MovieChat Forums > Light Sleeper (1992) Discussion > Superb film underdone by score

Superb film underdone by score

posted 16 years ago by maedhbh69
9 replies | jump to latest

I have more or less given up on movies in the last ten years and confine myself mainly to watching movies from the 70's and early 80's. I think the only really great movies that were made in the last 15 years or so are 'Boogie Nights', (Gladiator - not my kind of movie but it is brilliant), 'the Pianist', 'the Ice Storm', 'Closer', 'Casino', 'The Shawshank Redemption', 'The Green Mile', 'The Player'; 'Schindler's List; now I'm running out of energy but there was a time from the 70's to the mid 80's when finding a good movie was like shooting fish in a barrel whereas now waiting for a movie that appeals to me is like waiting for a bus that never turns up.

Now, plot and characterisation take second place to computer imagery. I bloody hate 'Beowulf'. Every second plot now is a fantasy; either centring on the end of the world - I've lost count of the rubbish films made around this theme the latest one featuring 'Will Smith's 'I am Legend' or else it revolving around some sort of pathetic sci-fi adventure like the truly awful 'Fantastic Four' series. I also really really hate Quentin Tarantino that poseur of comic violence.

So when this film came on the other night after 'Peep Show' I was prepared to give it 10 minutes after which time I would normally switch off but didn't. This film has everything that is lacking in the films they make now. Real raw emotional truth, perfectly judged performances, gritty cinematography and nothing except perhaps the choice of some of the tracks chosen for the soundtrack take from its power. 'Taxi Driver' was a masterpiece but this film was like its older brother. There are so many similarities.
Can't wait to see to again if it is ever put on. Maybe they'll give 'Father of the Bride' or 'The Wedding Crashers' a break from prime time and give it another play.

[–] rosen1ba 16 years ago

I really agree with everything you've said...although I've found a few pleasant films within the past 15 years that make me re-evaluate my stance on today's films.

I watched Light Sleeper last night. I remember when it came out in theatres in the 1992, but I was not old enough to see it. Regardless, it didn't come to my small-market area which normally received second-run films anyways. I finally rented Light Sleeper in 2000 and absolutely loved it - specifically Dafoe's performance. Being that 2000 was only a couple years removed from the onslaught of some really great psycho-dramas (like Light Sleeper, One False Move, and Rampage) I had really hoped to see more of these films surface within the following years. Looking back the past 8 years - I'm fairly disappointed yet not really surprised.

This lead me to say to myself: "They simply cannot make films like this anymore." And they haven't - Light Sleeper is still one of those films 16 years later which I am grateful that not a lot people know about (as evidenced by the lack of comments on this board).

And by the way, I really liked the music. I thought the jangly reverberated guitar mixed with synthesizers made for a great effect.

[–] tinydr47 15 years ago

A tidbit that people may find amusing... Schrader did a Q&A tonight during a screening of Light Sleeper & Blue Collar: he pointed out that he originally planned the script around three Bob Dylan songs. Schrader apparently knew Dylan well enough that he thought he would let him use the songs for the movie: instead Dylan countered with a group of six different songs, but refused to let Schrader use the songs the script had been planned around.

So... Schrader used the songs heard on the soundtrack.

[–] polysicsarebest 14 years ago

This is probably the best time for movies right now, if you look in the underground.

Easily the worst time for mainstream culture but that goes everything.. video games, music, etc.

[–] 18heavenly 14 years ago

I agree that the score was the only thing that grated and that dates this film. Sure it is a '90s film, but the score is the only thing that makes it of its time, as opposed to about its time.

[–] franzkabuki 13 years ago

Taken separately from the score, it´s a bland, uninspired and wholly artificial feeling second-hand story about Dafoe in vaguely defined trouble. Add the soundtrack and it races right into the territory of high kitsch. Furthermore, add a boring, typical (anti)climax of gunfire plus a goofy, wussed-out redemptive ending note and you have a fairly typical - and, compared to Hardcore, American Gigolo or Affliction, inferior - Schrader movie. It´s a soulless, characterless story which so-so badly wants to have soul and character, but it woulda taken a director that is actually visually gifted to elevate this dimestore yarn. And, gotta mention, the diary entries Dafoe was reading us on the voiceover were trying to evoke Travis Bickle so hard it´s pathetic. A completely unremarkable artifact of 80´s-early 90´s urban chic. 4/10.

"facts are stupid things" - Ronald Reagan

[–] balthazar_bee 12 years ago

Dammit, Franz, I haven't seen this movie in many years, but your write up brought it all back. Odd though: I remember liking it. Youth.

[–] GuyOnTheLeft 12 years ago

You nailed it! Very, very well stated: you perfectly encapsulated the train wreck that is this movie.

Netflix predicted four stars for me on this one (when the average rating is an anemic 2.9), and so as agog as I am at what an overbaked mess the movie is, I'm also meta-fascinated by the fact that since Netflix thought I'd like it much more than the average person does, there is clearly some considerable number of cinephiles out there who have otherwise good taste (because I assure you, I do have good taste!) but blew the call on this one. That is backed up by Roger Ebert's perfect four star review linked in the "External Reviews" on this site, as well as the plaudits from the Washington Post reviewers. I mean, huh?

[–] mobocracy 8 years ago

I like this movie, but not because of any artistic taste pretensions I have, but because of the interesting look at mid-level middle/upper class drug dealing.

I sometimes wonder if that's actually part of the generally high regard it has among others. Not that as a film it's great, but that the audience is inclined to be fascinated by the clean and easy anything-you-want drugs by delivery depicted in this film. From what I've read this type of drug dealing isn't uncommon in New York City, a byproduct of density and wealth and anonymity mostly unique to DC.

The soundtrack I find to be pretty tiresome, a kind of a Chris Isaak knockoff a couple of years past its sell-by date.

To what extent I find myself a film critic, I've always had trouble with Schrader directed films. He's a good writer, but anything he's directed I struggle with, as if he was just trying to mimic Scorsese without really knowing what he was doing.

[–] bear022013-909-645034 8 years ago

So true.I am nauseated by the filth/mediocrity/and anti-male message movies in last 20 years.