While both Robert DeNiro and Al Pacino are known for their iconic roles, both have hit a slag as of late. From DeNiro's Arthur and the Invisibles to Pacino's 88 Minutes, the younger generation has little to be impressed with when it comes to these two veteran actors. However, both stars are making a giant effort to impress their fans with Righteous Kill, an intense and sometimes comical look at two veteran detectives who work to hunt down a serial killer whose crimes resemble those of a killer that they put away long ago. Sadly, although the film is decent, neither star is able to save its predictable and dragging script as it tumbles along carelessly, hitting roadblock after roadblock, and ending its travels with a catastrophic crash near the finish line.
First off, I want to comment on the performance from both DeNiro and Pacino, because although the film was lacking, neither actor disappoints their fans with their turn as Turk and Rooster. Sometime, when two high profile actors share the screen for much of a film, the premise and story is hurt as a result of egos. Thankfully, that did not happen here as both actors worked well within themselves each giving stellar performances and helping to make this film what it is.
However, the same cannot be said about the supporting players, Gugino, Leguizamo, Wahlberg and Curtis Jackson (50 Cent). Forced to interact with one another and the film's leads, all four B-rated stars failed to be memorable in their portrayals, losing the audience in the muffle and bringing a solid end to the film's chances at greatness. Through these four, the dramatic intensity and shell-shocking conclusion were ruined as the film lost its flow and ability to encompass the audience's mind.
Additionally, I must criticize Jon Avnet for his direction. Fresh off the disaster that was 88 Minutes, Avnet looked to get back into the game with this film, and sadly, he picked another terrible script to do it with. Hampered by some extremely dry moments, Avnet is unable to capture the mood or story effectively, sending audiences on an unneeded wild goose chase from start to finish. Not to mention the fact that he toyed with the set lighting, casting dark shadows at random, creating an unneeded distraction for the audience.
And just when I thought that the film was doomed for all eternity, a great ending began to unravel on-screen. Taking everyone by surprise, those watching were quickly forced into panic mode as they attempted to piece together the clues as they were revealed on-screen. And while I had an intuition as to the occurrences that would take place at the closing moments, I cannot help but feel stupid for not having pieced everything together earlier. But regardless, it was a clever ending"¦that would sadly never end.
Instead of giving audiences a susceptible conclusion to the story, director Avnet chose to prolong the ending by adding in not seconds, but minutes of unneeded dialogue. The effect, a total catastrophe that sends viewers out of the theater with a dampened spirit, as the film could have and should have been much better.
