La Rue

I just finished watching this film and I'm stunned...stunned. Morgan Freeman's performance was the best acting I have seen in a long time. The passion he put into his character was raw and powerful. It had me going "Wow." The movie was interesting- moments of tension. I did not think Christopher Reeve did a great job of his character- mediocre for cinema. He pulled it off well enough to get me into his character. Maybe his mediocre performance was who the character really was. There is no way of knowing the answer to this question. It could be either, or. Everyone you meet in the real world and in fantasy is not a dramatic, stunning personality. There wouldn't be any room for people's egos! Who says his performance was not true of the character. The character was who Reeve was.

The message of this film is very true. Don't lie. If you do make a mistake, if you lie, admit up front that you have. Otherwise, it's likely your lie will come back times 3. This is a lesson we should all have to learn one day. I hoped this review pleased someone. Take care and have a joyous and peaceful life. Good bye, Chauncey

If It wasn't by the performances of Morgan Freeman and Kathy Baker, I would have given 5 stars to "Street Smart", but such performances elevate the category of a modest movie.

I didn't like the plot of the movie, but at least this movie doesn't bore you and keep you entertained, this movie is similar to the police movies made for TV, and I liked the shots of different parts of NY.

The plot of the movie is about a journalist who invent a story about the life of a fictitious pimp called Tyron that is published in the magazine where he writes. The law confuses this factitious pimp Tyron with real life pimp "fast black" (Morgan Freeman) who is being accused for murder, so the law ask the journalist to deliver all his notes and tapes about his interview with the pimp to arrest Fast Black.

There are 2 great scenes in the movie, in one scene the journalist is seduced by Punchy, who is one of the girls of Fast Black", where Kathy Baker who plays Plunchy looks really sexy (10 stars for her in this scene). And the other scene which is the best in the movie from an acting point of view involves the characters of Morgan Freman and Kathy Baker, you will know what scene I mean when you see it.

In short you have to watch this B movie for the performances of Morgan Freman and Kathy Baker

Morgan Freeman has a commanding presence and he does it with such little ease. Here is no different in a pimp role, as you could say outside the fittingly gritty and authentic urban location work that really puts you there. He is the best thing about this movie. Giving his character plenty of personality with weight, but an underlining edginess that sees him playing it rough when he "had" too. That's not taking anything away from the likes of Christopher Reeve, Kathy Baker and Mimi Rogers. Reeves is rather accomplished as the reporter who finds himself in a difficult position --- career and personal life, but his morals are really put to the test. The ladies are the ones who come off being the ones you care for. New York journalist Jonathan Fisher is not getting anywhere in his attempt to write an article on prostitution, so he writes a fictional expose on a pimp, that ends up seeing him gather numerous praise for its realism. However this fake piece seems to resemble that of a real life pimp; "Fast Black" who's on trail for murder. As things become unstuck, Fisher now finds himself caught in a dangerous predicament with the distract attorney on one side wanting these notes and Fast Black on the other trying to get him on his side by showing him in the real life of a pimp. How one little lie can escalate into something much more. This smoky dramatic thriller doesn't exploit the glamorous nature, but gets dirty as things spiral out of control and circumstances are manipulated to suit one's own favour. This leads to some dangerous consequences for both sides. The interplay between Freeman and Reeves' characters are always gripping and at times quite intense and spontaneous. The rigid narrative does have some questionable details, but remains digestible and cleverly explosive up until its sudden ending of street justice that the courts couldn't supply. Also memorable is the swaying jazz flavour to the music soundtrack and Baker as one of Fast Black's hookers. This enterprise was produced by Cannon.

"We don't like to lose."

