Review of Righteous Kill (2008) by Lewis P — 03 Apr 2010

Clichéd but occasionally entertaining De Niro/Pacino neo-noir.

*** This review may contain spoilers ***.

'Righteous Kill' represents a big foot forward for screenwriter Russell Gewirtz whose rookie effort, 'Inside Man', was a story about a bank heist that had little credibility. The plot of 'Righteous Kill', however, is modestly clever. A vigilante serial killer is on the loose in New York City, murdering various criminals. His calling card is a rhymed poem left at each crime scene. De Niro (Turk) and Pacino (Rooster) play the two aging detectives assigned to solve the case. De Niro is seen throughout on a surveillance tape seemingly 'confessing' to committing the murders. But in a twist at the end of the story, his confession turns out to be forced and it ends up that Pacino is actually the murderer all along.

Before arriving at the film's climax, we learn that Turk planted evidence on a murderer who got off on a technicality and as a result the criminal is sent off to jail. A good part of the movie chronicles how each of the bad guys are dispatched by the vigilante. The main bad guy is a drug dealer played by 50 Cent who is convincingly menacing. An early unconvincing scene involves Turk and Rooster sending a pretty coke-addicted lawyer to the drug dealer's lair, wearing a wire, and trying to entrap him. The drug dealer sees through the ruse right away and the lawyer is shot by the drug dealer's bodyguard (but eventually survives). Why veteran detectives would place an amateur informant in such easy jeopardy doesn't ring true. There's a subplot involving a sexy Crime Scene Investigator who is simultaneously bedding Turk and Perez, a younger detective (played by John Leguizamo). Perez and his partner Riley (played by Donnie Wahlberg) come to the conclusion that it's one of their own who has been committing the murders.

Various posters here have pointed to deficiencies in the script including that De Niro and Pacino are too old for their parts, there's a lack of character development (too many good cop/bad cop clichés), a lack of suspense and scenes that are repetitious. One poster suggested that the characters needed to have a softer side but I think it was the director's intent to keep the entire story as dark as possible. The constant use of the moody soundtrack throughout most of the film compensated for the lack of emotional depth of the characters. Was this a good thing? I don't know. But clearly the music added to the film's 'neo-noir' feel.

'Righteous Kill' will probably do fairly well at the box office if one factors in the potential global market. This is really a noir version of 'Dirty Harry' and those who love having their stick-figure bad guys brought to justice without putting up a fight, will be drawn to his type of film. And then there's De Niro and Pacino. De Niro almost always channels the same character--a hot-headed gangster type (I was so much reminded of his performance in 'Analyze This', although that's a comedy). Moviegoers always want to pay money to see De Niro even though he usually coughs up the same shtick. Pacino however is much more subdued in this film until the end. Only then does he allow his over the top persona to come out. Actually that was the intent of the screenwriter; the audience is led to believe that De Niro is the hot head and Pacino is the reasonable one. Pacino keeps De Niro "in check' throughout the film until the ending.

Although many claimed they 'figured out' the twist ending 30 minutes into the film, I must confess that I didn't see it coming. But once it was revealed I didn't really buy the reversal since it was inconsistent with the way the character arc had developed. Pacino's 'Rooster' has noble motives for offing the bad guys. But suddenly, when the sexy CSI gal is about to expose him, he viciously attacks her. It just seemed totally out of character for this noble 'Dirty Harry' character to suddenly decompensate and attack a woman. What 'noble' criminal would do such a thing? Rooster's explanation is that he became disappointed with Turk after Turk planted evidence on the murderer who got off on a technicality. He had 'looked up' to Turk but now the image of him being a noble cop had been destroyed. Somehow he now becomes a vigilante serial killer because his partner no longer 'went by the book'. This is his explanation as to why he becomes unhinged which leads his partner of 30 years to shoot him to death. If you believe in this motive, then you'll believe that the portrait of the New York City Police Department as depicted in this film is a realistic one.

When all is said and done, we never get a feel for Turk and Rooster as flesh and blood human beings. There is little 'back story' to 'Righteous Kill' and that applies to all the characters. 'Righteous Kill" remains a modestly entertaining detective mystery with little character development and chiefly relying on the hit or miss semi-comic banter between two aging Hollywood legends.