Review of Sea of Love (1989) by Ola G — 08 Aug 2015

New York City homicide detective Frank Keller (Al Pacino) is a burnt-out alcoholic. His wife left him and remarried one of his colleagues. He is depressed about reaching middle age and his 20th year on the police force. Frank is assigned to investigate the murder of a man in Manhattan, shot dead while face down in his bed, naked, listening to an old 45rpm recording of "Sea of Love". Keller has three clues -- a lipstick-smeared cigarette, a want-ad that the dead man placed in a newspaper, and fingerprints of the perpetrator. A second man dies in the same manner in Queens. Detective Sherman Touhey (John Goodman) from the local precinct suggests that he and Frank collaborate. Both victims had placed rhyming ads in the lonely hearts column of the newspaper, seeking dates. The detectives track down Raymond Brown, the only other man with a rhyming ad. He's a married man and admits placing the ad, but swears on his children's eyes that he threw away all the letters and never saw anyone. Frank gets an idea to place their own rhyming ad in the paper, meet women who respond in a restaurant and take the prints from their drinking glasses. A superior officer thinks Frank is looking for an excuse to go on dates at the department's expense, and does not approve the idea. He changes his mind when Brown also turns up dead in the same manner as the other two murder victims. Frank has dinner with several women, while Sherman - posing as a waiter - puts their glasses into evidence bags. One woman, divorcee Helen Cruger (Ellen Barkin), shows no interest in Frank and leaves before she takes a drink. Frank bumps into her again at a market, but this time she is more friendly. Since they didn´t get her fingerprints Helen becomes the main suspect in the case, but Keller falls in love with her and convinces himself that she isn´t the killer...

This was Al Pacino´s comeback after a 4 year hiatus and it rendered him so really good reviews while "Sea Of Love" is a suspense cop thriller that we've seen countless times before and I would say after "Sea Of Love". The Washington Post stated that if the film "were able to get it all, it would be a great movie. As it is, it's stirring and messy and hints at more than it is capable of delivering." Roger Ebert thought "the ending of "Sea of Love" cheats by bringing in a character from left field at the last moment. Part of the fun in a movie like this is guessing the identity of the killer, and part of the problem with "Sea of Love" is that the audience is not fairly treated. Technically, I suppose, the plot can be justified. But I felt cheated. I had good feelings for the characters and their relationships, but I walked out feeling the plot played fast and loose with the rules of whodunits." When seeing it today I personally don´t think there´s major sparks between Pacino and Barkin. There´s chemistry and you believe their somewhat unbalanced relation, but I wouldn´t say there´s sparks and the sex scenes aren´t that sexy. For being 1989 maybe, but not in 2015. I have never really liked Ellen Barkin that much, and despite her being praised for her performance in this movie, I think she did a better job in Walter Hill´s classic "Johnny Handsome". The plotline is quite standard and there´s only suspense in certain scenes not throughout the whole movie which would be of course the ideal situation. And the plot holes are all over the place creating a less dynamic film. John Goodman is a good support and he creates a balance with Pacino´s down and out alcoholic cop. The funny thing is that when you see it today, the minute Michael Rooker appears you know that he is involved in the killings. He is such a typecast bad guy it goes through the screen and I reckon we knew that already in 1989. Hence the revealing of the killer in the end is hardly a surprise. "Sea Of Love" is a said quite standard in my eyes and if it wouldn´t be for Pacino´s participation it would drown amongst other films in the genre from that time period.