Men with Guns (1998)

Sorry, this movie sucks

At first rather annoying in its heavy emphasis on reenactments, this movie ultimately proves fascinating, simply because the complicated, highly dramatic tale it tells still almost defies belief.

All of these films share one commonality, that being a kind of emotional center that humanizes a cast of monsters.

By the time the dramatic fireworks start popping off, each one feels earned.

Eddie and Richard are two losers who were bullied as children. Adulthood is not much different. They opt to get guns and fight back and suddenly when things go awry they find themselves way over their heads leaving the audience with nothing to root for but a quick end to the film.I didn't like the plot, the characters, or the dialogue.Guide: F-bomb. Sex and nudity.

About the only kindest thing one can say for "Men with Guns" is that unlike most Canadian films, the movie does not try to disguise its location and characters as American - it's made clear it's taking place in Toronto and the surrounding area. Otherwise, the movie goes wrong in just about every way you can think of. The main problem is with the script. The heart of the story - two criminal lowlifes getting their hands on a large supply of illegal narcotics belonging to the mob - has been done on TV and in other movies many many times before. It still could have worked, but the script also suffers from characters that are not only extremely thin, but are pretty repulsive and one note. The cast shows some talent, but the only actor who manages to make an impression is American Paul Sorvino - and he is only given three (brief) scenes in the entire movie. The movie also suffers from shoddy production values; it looks like a low budget Canadian TV show from the 1980s instead of a movie. Obviously not to be confused with the reportedly superior John Sayles movie of the same title that came out around the same time.

In its favor, "Men With Guns" has a cool title, three strong performances, a nice sense of ambiance and atmosphere, Paul Sorvino doing what Paul Sorvino does, a few genuinely funny moments, a pretty good party/orgy scene, and a dandy chase scene that gives you a sense of the character's desperation and fright.On the other hand, you can go to a video store or turn on your cable provider, and see a hundred gritty crime dramas about small time losers getting in over their heads with the mob and/or the law, some of them much better paced and told than this one.While "Men With Guns" has a slightly different emphasis with its emphasis on the devotion and loyalty of the two friends to each other, the director seemed to out of his way to rub the audiences' collective noses in the sleaze and grime of their lowlife scene, to the point where it seemed to me he was wallowing in cinematic tricks and clichés stolen directly from Tony Scott and French existential cinema. Add to that a rushed ending that doesn't have the guts to live up to its "Butch Cassidy" finish and characters who are dense, unthinking, and pretty unsympathetic (it's not a tragedy if the bad things that happen to the protagonists is a direct result of their own stupidity) and you've got a movie that makes you wish you'd watched "GoodFellas" or "Taxi Driver".The director and cinematographer obviously have some chops - this is a well "made" movie with professional polish and some great setups. But they need to set their sites a little higher regarding the story they want to tell.If you just have to watch a gritty crime drama about low lives getting in over their heads with the mob and the cops, and you've already seen all the better movies in the genre 100 times, well, "Men With Guns" will give you your crime drama fix. But you'll probably prefer to go back and watch "Rounders" for the 101st time instead.

Men With Guns opens with two twenty-something guys sitting around discussing the times in their life when they were humiliated. Gregory Sporleder, Lucas, relates the time when he was forced to hold a guys coat every gym class or risk getting beaten up. Donal Logue, as Eddie, listens intensely, "I thought that was your coat... why didn't you tell me? Ah man, I got your back! You know that!"This powerful opening stands out more than anything else that happens in this film. It concerns two friends, Eddie and Lucas, who go out to a farm to retrieve some money for a local club owner. When they arrive, they are brutally attacked by a group of thugs.The incident doesn't sit well with Eddie and Lucas. They decide to put a scare into the men who attacked them. They manage to recruit one of their friends, Mamet, played by Callum Keith Rennie. Mamet is a well meaning sort but his mind-set appears suspended somewhere out above the clouds.The revenge plan goes horribly awry. Eddie and Lucas find themselves sitting in a room with three corpses and a whole lot of money and cocaine. At this point the film seems to get lost. It really doesn't know what to do or where to go. We watch as our three simpleton heroes party away the cocaine and money.A problem arises when it becomes evident that the cocaine and money actually belong to a local mob boss played by Paul Sorvino. Sorvino and his laughable cronies begin a man-hunt for the three.Without trying to give anything away, the film becomes a little tedious and manages to immerse itself in a bloodbath. A needless one.Where the film gets lost in its story it finds solace in its actors and characters. Callum Keith Rennie, a truly amazing Canadian actor, offers a haunting performance as a man whose subtle eccentricities begin to give light to his absolute insanity. Also watch for Easy Gary played by Max Perlich. His character is one of the most interesting that I've seen in a film in a long time.