Up until its final ten minutes or so, and despite the presence of Clint Eastwood in front of and behind the camera, "True Crime" is truly boring. A tired retreading of cliched characters and an overly familiar "the clock's ticking against the con on death row" story, one can only assume that some potential was present at one point concerning this production. Nonetheless, so many similar stories have been done so often before -- and with much more compelling results -- that this one significantly pales in comparison.
Based on the novel by Andrew Klavan (that's adapted by screenwriters Larry Gross ("48 Hours"), Paul Brickman ("Risky Business") and Stephen Schiff ("The Deep End of the Ocean"), and as helmed by Eastwood ("Unforgiven," "The Bridges of Madison County") in his twenty-first outing in the director's chair, the film never feels as if it were properly allowed to gel or ripen.
While we understand that the film is intentionally more of a character study than a "save the doomed man" story, the latter seems more of a plot contrivance/catalyst -- where the "hero" gets to redeem himself by trying to save the day -- and thus feels rather shortchanged. Along the way, the dialogue often feels similarly contrived and forced, and beyond a few fun scenes between Eastwood and James Woods (who plays his boss), the film never feels like it hits its stride or manages to develop a natural rhythm.
Most of that's due to the way the protagonist is drawn as well as his subsequent behavior and attitude. While it's occasionally refreshing to see characters who aren't perfect heroes -- and thus come off a bit more like everyday folk -- Eastwood's adulterous, recently alcoholic and overall S.O.B. character is taken to such an extreme that it takes the audience more than a while to get behind his efforts/goal.
That, when combined with the fact that the film's momentum remains unfocused and clearly unhurried throughout most of its duration -- at least until the very end and despite a general plot description that would suggest otherwise -- ends up creating an odd effect. Although we're obviously supposed to be increasingly nervous and apprehensive about whether Eastwood will be able to save this man's life, the feeling audiences will most likely experience instead is frustration.
Of course it doesn't help that this loser character -- whose sole catalyst to intervene is his nose that can smell when something stinks -- has no concrete plan of action. While that wouldn't be surprising for any normal person in real life -- and is possibly done to purposefully frustrate the audience (although I don't know what benefit would come of that) -- the fact that his character stumbles into solutions instead of actively generating them demeans why most of us go to the movies in the first place.
Any of us could stumble into accidentally saving the day. What we want is the hero -- no matter his or her personal flaws and the seemingly insurmountable obstacles he or she faces -- who figures out how to actively and/or cleverly solve the dilemma. When Eastwood happens upon a crucial, but elusive piece of information in another person's house within seconds of starting his search, those at our screening could not contain their heckle-filled disbelief.
Had the story gone more of the conspiracy route with Eastwood's young co-worker being killed because she was getting too close to the truth (which leads to him getting the assignment), him then likewise uncovering the hidden/glossed over facts (which would explain how he could do as much so fast when others couldn't do the same over a matter of months), and then having him accused of her death (since he's an adulterous, unlikable character and to get him off the case), all of it might have been more believable. As it stands, however, much of the story is often quite preposterous.
The film's only redeeming quality is with its performances, although the old "love Eastwood/tolerate or dislike Eastwood" bias will undoubtedly influence one's reaction. Playing the flawed lead character, Eastwood ("The Bridges of Madison County," "Dirty Harry") does create some nice subtleties that give character depth. While he never makes him that much of a likeable or empathetic guy, at least Eastwood keeps him interesting.
Isaiah Washington ("Out of Sight," "Bulworth"), despite unfortunately being relegated to more of a supporting character, is quite good as the man facing what may be an unjustified, but seemingly inevitable death. The traditional supporting roles are all strong, including Diane Venora ("The Jackal," "Heat") and Lisa Gay Hamilton ("Beloved," "Jackie Brown") as the wives with different views of their husbands, but James Woods ("Ghosts of Mississippi," "Contact") as Eastwood's rascally boss clearly steals the show.
While we it's not that difficult to realize that the picture seems more interested in telling the reporter's story and uses the con on death row subplot as a comparative and perhaps even symbolic device between the troubled men -- which even includes their wives and little girls -- the end result isn't that great or even compelling.
Without the power of the thematically similar "Dead Man Walking" (Sean Penn, Susan Sarandon) and featuring a generally unlikable protagonist and his slipshod course of action, the film is likely to frustrate and/or try the patience of fans of traditional Hollywood fare as well as those who've admired Eastwood's more memorable movies and characters.
Although having a down and out character face seemingly insurmountable obstacles as well as a ticking clock -- all with a man's life hanging on the line -- sounds exciting and filled with potential, you may be surprised -- at least until the predictable, stereotypical ending when the pace finally picks up -- just how uneventful the picture turns out and how uninvolved the audience will be. We certainly were, and thus give "True Crime" just a 3 out of 10.