Assassinato em Hollywood

I saw Sunset, recently, during a middle-of-the-night channel surf that ended up on a cable channel running the film at about 4:00am. I had never seen the film before, but had always been interested because of the two leads, and the era in which the film is set (the late 1920s).

I enjoyed the film, quite a bit, actually. I thought the story was very good, and well written, and Garner and Willis made a great team. I especially enjoyed Willis' characterization of Tom Mix. He brought just the right amount of cowboy style to the silen movie hero. And, of course, Garner is always good. But he really excelled as Wyatt Earp.

I thought the premise was very original, and that the whole film was a lot of fun.

With one exception.

Why is the villain of this piece so obviously supposed to remind us of Charley Chaplin ? Alvy Alperin ? Formerly known as The Happy Hobo ? A clear reference to Chaplin, and his little tramp. And yet the character is an abuseive rapist, and murderer who beats his own wife to death.

Why Edwards chose to virtually villify one of the most talented and entertaining comedians of the silent era, who was also a fairly nice bloke in real life, if a bit of a womanizer, I do not know.

The other original characters in the film- that is character who are fictional, rather than historical, like Earp, and Mix, are very well-crafted, believable, and completely original. No single character seems to be a rip on any single individual in Hollywood at the time, except for Malcolm McDowall's Alperin.

As a fan of Chaplin, Normand, Arbuckle, and the great silent clowns I found this to be a strong defect in the overall film. I can definitely believe Tom Mix as a hero. But I simply cannot reconcile even a thinly renamed Chaplin with a bully and a rapist.

I wonder why Edwards didn't go the extra mile to make the Alperin character more original.

Aside from this point, which is a big one, really, the film is a lot of fun for fans of the period, and the leads.

For me, it's the supporting actors that make this interesting . Emmet walsh was so good in what's up doc, and joe dallesandro has his own history in warhol films. Mcdowell was probably best known for clockwork orange. In the story, tom mix and wyatt earp meet up in hollywood, on a movie set. When a moidah takes place, they decide to work together to solve it. Fun info in the trivia and goofs sections. While the story is mostly fictional, it does have some elements of truth scattered throughout. Mix and earp really did know each other. And parts of the story itself seem similar to the alleged shooting incident aboard hearst's yacht in 1924. The story is so serious... it's more of a dramatic murder mystery than a comedy. But it seems to want to be both, which would be a typical blake edwards film. Like victor victoria. Which also starred james garner. With a similar song and dance number at the center. According to wikipedia, even siskel and ebert had trouble describing the film. Keep an eye out for jennifer edwards, daughter of the director, as victoria. This felt like an odd role for willis. He also did "die hard" in 1988, and that seemed a better match. Clearly, the best way to get nominated for an oscar is to make a film about the oscars! This was nominated for best costumes. A couple razzies too... hemingway was nominated worst supporting, and blake edwards "won" for worst director! TCM doesn't seem to show this one. It's entertaining, but a little disjointed. Kind of banks on the friendship betwen mix and earp as the glue holding everything together.

Blake Edwards' "Sunset" has the misfortune of following a series of films that are among his all time best: "10", "S.O.B.", "Trail of the Pink Panther" (a surprisingly cohesive film considering the circumstances; see my review for more details), "Victor/Victoria", "The Man Who Loved Women" (an underrated film), "Micki and Maude", "A Fine Mess" and the remarkable "That's Life!" By comparison, "Sunset" is a weak film.

But it is a good Blake Edwards film and good Edwards ("Blind Date", "Curse of the Pink Panther") is much better than horrible Edwards ("Switch", "Bring Your Smile Along", "Justin Case"). "Sunset" is Edwards' attempt at a risky genre, film noir, which if handled wrong, gives us films such as "Palmetto". When handled right, the results can be very entertaining.

"Sunset" is indeed very entertaining. It has laughs, but they're not important here. The atmosphere is what's important here and Edwards drenches us in it. And his casting of James Garner and Bruce Willis is inspired and right. They work wonderfully together and it is a testament to Garner and Willis as actors that they are so utterly believable as Wyatt Earp and Tom Mix, respectively. The bigger surprise here is Willis, who has a fresh faced charm that he doesn't show all that much anymore. I had forgotten what a solid actor he really is beneath that cliched "ACTION STAR" persona.

What prevents "Sunset" from approaching greatness is that Edwards is weighed down by the plot. He wants to create a complex mystery and he achieves that. But after getting to know such rich and likable characters, I really wish he had just forgotten about the plot and focus on them. All of his very best films are about character. Look at the list in the beginning. Each and every one of those films has characters we care about and he wisely forgets about resolving the plot. He observes and that's how he gets our attention (and laughs where appropriate). I only wished he had remembered. Luckily, his next film "Skin Deep" remembered that.

I still recommend "Sunset", if only for the charm of Willis and Garner and that wonderful atmosphere. This isn't a great film, but you just can't resist smiling at the end.

*** out of 4 stars

"Sunset" is the blackest of black comedies. I was surprised to learn from watching it on TV last night what a really fun movie it is, given the uniformly bad reviews it received. Pay no attention to the critics, this is good stuff. Bruce Willis, as Tom Mix, and James Garner, as Wyatt Earp, have never been better at their laid-back charm-boy schtick. The plot, while complex and often violent, is not to be taken seriously -- or better still, not to be thought about at all. In this connection, just remember what the movie itself tells you, "It's all true, give or take a lie or two." In addition to Willis's and Garner's stellar performances, Kathleen Quinlan, as Mix's long suffering girl friend, is a hoot. The mood of time and place -- 1929 Hollywood -- is perfectly captured: interesting costumes, great looking vintage cars, the last gasp of the Jazz Age just before the Depression. Highly recommended, 7 out of 10.

Caught this for the first time late night Sept., 2006. It was a very cool, foggy San Francisco night. I loved it! The critics missed the point altogether on this one. An older Ebert probably would have given it more than two stars. Garner was great, as usual, in his cool understated character. One critic said Bruce Willis was not movie star material. WRONG! The porn star Joe Dallesandro as "Dutch" was one of several funny, kinky sidebars. Yes, Chandler could have written it and drank to its health. Oh oh! scolded for less than ten lines---so, the cold, impersonal wind swept down trashy Market Street where the very rich and the very poor rubbed shoulders nonchalantly. Ah! the irony of it all.