Freebie and the Bean

Dir: Richard Rush

1974

*****

The precursor to the buddy/buddy cop movie. Without Freebie and the Bean there’d be no Tango & Cash, no Lethal Weapon, no Last Boy Scout, no Bad Boys, no 48 Hours, no Running Scared, no Rush Hour, no Midnight Run and no Red Heat. There probably wouldn’t be K9 or Turner & Hootch either and the film really opened up the possibilities as far as stunts are concerned, with films like The Blues Brothers and Smokey and the Bandit taking notes. It’s influence goes beyond that though and the impromptu conversations in Pulp Fiction, although highly scripted, always makes me think about Freebie and the Bean. It is a funny film that took films such as Bullit, Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid and The French Connection (to some degree) and mixed them all together with a Jack Lemon and Walter Matthau comedy. It very funny but it is a tough humor, cop humor, and essentially a genre was born. Peter Hyam’s Busting also has to share credit, but neither film is thought of whenever a new buddy cop film is a hit. You can pretty much file Freebie and the Bean under ‘forgotten classic’, even though it did pretty well and even got its own (doomed) TV series. I think maybe the problem was that all involved didn’t realise what a great film they’d made. James Caan and Alan Arkin are both outstanding as fast-takin’, wise-crackin’ police detectives and the film only became an action comedy after the pair met for improvisational sessions leading up to filming, where they would explore a more comedic approach to their characters’ relationship. The film has comedy, action, comedy-action, some quite serious scenes and personal extras that gave the characters some life. The characters weren’t formed out of a hobby, interest, social problem or whatever, they were real guys who had unreal experiences that felt real because they were. Arkin later described the film as ‘absolute garbage’ and that he only did it for the money. He and Caan were said to be sore after seeing just how much of the film ended up being about the stunts and less about their performances. However, in retrospect it is genius, an original for 1974 and the formula has rarely been bettered, not for want of trying. There is also a really strong plot among the action and the comedy that I think is often forgotten. The end of the film gets really serious, sure there is a scene halfway through the film where Bean and Freebie essentially murder a guy, but the finale really gets you in the gut. Dare I say, there is also a Hitchcockian element to it, hidden in all the palooza. Caan, Arkin and director Rush are all geniuses as far as I’m concerned, I don’t think any of the film can be claimed as serendipitous or luck, Rush knew what he was doing and Caan and Arkin were on top of their games. However, I don’t think anyone could have ever guessed what they had essentially created, although mention the film these days and many film fans wouldn’t know either. It’s a lost classic, remembered by a dwindling few, even though it’s one of the greats of the early 1970s and one of the most influential films of all time.

Getting Straight

Dir: Richard Rush

1970

****

1970’s Getting Straight was the first of two collaborations of director Richard Rush and screenwriter Robert Kaufman. Like their second film (Freebie and the Bean), Getting Straight is very much of its time and is a pioneering beacon in the world of cinema, even though most people haven’t seen or unaware of its existence. The novel on which is was based on was only three years old at the time of release, so the story was relevant to the climate in which it was set. 1970 was a time after many a protest and riot had had great effect – there were plenty more to come, but the youth suddenly felt they had a voice and the establishment suddenly found themselves without full control. What better example of the social and political climate of the time then that of a university. Elliott Gould, who had just found success and had made a name for himself in both M*A*S*H and Bob & Carol & Ted & Alice, was the perfect choice to play non-conformist graduate student and veteran Harry Bailey. A former student activist, Harry goes back to university to complete an educations course to become a teacher. He tries best to avoid the increasing student unrest but finds it difficult given his girlfriend and friends are leaders in the constant protests. His fellow students look up to him and the establishment want and encourage him but his fellow students also begin to doubt the man they look up to, while the establishment also begun to suspect he will let their side down. Bailey wears his feelings – and political opinion on his sleeve but it becomes increasingly unclear whether he can be part of both worlds. It’s a role Elliott Gould was made for, with a script that suited him perfectly. It’s a very good depiction of student politics of the time that paints a very balanced picture of life how it was. It’s now considered something of a period piece, a window to the past as it were. What I really admired about it was how fair it really was. Bailey has his faults – many faults in fact – but he acted as the perfect protagonist of the day. Protest is often best delivered by those with nothing to lose but then that is how the establishment gains obedience. The students muddy the water and end up rioting for certain things that aren’t that important but the establishment also overlook how unjust they are, purely because they follow the ways things have always been done, simply for the sake of it and because they’ve detached themselves from society. Both camps are balanced perfectly, with Robert F. Lyons playing Harry’s friend Nick – a drug taking chameleon whose mission statement changes every five minutes – a brilliant representation of the hippie movement of the time and Candice Bergen playing Harry’s girlfriend Jan – a nice but simple girl who wants justice but also wants a white picket fenced house in the middle of suburbia and collector of opinion and interesting people Jake – played by Harrison Ford in his debut - on one side, and Jeff Corey as friendly but right-wing Dr. Edward Willhunt, compassionate but clueless Dr. Kasper (Cecil Kellaway in his last ever role) and arrogant establishment lap-dog Lysander, played by Leonard Stone (who was soon to be remembered as Violet’s father, Mr. Beauregarde) on the other. Harry fights impetuousness behavior one one side and futile objectiveness on the other, it’s very amusing but also quite serious. The climax is striking and a little absurd, which I think it probably the best conclusion it could have given the content and characters. It’s a peculiar film, very much of its time, not too dated though, overall a forgotten classic.

Color of Night
Dir: Richard Rush
1994
*
Color of Night was sold as a sexy erotic thriller but the truth is that it was more like a clumsy cartoon that knew nothing about its subject matter - with nipples. It's got a great cast of some of my favorite actors including Bruce Willis, Brad Dourif, Lance Henriksen, Kevin J. O'Connor and Scott Bakula, none of whom make up for what is possibly the stupidest films I've ever seen. Color of Night is essentially a 'Who dunnit' murder mystery with psychobabble. The group of suspects/victims are connected by the fact they all attend the same therapy group, their therapist being the victim they're all suspected of killing. Writer Billy Ray has come leaps and bound since his debut but in 1994 it was evident he knew nothing about suspense, intrigue or indeed, psychology. The conclusion was obvious within the first 10 minutes of the film, thanks to what is possibly the worst bit of make-up in the history of cinema. Overblown sets, a really horrible script and more pointless sub-plots you can shake a stick at, make for one truly puzzling thriller. Puzzling that any of the actors acted again, puzzling that Billy Ray worked again and puzzling it was ever green-lit in the first place.