Cattive compagnie

When you encounter a bad movie, the tendency is to just blow it off. After all, most folks are largely incompetent at what they do. But if you check the credentials of the people involved, you have to think again.

The writer has written successful movies as well as fine ones. "Snake Eyes" is great until the end, a fine examination or watching for us to watch. And "Panic Room" is an experiment in making a building a character.

The director has written and directed films that show he understands the mechanics of noir, the very thing being tinkered with here. Spader has been involved in several noir-bending adventures, always as a contributor.

What went wrong? The pitch certainly would have been "noir personified," specifically by mixing in the "visitor that changes lives" genre. Noir is when a man or couple get accidentally caught up in mischievous fate, fate that seems to actively play with their lives.

A well established derivative is the "omniscient serial killer" genre, which to some extent puts a face on fate. "Funny Games" is a similar experiment in building calmly human dervishes. But it is an entirely different matter to make fate a friend. That's what's attempted here. It may be possible, but not the simple way that's tried.

The minor fold here is that fate uses film (video) in the two events around which the story turns.

Ted's Evaluation -- 2 of 3: Has some interesting elements.

Bad Influence is directed by Curtis Hanson and written by David Koepp. It stars Rob Lowe, James Spader, Lisa Zane and Christian Clemenson. Music is by Trevor Jones and cinematography by Robert Elswit.

Michael Boll (Spader) is the ultimate milquetoast. Alex (Lowe) is something altogether different. When Alex introduces himself into Michael's life, Michael finds from within a boldness he didn't know existed. But Alex's life lessons may just come at a cost...

Tell me what you want more than anything else in the world.

The 90s began in a neo-norish haze for one time brat-packers Spader and Lowe. For Spader it was another chance to show, after 1989's Sex, Lies and Videotape, that he could do drama very well. For Lowe it was a case of dusting off his off screen misdemeanours to self mockingly portray the bad boy playing the bad boy. With future L.A. Confidential helmer Hanson in the chair overseeing things, Bad Influence rounded out as a sneaky bit of grit. It didn't make any great waves back on release, but it's a film that holds up surprisingly well these days, particularly as an 80s noir snapshot.

Thematically picture asks us if everyone has the devil inside them if prompted or manipulated from outside sources? Alex's motives are intentionally left sketchy, we are in no doubt from the opening credits that he's untrustworthy, yet who he is or what he's really about are questions left hanging in the air. A good looking charmer without doubt, and thanks to Spader's uber wimp beginnings, we find ourselves urging Alex on as he slots a spine into Michael's back. There's a decidedly nasty edge to the Koepp screenplay that lets the actors excel in their respective transformations, and with the mood set at simmer, story unfolds and lets the Doppleganger motif kick in. From here on in it's now a question for the viewers of how it's going to resolve itself?

Call me Mick.

Hanson paints it in sweaty metallic strokes, interiors of Michael's condo portray yuppie claustrophobia, exteriors of nighttime L.A. are classic noir; where the bright lights of the city are eyes observing Michael's transformation and the salty whiff of the pier and the sea hover over the telling periods of dialogue. True enough to say that Bad Influence, and its director, owe a huge debt to past masters, notably something like Strangers on a Train, but the update works very well, particularly in the context of maintaining a continued sense of tension. The humour that lives and breathes in the picture is nicely placed, adding a bit of salt to an already spicy broth, and there's even the delicate hint of an old noir favourite, potential man crush.

The build up isn't matched by the pay off, but even then there's enough of a bite to warrant respect. Far better than some internet ratings suggest it is, and certainly undervalued in the neo-noir pantheon, Bad Influence is well worth reevaluating in this new age of cinema. 7.5/10

Could have been the inspiration for "The Fight Club" in some ways -- it has the same dynamic -- wimpy yuppie boy inspired to greater strenghts (and pulled into the darkness) by footloose mysterious stranger who seems to have it all together.

The reason this movie doesn't work, I think, is interesting. I think they "mirror-imaged" the casting. Rob Lowe should be the yuppie wimp and James Spader the mysterious stranger who exudes both strength and danger. When you consider the types of roles these actors tend to play today, it seems bizarre that they were cast the way there were in "Bad Influence."

This is the most textbook demonstration of Nietzsche I've ever seen. Rob Lowe is the gifted liar prepared to go all the way to get whatever he wants and keep himself entertained. Spader is the timid, uptight yuppie who doesn't understand just how much he's in for when Lowe's "will to power" rubs off on him. What ensues would bring anybody back to good old fashioned organized religion. A morality play taken to extremes that nonetheless works as a thriller, too. Worth seeing. 8.

I enjoyed this movie very much, which is why it got seven stars from me, but it's by no means a fantastic or transcendent experience. It does it's job as a thriller ably, and it's worth watching.

The good: You do care about the characters, and James Spader and Rob Lowe are both fantastic actors who are on the top of their game here. It's interesting to see Spader play a guy who isn't super cool and self assured for a change, and he handles it well. Lowe channels a bit of Patrick Bateman and creates a great GQ sociopath. The supporting cast is quite good as well, however this could very well have been a two-man film, as you can fit the dialog of all the other characters in the movie combined onto maybe two sheets of paper. The director also had a great eye for style, as the locations, clothing and music were gorgeous and perfectly suited to the era, and gave the film a great deal of authenticity.

The bad: I'm not entirely convinced why Spader was so quick to discard his fiancé (who was beautiful, rich and from all indications a very nice person that cared for him a great deal). The film never really sets up any kind of conflict or apprehension between the couple to justify Spader's truly rash behavior. Yes, I get that he wanted a taste of the bad-boy life that Lowe was a part of, but he seemed to throw it all away far too easily and willingly. For the type of character that he was, I'd expect a little more internal conflict, moralizing and apprehension to go along with a decision like that. It just seems like his descent was inexplicably rapid and left a lot of questions unanswered. Beyond that, I think the ending (or last 30 minutes or so) could have been done a little better.

The good does really outweigh the bad, and the movie is genuinely worth watching if you're a fan of the genre. Don't expect a Michael Mann film, but you can definitely get some solid entertainment value out of it nonetheless.