Influences

People I Know (2002)

** (out of 4)

Press agent Eli Wurman (Al Pacino) is trying to get together a big benefit but other things in his life starts to cause problems. His one client, actor Cary Launer (Ryan O'Neil) asks him to get a hooker (Tea Leoni) he knows out of jail and this here leads to some dark corners of the city involving some high ranked officials. PEOPLE I KNOW pretty much got released without any fan-fair and it's easy to see why because even with an A-list cast the thing just never really comes together. I think the biggest problem with the picture is that the screenplay simply has way too many subplots and none of them are very interesting. I think the film was trying to show how much stuff this agent has going in his life but the only problem is that the majority of it isn't all that interesting. This includes his relationship to his dead brother's widow (Kim Basinger), his needing this party to be a success and of course the stuff dealing with the hooker. The story here is certainly on high speed as all sorts of things are going on but when you don't care about any of them it's hard to get too invested in the film. The only thing that keeps the film interesting are the performances with Pacino leading the way. I thought he was pretty laid back here and this really helped the performance. In this era the actor was known for the screaming and so on but that doesn't happen here and I found him to be very believable in the part. Supporting players Basinger, O'Neal, Leoni, Richard Schiff and others are also very good in their parts. The film is a thriller but there just aren't enough thrills to make it worth sitting through. It's really too bad the performances are wasted in a film where they deserved much more.

I think that when Al Pacino, the great actor that he is, retires; people will look back at this film and these sorts of films he was in and will use them as pieces of evidence to suggest that even if the film overall was a little weak and if it was a film that made errors, the one stand out feature was indeed, Al Pacino and his acting. It's films like these that will not only highlight Pacino and his ability to carry a film but will also suffice as an example as 'a film you'd watch only for its main star'.

People I Know is a film that simmers and simmers; it's a film that you put in a pot on a low burner level in an attempt to etch out all the goodness and taste that you believe it to contain. These come in the form of the strong cast, the nice cinematography, some amusing scenes that hit and miss as well as the multiple plot devices the film has. Unfortunately, People I Know is a miss-mash of numerous plot paths, stiff dialogue and suffers from time to time of scene in which you just don't seem to care about. The film attempts to look and feel like Scorsese's 1999 film Bringing Out the Dead but with a publicist instead of a medic and a limousine instead of an ambulance. Just like Cage's character from that film, Eli Wurman (Pacino) has numerous encounters with some rather strange people whilst at the same time makes life difficult for himself.

The primary problem that I personally had with the film was that it opened up all these ideas and plot paths and yet doesn't really choose to go down any of them: there is the incident with the girl who is raped and subsequently dies in the hotel room, there is the route of the elf discovery drama as Eli tries hard not to hit rock bottom and there is the simmering tension between politicians that seem to revolve around race. This made me realise afterwards that even though these things were hinted at and included, there isn't any closure on any of these events –the dead girl is ignored when I thought the film would become a drama centring around a possible framing of Eli; the mood of the film and the way Pacino acts Eli suggests he's on the verge of meltdown and yet he remains upbeat enough for the duration to see it out and lastly, the way the politicians and their situation revolving around illegal photographs of themselves plays out is a great idea for a film but People I Know just seems to brush it under the rug; alas, despite all these opportunities, the film isn't really about anything and any 'update' we are told about is through television news coverage within the film which was pretty poor.

Despite this, the film is effective in its little things. Eli is almost pathetic in his attempts to get people to come to his function and you genuinely feel for him since at the time, you don't know if he is successful or popular or whatever. Also, introducing a character and giving them all this build up before merely killing them off might be an effective way of toying with the audience but if it's forgotten about later on in the film and doesn't come back to either haunt the protagonist or create problems then what the hell is the point? Thus, the opening thirty minutes or so is technically a waste of time bar the other, tiny things people say and do. People I Know is a unique film in the way it feels bloated and yet by the end, it's very deflated. There is so much going on in this film involving deaths and illness and corruption that the story gets confused and doesn't know what to do with it all; the screenplay overpowers itself which is truly unique if not ironic since by the end, everything is still left relatively 'up in the air'. The racism divide is built up to the function but nothing really kicks off; Eli's health is built up as bad and visits to the doctor confirm this but without spoiling the ending, nothing really happens; the TV reports the girl's death and police are investigating but, you guessed it: nothing really happens thereafter. If you're going to watch People I Know, marvel at the way the film plays around with things and at the way it makes its mistakes in releasing all the suspense and intrigue. Marvel at the way it looks, not at the way it speaks and of course; there's always Al Pacino.

Pacino is extraordinary. The much-lamented accent is sorta a bisexual/Georgian/"Noo Yawk" ... it represents a complex mixture of dialect for a complex character perfectly portrayed by Pacino - balls and all. His work seems to become increasingly esoteric over the years, and outside of his character, the storyline is uneven and downright wretched in some parts.

But Pacino redeems even the drek and delivers a landmark performance that one wouldn't expect as he nears closer to being able to collect Social Security. Gutsy, bold, and brilliant. The script and direction needed quite a bit of work- but Pacino's performance is compelling enough to wonder exactly what he will do next. A must-see for Pacino fans.

I'd never heard of this 2002 film until Ebert and Roper reviewed a few weeks ago and I was pleasantly suprised since I don't think Al Pacino has been doing his best work lately. In this film, he's right on target and the film is pretty fascinating. He looks haggard, overworked, and struggling with all kinds of things. Even Ryan O'Neal is believable for a change (of course, the character he plays fits him to a tee).

I don't know if this one went straight to video or what, but search it out (especially Pacino fans). A definite 7 out of 10. Tea Leoni is sharp as a tack playing a flake. The entire supporting cast blends in nicely and this resembles a David Mamet script.

Jon Robin Baitz, the writer of this film, needs to check his facts a little more carefully. The story, as I perceived it, takes place in today's New York with today's personalities of the moment.

At one point of the film when Eli Wurman, played by Al Pacino, is talking to his widowed sister-in-law, Victoria Gray, and he asks her if she remembers when they had marched in Selma? Helloooo Mr. Baitz, how old is Victoria supposed to be? I made her out to be in her early 40s. Now, wouldn't that have been a miracle? The only way she would have been around Selma at the time of the march on that city would have been in the womb of her mother, if that was so! Well, then again, I could be wrong, she really is in her late 60s!

This film tries to do too many things; it goes in all directions without making sense, most of the time. The idea of presenting the Eli Wurman of Pacino, who was obviously gay, playing against a straight woman is laughable. Even more ridiculous when the one making the passes is a beautiful woman like Ms. Bassinger, in wild contrast with this washed out person.

Mr. Pacino might be a great actor. He has given us many interesting and diverse characters that will be cherished by all his fans, but lately, he has appeared in a series of duds that one wonders who is the person behind his decisions, since many of his choices haven't added any substance to his body of work.

This Eli Wurman, being compared to the Burt Lancaster's character in Sweet Smell of Success by many critics, kept reminding me of the Clifton Webb's tragic role in The Razor's Edge. This Eli has seen better days and no one cares about him at all.

The subplot having to do with the cause Eli is working to promote racial justice to people being deported, sounds empty and not true. It shows a side to this character that deep down inside all he cared for in his life was being at the right places, surrounded by the same celebrities he stooped to serve.

How about the other aspect of the film about the rich, possible would-be-sponsors of the cause, as libertines and swingers in an opium den on a Wall Street club? Is that supposed to be a metaphor? Oh well, I guess some of us, so out of touch with the powerful people of New York, will never know what we are really missing in those "fun" places.