Freeman gives his most powerful performance here. I've seen almost all of Morgan's films but I think this is his most outstanding performance. Fast Black is one juicy character and Morgan brings life into it. Christopher Reeve, god bless his sole, is a pretty bad actor. I only seen him in his Superman roles, which I wasn't much a fan of. But here his character gets a lot of screen time and Reeve just can't live up to it. He makes the movie boring. Kathy Baker excels in her role. Mimi Rogers does her part well. The film has an amazing storyline here, but screenplay is 50/50. If Morgan had more scenes the movie would have been way better. Yes there are some really strong scenes, but all of them involved Freeman. The direction wasn't great, if this movie was handled by a better director it would of been memorable. Many people probably don't even know about this movie and that's a shame because Freeman's performance must be watched. Freeman's outburst scene where he puts a bottle up to Reeve's face and gives him a 20 second stare is WOW. And not to forget the scissor scene where he threatens to poke Kathy's eye out...MARVELLOUS. What disappoints me the most, regardless of the many flaws in direction, is that Freeman didn't have a last scene in the climax. In a movie where Morgan kept everyone in their seats, the director/screenwriter didn't hook him up with a proper climax scene. I was expecting something huge, but instead the ending was the same old same old. Overall, the movie is OK, but Freeman's performance is great.

"Street Smart" is a movie not a lot of people appear to remember from the 1980's. What attracted me to the movie was the fact that Morgan Freeman received his first ever Academy Award nomination for his role as a pimp in this film. Freeman hasn't played a role like this before or since, and his best known roles to come after this (including Oscar nominated roles) have consisted of more positive characters with effective leadership skills. Although Freeman doesn't play the type of positive African-American role model here that he is now best known for playing,he gives the character of Leo Smalls, Jr., a.k.a. "Fast Black", a three-dimensional performance that few other actors, black or white, would have been able to pull off. He's not just an intimidating presence, or a guy who wears flashy clothes. In fact, the scenes where he goes back to his apartment, and a poster of Martin Luther King, Jr. can be seen in the background, says volumes about his character.

Without a doubt, Freeman's performance is the best thing about this movie. The rest of the movie is indeed intriguing, but has a few weaknesses which makes it feel a little half-baked. With a running time of 94 minutes, at least 20 minutes of footage could have been added to account for these skimmed-over plot details without throwing off the pace of the film.

The late Christopher Reeve is Jonathan Fisher, a Harvard educated print journalist who is under pressure to write a magazine article in a weekend. He submits an idea to his publisher, seemingly off the top of his head, about 24 hours in the life of a pimp. The story is supposed to be true, but Fisher, feeling intense encumbrance to get a story to his editor, fabricates one instead. To his surprise, the story makes the front page, Fisher becomes a celebrity overnight, and moves up to his own TV news segment.

The trouble comes in when some readers believe the article is about one particular real pimp (Freeman) who happens to be on trial for murder. Among those wary readers is the leading prosecutor for that case. Although the fictional article depicts no murder of any kind, Fisher is still ordered to give the court his notes in the trial, or be subject to a jail sentence.

With the trouble comes a story that keeps the viewers' interests high for what comes next, but plot holes that accompany the story remain unexplained throughout. For instance, we have some of an idea what Reeve's character wrote in the article, but no idea what in the article would be considered circumstantial evidence in a murder trial. Having a series of imaginary montages with Reeve's idea of a pimp as he's writing the story would have cleared that unexplained plot point up easily. Plus, although Reeve's character is Harvard educated, that's all we know about his character. How did he come up with the idea to write about a pimp in the first place? Since we never see him in the inner city until after he submitted the story proposal, that occurrence remains unexplained also. Reeve did a great job playing a guy who tries to maintain control of his life and career, only to have both be in jeopardy as his situation goes over his head. It would have been more helpful to establish some real roots for his character, though, not to mention a moral compass of some kind.

There were some other times where the story felt shaky, but the film had other great qualities. For instance, the inner city in the film looked far more real than other "gritty urban dramas" I've seen over the last few years where the movie sets looked like movie sets and the houses looked too polished. Overall though, the film is worth checking out for Freeman's performance, and probably should be remembered better in Reeve's career than "Superman IV: The Quest For Peace". If anything, this movie showed that Reeve can play a character who has everything under control (Superman) just as well as one who does not.