Internal Affairs (1990)

 Internal Affairs (1990)


To say I was surprised with Internal Affairs puts it mildly. For a film that tackles police corruption and released in the banal month of January, this usually spells disaster. Yet…it was not. Yes, the film can be predictable and there is nothing we have not seen before. On the other hand, the film is elevated by Mike Figgis’s atmospheric direction and a rather atypical performance from Richard Gere. Far as I know, this is one of the very few roles (if not only role) where Gere is the antagonist. While playing the bad guy, he keeps the charisma that everyone knows him for. The film is an example that proves Gere has the acting chops. I was surprised how much I enjoyed this police thriller. There are some twists that came out of nowhere thanks to Henry Bean’s ingenious screenplay. The script and Figgis’s direction do a fantastic job building tension as the IAD do their thing. Is the finale any good? Some people say it was a letdown and others say that is does a solid job wrapping the story up. At the end of the day, it is an enjoyable police procedural but a forgettable one at that. For an early January release in 1990, that is like having an Oscar-winning drama on your hands.

Raymond Avilla (Andy Garcia) is brand new to LAPD’s Internal Affairs, the most hated division in the police force. After all, who likes when police investigate their “brothers.” He is partnered with the highly intelligent Amy Wallace (Laurie Metcalf). Raymond’s first case is to investigate Van Stretch (William Baldwin) whom he goes back with to the Academy. He soon realizes that while Stretch has some issues, the more dangerous cop is the partner, Dennis Peck (Richard Gere). The higher-ups believe Peck to be a model officer, but he is anything but. He is a man who lives beyond his means as a womanizer (despite being a married man) and a thief. He also excels at manipulating people to achieve his illegal endgame. Now there is a seemingly endless cat-and-mouse game between Raymond and Dennis. Raymond’s wife, Kathleen (Nancy Travis), is an art curator and is used by Dennis to get at Raymond. Who is to say that Raymond won’t do the same with Dennis’s wife, Heather (Annabelle Sciorra). Dennis will do anything to get what he wants and is not afraid to kill.

If anything, the reason why to watch the movie is to see Gere’s villainous performance, one that he never, ever partakes. It is nice to see him branch out and try something new. He made for a convincing bad guy. That is all the more dangerous because he maintains his charm that made him a movie star in the first place. His chemistry with Andy Garcia is something else. Rumors have it that the two actors did not like each other on set and some of the punches delivered by the men are actually real. Nothing like hatred for your co-workers to bring out the best in you, eh? I also found Laurie Metcalf to be a very likable, interesting character who is not afraid to tell the hard truths. Also, very young Elijah Wood is in the movie!

Is Internal Affairs any good? Maybe a little at least by January standards. The performances (especially Gere’s) and Figgis’s direction save the film from being mediocre. The story itself is fine if not forgettable. I enjoyed the flick but had a hard time remembering what happened only mere hours later. Take that for what you will.

My Grade: B-

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Ferris Bueller's Day Off (1986)

Image
Ferris Bueller's Day Off (1986) “Life moves pretty fast. If you don’t stop and look around once in awhile, you could miss it.” Ah, wise words from our new young friend, Ferris Bueller. In John Hughes’s 1986 film, Ferris Bueller’s Day Off , all Ferris wants to do is take a day and have fun. That is the most simplistic theme the movie has. You can go deeper, but the main takeaway is that it is okay to have fun. That is a motto I have taken to heart. I really loved the film. People consider The Breakfast Club to be Hughes’s best and most important movie. That’s a fine statement to make, but I would personally rank the film number two behind this particular one. The teen characters are instantly relatable, it has a memorable antagonist for the children, and this is basically a thirty-year-old travel guide for Chicago. Just how Woody Allen creates his movies as love letters for New York, this is applicable for John Hughes. A Chicago love letter!   Like all of his films, Hughes wrote...
Read more

The Spy Who Loved Me (1977)

Image
The Spy Who Loved Me (1977) The James Bond franchise is one of those franchises that will never die. It has been going strong since the first movie rolled out in the early 1960’s, and new James Bond movies are still produced today. What makes this series unique is they use multiple actors to play the titular character over the years. They all bring their own gravitas to the role, and each Bond is a different man when compared to each other (although the martini, shaken not stirred and the beautiful women among other things remain a constant.) So my first James Bond review for this blog is 1977’s The Spy Who Loved Me. This wasn’t my first look at the series, but it was my first look at the older movies. I really liked what I saw. This is an old-fashioned story that combines a spy drama and an action-packed war movie into one package. Like many of the older Bond movies, the story can get borderline preposterous. The cheesiness of the plot did come to grow on me after awhile, even...
Read more

Table for Five (1983)

Image
Table for Five (1983) I can guarantee that ninety percent of my readers here have not seen this tear-jerking melodrama 1983’s Table for Five , yet alone heard of it. Hopefully after reading my kind words, you will be somewhat intrigued by this movie. When doing my research for the film, I was shocked to see how vastly underrated the movie is. There are only a few reviews on Rotten Tomatoes, hardly any information on Wikipedia or Google-hardly anything out there in this vast Internet landscape. Then, why on earth is this movie so good? Sure, maybe some folks will say the movie is just a predictable Lifetime TV movie, but honestly it is much more than that. There are some elements that makes this film seem destined for the television at times, but to me it is much more than that. I consider the movie to be an honest, emotional portrayal about fatherhood and family. Directed by Robert Lieberman, this film is about a man named J.P Tannen (Jon Voight) who fails at being fathe...
Read more