KEVIN COSTNER EXPLORES NEW TERRITORY FOR HIS CAREER
Written: Jun 01 '07 (Updated Jun 02 '07)
|
Product Rating:
|
|
| Bang For The Buck |
 |
|
|
Pros: Good acting, exciting action
Cons: Plot a little too complex
The Bottom Line: I think this film gives Kevin Costner a chance to show he can play the "bad" guy
|
|
|
| mike.holmes's Full Review: Mr. Brooks |
The career of Kevin Costner has been baffling to me over the years. He has made some of my favorite films such as "Dances With Wolves", "Fields of Dreams" and "Bull Durham". But he has also starred and directed some of the all-time loser films of the last few decades, most especially the dreadful "Waterworld."
But one thing about Costner has remained fairly constant: he's always been the good guy. In "Mr. Brooks", he plays an odd combination of "good guy" publicly and serial killer in his private life. One professional review I read (by Christy Lemire of the Associated Press) states that "There is not much to like about" the film. She goes on to say that "the thriller is a sloppy, sleazy trifle of chaotic storytelling."
Although I don't think the movie is one of the best that I've seen, I do believe the film is better that Lemire does.
THE PLOT
Mr. Earl Brooks is an upstanding, Chamber-of-Commerce award winner as the film begins. He and his wife own a box company in Oregon and live in a mansion. They have a daughter who is attending college and appear to lead the perfect life. The only catch to that perfection is that Mr. Brooks and his alter ego (played excellently by William Hurt) have a rather serious addiction: they like to kill people. In fact, Brooks has been killing people for years and he is known at the "thumbprint" killer for the signature thumbprint of each victim he leaves at the scene.
Mr. Brooks actually hates what he does in his spare time and has even joined Alcoholics Anonymous to fight his addiction (presumably because there is not a "Serial Killers Anonymous). Early in the film, Costner makes a mistake which allows a witness to photograph his most recent double murder. That witness, "Mr. Smith" (Dane Cook), blackmails Brooks in a rather unique manner that I don't want to spoil.
Also involved in the plot is the determined detective Tracy Atwood (Demi Moore) who is in the middle of a nasty divorce plus trying to avoid getting killed by another serial killer who has escaped from prison.
Admittedly, there is a lot going on in this film and I haven't even mentioned the fact that Brooks' daughter, Jane (Danielle Panabaker) has significant problems of her own which I won't spoil.
WHY I LIKED THE FILM
Although the plot was undoubtedly overly-complicated, I thought the director Bruce Evans (who also co-wrote the film with Ray Gideon -both co-writers of "Stand By Me") did an excellent job keeping the movie interesting. At no time does the film lag although part of that is due to all the sub-plots going on.
I liked Costner's acting in the film. His portrayal of a split personality killer never really goes over the top. In my experience of prosecuting two serial killers, neither of them acted particularly "crazy" outside of the facts that they killed people. By that, I mean, that to the everyday world, they were "normal." Costner is convincing in this role as a man who is tortured by what he does but incapable of stopping.
Costner's wife in the film, CSI's Marg Helgenberger, is not given too much screentime but she does a fine job. Young Panabaker ("Shark"), as Brooks' daughter is excellent as a very troubled young person.
But perhaps the best acting in the film is done by William Hurt as "Marshall" the alter ego that only Brooks hears or sees. Hurt ("The Big Chill", "Kiss of the Spiderwoman") is one of my favorite actors and his character is thoroughly despicable in this film with his almost "happy-go-lucky" attitude about killing.
Demi Moore also gave a strong performance even though her character plays a combination of "tough cop" who is stalked by a maniac and being divorced by a golddigger hubby. It was one of the best jobs of acting I've seen from her in a while.
There is some nudity in the film and quite a lot of violence so I wouldn't recommend the movie for children. While I don't think the movie will win any awards, I think it is worth seeing. FOUR STARS
Recommended:
Yes
Movie Mood: Serious Movie
Viewing Method: Other
Film Completeness: Looked complete to me.
Worst Part of this Film: Plot
|
|
|
|
Epinions.com ID:
mike.holmes
|
 in Music, Movies, Books |
 - Top 500 |
|
Member: Mike Holmes
Location: Odessa, Texas
Reviews written: 1254
Trusted by: 361 members
About Me:
TO HONOR TED KENNEDY, CONGRESS SHOULD PASS A MEANINGFUL HEALTH CARE BILL
|
|
|
- Add to My Yahoo!: 
- Add to Google Homepage: 
© 1999-2009 Shopping.com, Inc.