(Everything but the kitchen sink…)
CAST: Robert Redford, Debra Winger, Daryl Hannah, Brian Dennehy, Steven Hill, Terence Stamp, John McMartin, Christine Baranski, Sara Botsford.
DIRECTOR: Ivan Reitman
WARNING: Some SPOILERS and one big goulash of a movie - straight ahead…
In our review for GHOSTBUSTERS (review # 98) and GREMLINS (review #196), we talked about how tricky the “Horror Comedy Genre” is. You have to be very precise with how you blend the scares and yuks, otherwise you wind up with something awful like CRITTERS (review #276). Same goes for the “Thriller Comedy Genre.” The balance between thrills and laughs needs to be absolutely perfect, otherwise you wind up with a film that is neither thrilling enough to be a thriller, yet not funny enough to be a comedy. In other words, let’s recall that famous Chinese Proverb: “He Who Chases Two Rabbits, Eventually Loses Both.” Or is that “Never Eat General Tso’s Chicken With Ho-Hos and Twizzlers Or You Will End Up With A Fucker Of A Tummy Ache?”
Whatever. The point is this: just like the Horror Comedy Genre, the Thriller Comedy Genre is one that is very difficult to get right. Proof of that lies with our next review, the 1986 Robert Redford / Debra Winger vehicle LEGAL EAGLES. This flick doesn’t know whether it wants to be a sophisticated comedy, a screwball satire, a light romance, or a suspense/thriller - so it tries to be all of them at the same time. And let’s just say I haven’t this bad a case of whiplash since I rode the New York-New York rollercoaster during my last Vegas sin-fest. Actually, with this flick’s erratic swinging from genre to genre, it makes that rollercoaster look like a pleasant bicycle ride.
Our hero is NYC Assistant District Attorney Tom Logan (Robert Redford), who finds himself drawn into a knotty robbery case involving Chelsea Reardon (Daryl Hannah), daughter of a once-famous-now-dead artist who may or may not have been the victim of foul play many years ago. Chelsea’s been accused of trying to steal one of her late father’s paintings from one of his former associates, a sleazebag known as Forrester (John McMartin).
Defending Chelsea is pretty but dingbat-ish defense attorney Laura J. Kelly (Debra Winger), who is famous (actually, “infamous” would be a more appropriate adjective) for her zany courtroom tactics like: (1) trying to put a dog (not a highly unattractive person - an actual canine) on the stand; (2) trying to defend a fence by saying the dozens and dozens of stolen electronics in his house were all gifts from his family; and (3) generally behaving like a female version of Jim Carrey. Let’s just say I’d be interested in hearing how Chelsea figured Laura would be the best counsel to defend her. Well… come to think of it, Chelsea’s pretty daffy herself, so there you have it: soul sisters.
Anyhow, through a convoluted series of events that makes the plot of SUCKER PUNCH look downright believable, Tom finds himself pulled into Laura’s crazy-ass plot to get Chelsea off. Not that way, pervs. I’m talking about the robbery charge, which is mysteriously dropped - then replaced with a murder charge when one of her exes turns up dead. For someone as stunningly hot as Chelsea, she sure doesn’t seem to have much luck with men.
Before you know it, Tom and Laura are co-defending Chelsea in open court. With a tight-ass like Tom and a loon like Laura, how will this all turn out? Will they kill each other before even cross-examining the first witness? Or will these two dipshits actually, you know, learn to work with each other? Is Chelsea actually guilty? What secret is she hiding? What is her secret agenda? Is she playing Tom and Laura? Or is someone else behind the whole art theft murder mystery? Is it her dead father's former associates? Is it… Andy Warhol? Or even - gasp! - Pablo Picasso?
Yes, I know Picasso and Warhol are both dead, Peanut Gallery. Cut me some slack here, would ya?
BUT, SERIOUSLY: I wasn’t kidding earlier when I wrote that LEGAL EAGLES tries to blend several genres all at once. Part-legal thriller, part-mystery, part-sophisticated comedy, part-satire, part-romance… this film has one busy plot. Unfortunately, the end result is a cinematic metaphor of that old chestnut: “Jack of all Trades, Master of None…” Neither thrilling enough to be a good thriller, nor atmospheric enough to be a good mystery, or funny enough to be a good comedy, or romantic enough to be a good romance - LEGAL EAGLES, while sleek and competently made, is ultimately a disappointment on all fronts.
Credit the talented and attractive cast for giving this film whatever virtue it has. Robert Redford proves again that he is a natural leading man. Redford has always been one of those actors like Paul Newman and Kevin Costner who slyly use their good looks to allow audiences to underestimate them. But under those “Football Captain” features is a sharp, keen intelligence. Redford manages to make Tom Logan interesting enough that we keep a bead on him.
Debra Winger is equally good as Laura Kelly. Winger brings a nice, goofy air to this “professional woman” role, as well as a certain gawky quality that is absolutely endearing. While Winger’s chemistry with Redford isn’t something to write home about, it isn’t exactly lukewarm, either. They have just enough spark between them to keep Laura and Tom’s relationship reasonably interesting.
As the mysterious “femme fatale” who may or may not be a thief/murderess, Daryl Hannah brings just the right amount of cool allure and distant spaciness to Chelsea Reardon to keep us on our toes. As with future ice princesses like Catherine Trammell (Sharon Stone) from BASIC INSTINCT and past ones like Francie Stevens (Grace Kelly) from TO CATCH A THIEF, Chelsea is meant to be an ambiguous figure whose true alliance is never clear until close to the end. While Hannah's performance isn’t quite on the same level as Winger's and Redford's, she still delivers and holds her own.
The supporting cast of Brian Dennehy, John McMartin, Christine Baranski, and Terence Stamp are okay, but LEGAL EAGLES reaches the average mark mainly because of the talent of its three leads. Without them, this film might’ve rated even lower. When you have a film that tries to be everything at once, it helps to have charismatic stars to help distract you from the fact that the movie misses the mark in a big way.
