Take pity on the Righteous

Al Pacino (88 Minutes), Robert De Niro (Stardust) and Russell Gewirtz (the writer behind Inside Man) collaborating on the same movie - cinephiles were practically wetting themselves when Righteous Kill was announced. It would be like the magnificent diner scene between Pacino and De Niro in Heat, only feature-length! Alas, it was not to be.

The question of why Righteous Kill is at best a mediocre movie has many answers, including the performances of the actors themselves. Playing cops hunting a serial killer, Pacino and De Niro are kept at bay as performers, just a few more comical players in writer Gewirtz's limited arsenal.

Now, in the twilight of their careers, both actors have been riding high off their peak films for years. De Niro had a brief comic renaissance playing off his Goodfellas persona in films such as Meet the Parents and Analyze This. Ditto for Pacino's devilish mentors, literally in The Devil's Advocate, figuratively in The Recruit. But neither actor has been stellar as a lead in years.

As alien as the notion may seem now, Pacino was somewhat understated, even when at his best. In films such as The Godfather, Serpico and Dog Day Afternoon, he relied on a quiet naturalism, which eventually gave way to a playful showiness dominating his later work. De Niro has also had his share of showy roles (Cape Fear, The Untouchables), but is probably best known for his work playing some of cinema's rougher outcasts for Martin Scorsese (Mean Streets, Taxi Driver, Raging Bull).

The biggest problem with Righteous Kill is that it doesn't let either actor do what he is known for. De Niro is playing a conflicted, hardened man, which he did to great dramatic effect in Casino and Heat, but Gewirtz's insincere tendencies undermine any shot at palpable drama. Pacino solidly straddles the very awkward middle ground between his more natural and showboating urges, but it's to the detriment of both approaches. This can be attributed to the vagueness of his character - because it isn't definitively hammered out, Pacino could easily commit to either acting direction, yet neither seems quite right.

Throughout its runtime, Righteous Kill teeters on the brink of being laughable for all the wrong reasons. Amongst those are the cheesy poems left by the killer at the crime scenes; the ridiculous, blurry slow-motion shots (a technique which should be reserved for Lifetime movies-of-the-week); and the general goofy impression left from director Jon Avnet's too-blunt or too-generic direction.

One gets the sense no one in the production ever really had anything to sink their teeth into - from top to bottom, the film feels uninspired. In Inside Man, Denzel Washington (The Great Debaters) and Chiwetel Ejiofor (Redbelt) sizzled as the good-humored detectives, bouncing off one another for great comic effect. Believe it or not, the chemistry just fizzles between Pacino and De Niro.

Gewirtz's dialogue provides the occasional wild card in the mix. His blend of cat-and-mouse intrigue and witty banter worked to perfection in Inside Man because it was a breezy film, but his preferred style too often distracts in the more serious Righteous Kill. He hits some jokes ("She's got my semen count so low I gotta sit down to take a piss," De Niro says of his randy lover) but also indulges in cliché (A sample exchange: "This conversation never happened." "What conversation?"). Enjoy the rare laughs when they come - they're ultimately the best part of the film.

Fortunately, Avnet stays out of the way for most of the film; Gewirtz manages to score at least one genuine plot surprise; and even at half-speed, De Niro and Pacino are still fun to watch. But given the talent involved, Righteous Kill has to be considered a huge disappointment.

dan.benamor@gmail.com