Gorky Park (1983) from
Tuna and Johnny Web (Uncle Scoopy; Greg Wroblewski)
|(Scoopy's note: I agreed with
everything Tuna said, and I had some additional thoughts,
so I just combined it all into one review. We give it two
Gorky Park (1983) is a very classy
whodunit starring William Hurt as Renko, a Moscow city
detective investigating a bizarre triple murder.
bodies are found in Gorky Park, and all of them have had
their faces and fingertips removed. Renko smells KGB from
the beginning, and tries to get off the case, but is
persuaded by the head of the department to stay with the
case. It turns out that just about everyone in Moscow is
using Renko's investigation for his own purposes, and
Renko feels like he's heading straight into a trap.
showed breasts and buns in the sex scene with
|His biggest lead is a young woman (Joanna
Pacula in one of her first roles) whose skates were found
on the feet of one of the victims. Eventually, Renko's
prime suspect becomes an influential American (Lee
Marvin), so the Moscow cop forms an uneasy alliance with a
revenge-minded New York police detective (Brian Dennehy),
whose son was one of the three murdered.
The movie is
beautifully filmed, and the performances are top notch.
though it is a good picture, the filmmakers must now be
killing themselves that it could have been a great movie
with the freedom to do what they wanted to do:
part of Moscow is played by Helsinki, and those
cities are not very similar except for harsh
winters. Imagine how spectacular it could be now,
doing it for real in Moscow.
actors are good with accents, some aren't. A lot
of very fine actors like William Hurt are better
able to develop their characters without the
constraints of an artificial accent. Besides,
what is the logic in having a Russian (played by
an American) speak English to other Russians with
an English accent instead of an American accent.
Huh? It would have been great to get rid of the
pointless accent, even though he did it
wasn't much heat between Pacula and Hurt. They
either needed a rewrite or some retakes, or maybe
the love story wasn't really essential anyway.
||Despite those points,
we both really liked the movie.
- The international
politics and the Russian internal politics were
- The police work was
interesting to follow.
- Brian Dennehy and
Lee Marvin just couldn't have been cast any
better. Those two guys were perfect for their
roles. I also liked Hurt's thoughtful
interpretation of the non-political policeman
with integrity, walking in a dangerous world
where everyone but him is a conspirator.
- I think the ending
is a real feel-good moment that provides a needed
catharsis from Renko's tension, which we have
been feeling along with him.
- With their
votes ... IMDB summary: IMDb voters
score it 6.5, pretty consistent with
Maltin's three stars.
- With their
dollars ... $16 million US gross.
guideline: 7.5 usually indicates a level of
excellence, about like three and a half stars
from the critics. 6.0 usually indicates lukewarm
watchability, about like two and a half stars
from the critics. The fives are generally not
worthwhile unless they are really your kind of
material, about like two stars from the critics.
Films under five are generally awful even if you
like that kind of film, equivalent to about one
and a half stars from the critics or less,
depending on just how far below five the rating
guideline: A means the movie is so good it
will appeal to you even if you hate the genre. B means the movie is not
good enough to win you over if you hate the
genre, but is good enough to do so if you have an
open mind about this type of film. C means it will only
appeal to genre addicts, and has no crossover
appeal. D means you'll hate it even if you
like the genre. E means that you'll hate it even if
you love the genre. F means that the film is not only
unappealing across-the-board, but technically
inept as well.
Based on this
description, this film is a B or a
B-. Scoopy and Tuna agree on this range. Two
thumbs up, despite some flaws.
the Movie House home page