-30 minutes. You think he might finally shut up about it but he keeps on talking about it. There are a few other scenes with dialogue don't move the plot forward or contribute to it. And sometimes the dialogue itself is just plain dumb.

I see other reviewers talking about how violent this movie is. I assure you that the claims about this movie being brutal or very violent are way overexaggerated. I think movies like Casino and Goodfellas are more violent than this. This must be their first time watching an R rated film.

There was so much potential with this movie had there been a different script writer and director, but it is what it is. Since I can't decide on any rating I'll just give it a 6. Watch it by yourself because watching it with someone else will ruin any good mood.