The Next Three Days (***1/2)

You expect from the high-concept plot that this will be a cheesy thriller. Professor (Russell Crowe) seeking justice for wife (Elizabeth Banks) he believes was falsely imprisoned for murder. With no legal options, and her life draining away behind bars, he vows to get her out any way he can. If this were the Russell Crowe from Gladiator or American Gangster you would have one kind of film, an action-packed one in which Crowe muscled his way into the prison and killed off a dozen guards without breaking a sweat. But imagine the concept with the Crowe from A Beautiful Mind, maybe a little less brilliant, and a little less crazy, but pretty smart and every bit as obsessed. In other words, what would it take for a very driven regular guy to pull off a prison break?

While this remake of a French film (reset in Pittsburgh) is essentially a thriller, the suspense is of the sort that keeps you on edge rather than “thrilling” you. (The violence is realistic, but sporadic.) It’s a deeply unsettling film adapted by Paul Haggis. Haggis’s work can seem pretentious when applied to grand themes, as in the racism drama Crash. Here his approach that’s methodical and relentless (and nearly humorless), but never grandiose. Crowe is the picture of the man who is transformed by having the life he knew stripped away, yet does not suddenly become a superhero. In one scene, he’s nearly caught in his preparations. The moment having passed, he vomits. Banks, though her role is brief, does well to suggest the dispiriting experience of prison. (She reminded me of Sam Rockwell in Conviction.)

From Die Hard to Prince of Persia, there are zillions of suspense and action movies about men (or, less frequently, women) facing all sorts of peril to save someone. But unlike almost all of them, this movie really gives you the feeling of what it would be like if you actually tried to do such a thing.

IMDB link

viewed 11/3/10 at Rave UPenn [PFS screening] and reviewed 11/3–11/19/10

Conviction (***)

A movie’s appeal really shouldn’t depend on whether the story it tells really happened to someone, but it probably does help here to know that Betty Anne Waters really did decide to go to law school, not even having finished high school, just to get her brother Kenny out of jail. This is the sort of inspirational role that Hilary Swank seems to have made a specialty of, and having heard the real Betty Anne, I can say she nails both the rural Massachusetts accent and the sense of, yes, conviction that keeps Betty Anne moving forward.

Betty Anne and Kenny were part of a large, unstable family led by an undependable mother, and Kenny (Sam Rockwell) was prone to getting in fights, which is one reason attention was focused on him after a 1980 murder. Director Tony Goldwyn and writer Pamela Gray, who previously collaborated on 1999’s A Walk on the Moon, include brief but effective flashback scenes that provide a sense of the closeness that the two siblings developed. Rockwell’s few scenes show the actor’s range. There is suspense in the way Goldwyn shows us the testimony that convicted Kenny, and then shows how the jury was misled.

The underdog story seems so tailor-made for a movie that it seems almost too perfect. There is a murder, but not a mystery. The good and the evil are clear. Other stories of wrongful conviction often reveal a series of well-intentioned mistakes, cops and prosecutors trying their best but making errors and false assumptions. Here there is only the actions of one reckless cop, who is well played by Melissa Leo, but an unambiguous villain. And Betty is an unambiguous heroine. Therefore we have a well-told story, but without elements that would make the film truly great or surprising.

IMDB link

viewed 9/28/10 at Ritz 5 [PFS screening] and reviewed 11/16/10

After Innocence (**3/4)

A documentary focusing on men who’ve been wrongfully imprisoned. Shot as a series of human-interest stories, it might have been more involving with a sharper focus on the process that led to the unfortunate outcomes.

This is one of four limited-release documentaries (counting the performance film Sarah Silverman: Jesus Is Magic) that opened on the same weekend in Philadelphia. The second favorite film in April’s Philadelphia Film Festival (another documentary, Mad Hot Ballroom, beat it by a step), it tells the story of several “exonerees,” wrongly convicted men who spent years or even decades in prison before new DNA evidence (or in one case, a confession) led to their being freed. Given the title, it makes sense it that it’s mostly the men talking about their adjustment after prison. (There’s no narration.) Still, getting sent to prison for crimes—mostly involving rape, which yields DNA evidence—they didn’t commit is probably the most interesting thing that will ever happen to any of them. I couldn’t help but wish there was more detail about the crimes themselves and the legal process that led to the unfortunate outcomes. A more in-depth focus on a few of the men might have yielded more insights into how things like this happen, and what practical steps can be taken to improve things. I’d also have wanted more screen time for Innocence Project founders Barry Scheck and Peter Neufeld, who pinpoint misidentification by witnesses as the common element in most of these cases. There is a Philly angle to this film, as two of those profiled are local, and a proposed bill to compensate Pennsylvania exonerees and expunge their records is given some attention. [As of 2009, it does not appear that the bill was passed.]

IMDB link

viewed at 12/?/05 at Ritz Bourse and reviewed 12/5/05