1992

1992

I wasn't sure what to expect when I sat down to watch a movie set during the LA riots after the ridiculous non guilty verdict delivered to the cops who beat Rodney King on camera. 1992's main character is a man who had been out of prison for 6 months for an undisclosed crime, but related to gang violence. He has a 16 year old son that lives with him due to the deaths of the kid's mother and grandmother.

The twist here is that a group of criminals use the riots as a distraction for their heist of platinum from a plant. For 1992 it's a pretty advanced plot to break into the safe while only one security guard remains. As Ray Liotta's final film before his death, he plays the head of the heist, even though his 2 sons, and one of their war buddies did all the work.

I was glad to see that most of the first half of the movie deals with watching what the riots were doing in the neighborhood. Mercer, no stranger to violence, works to get his son to the same plant being robbed, for safety. The film does elicit the anger that the country felt to see such a miscarriage of justice.

The rest of the film is very Die Hard as Mercer fights against the thieves, as he watches in horror as his son is used as a hostage. It's fun to see Mercer take them out, and then it's fun to see the twist when one of the thieves realizes that the heist was going to far.

The one Black man in their crew is the first casualty when a forklift causes the amputation of his legs. The irony is not lost not he audience that during the riots, he is hurt by the remaining white crew, though unintentionally.

It's not a fantastic movie, though Tyrese Gibson (Mercer) does a fantastic job playing a scared father that has an ability, he is not proud of, to defend his family. He also is subject to the humiliation of suffering an incident with the police as he is driving to the plant, all while keeping his cool to avoid escalation. Watching a white family get sent through the barricade with no inspection just ticked me off.

I also wished the ending returned to the repercussions of the riots, but it did wrap up the heist plot. 30 years after the riots, I guess it was inevitable to use a real life event as an identifier of time and motive, but I almost felt it was going to be a more historical drama. But it's not, and I also remembered that the 2018 Black Panther movie did the same thing, at the beginning of the film.

This movie captures various themes and genres. At some point or another the movie is a heist movie set against the backdrop of the Rodney King riots of 1992. Along the way it's also a coming of age movie, an exploration of father-son relationships, and race relations.

Having seen the movie in a theater, to be fair, the movie has the cast, look, and feel of a better than average straight-to-streaming movie. The fact that it was given a "limited theatrical release" might just be giving the movie too much credit.

Tyrese Gibson, who plays a convincing father and "OG Merc" back in the day, finds himself thrust in the middle of a heist of valuable platinum bars, led by Ray Liotta (in his final film) at his villainous best.

What on first blush is an engaging heist movie rapidly evolves into a movie extremely derivative of "Die Hard" - nearly plot point by plot point. Not that this is necessarily a bad thing, but it does become quite formulaic.

Of course, the heist "crew", as always, includes "the muscle guy", the "smart" leader guy (Liotta), and the "clueless reluctant impressionable" guy (almost always related to the boss/leader) that you wonder why he was even brought along on the job in the first place.

A key plot point is that Gibson is bent on bringing his son to his workplace factory after-hours to "distance themselves" from the riot mayhem. What were they going to do? Spend the night there? Why not drive out of town altogether? I felt that was a fairly weak contrivance.

If you're a fan of Gibson and/or Liotta I think the movie would meet your expectations. Giving the movie a "10" (as others have done) is inexplicably generous.

Israeli director Ariel Vromen brings us a thriller with plenty of drama in a film that has some very intense moments, but they are not enough to give us a much more well-rounded film as we sometimes hoped for.

The script written by Sascha Penn manages to have moments of social drama that really manage to be a high point in the film and perhaps largely compensate for the weaker moments that the film experiences once it leans exclusively towards action that fails to reach a level that manages to give you the intensity of those more ghetto moments that feel precisely well done.

An efficient cast that gives us the posthumous appearance of the beloved Ray Liotta and a Scott Eastwood alongside Tyrese Gibson, who already know how to give us action on screen and continue to deliver in those moments when they provide it.

We find ourselves as spectators in a story where there are shootouts, a car chase, some heroism and some hard life lessons that invite us to have a good film that has its pleasant moments and those moments allow the film in general to come out acceptable and perhaps appreciated for its parts of social drama that really invite reflection.

Afterward we are left with a mixture of sensations where the film could have been much more complete than what we ended up receiving, which ends up deflating towards its final part, which leaves us with the bitter feeling that it had much more to give us.

'1992' was Ray Liotta's last film and it was fitting that he was playing an unhinged villain. He was one of the best in the industry to do it. He had a real edge about him that he could bring to a character and he absolutely expelled menace.

This film was a lot better than I expected. After a bit of a dusty start it found its way and became quite enjoyable. I was impressed with Tyrese Gibson in the lead role. He brought a lot to the film.

It is lacking a bit of polish and originality it would have to be said. And it could've done more with the 'Die Hard' type scenario it sets up towards the end. But all in all this was a pass mark by the barest of margins. 6/10.

Either that or they're in need of seriously broadening their horizons.

10 stars? Calling it a "Perfect" film?

To rank this alongside The Godfather, Schindler's List, Blade Runner, A Clockwork Orange, Apocalypse Now or even The Lord Of The Rings is the equivalent of walking into Mordor and we know that "one does not simply walk into..." I digress.

Let's talk about this latest effort by Ariel Vroman to convince us that he is a serious film-maker.

After delivering a blistering array of career low films for Costner and Oldman (Criminal), Marisa Tomei (Danika) and the thrilless Toby Kebbel (Angel) we have finally been given the long delayed 1992.

Vromen has turned his attention to a historically and culturally significant moment in Angelino lives, April 29th 1992 and delivered what can only be described as screen flatulence in the form of a weak heist film that all but ignores the gravitas of its setting entirely.

A younger cast is meant to give us the impression that this is a vibrant, fresh take on a well trodden path, but Gibson and Eastwood do their best with a pedestrian and predictable script, whilst the late, great Ray Liotta is buried ignominiously with the lines "I did the best that I could son. But it wasn't enough".

And it isn't enough. Not enough thrills, invention, originality, style, character, humor, depth or even sense. Convoluted at times and blunt to a fault at others, this is yet another ham-fisted effort to waste our time, some poor investor's money and the goodwill of all the people roped into making accounts just to give it 10 stars, all in the vain hope that we might mix Vromen in with his Israeli counterparts; but Avi Nesher, Amos Gitai and Joseph Cedar he is not, unfortunately he's not even in the Menachem Golan and Yoram Globus league as whatever we may think, they at least found an audience.

And this the main issue with 1992. Who is it for? Fast and Furious polish without the camp over the top action, Goodfellas violence without the gritty impact and Hip Hop sentiment but with a vanilla milkshake to wash it down.

1992 tries to be all things to all people and comes up short every time. Too slight yet too garish, it somehow manages to fall in that most terrible place, the absolute middle.

You want a heist movie with a crazy backdrop take your pick from The Italian Job (1968) or Heat (1995). If you want something closer to 10 stars grab The Usual Suspects. But whatever you do, save this film for when you've seen all the rest.