Looking Back at 'A Guide to Recognizing Your Saints'
Can this film change Brad's opinion of Channing Tatum?
NOTE: I am reviewing this now based solely on recommendations by readers over the past year or so to check it out in an effort to change my negative opinion of Channing Tatum and what I believe to be his ability to only play meatheads with little to no intelligence. Strangely enough that is pretty much exactly what he plays in this film, but there is a little more to it and I am glad I gave this one a turn.
I am not sure how much it matters that A Guide to Recognizing Your Saints, which is sold as autobiographical, is actually semi-autobiographical (at best) and at least one of the deaths in the film is completely made up. I didn't do enough research to find out if the other one was or not, but my guess is that it was made up as well. Personally, this did disappoint me on some level. I felt cheated, because when a guy writes a book, then adapts that book into a screenplay and then directs the screenplay and it is all about his life you expect some level of honesty. I am trusting that when it says "autobiographical" in the synopsis that is what I am getting, especially when the guy at the center of the story is the film's writer and director.
Dito Montiel is who I am talking about. A Guide to Recognizing Your Saints is based on the book of the same name. However, to read the description of the book is not to read this film's synopsis. None of this makes this film any less entertaining, but it does take a little bit of the air out of it in terms of emotion.
The film opens, introducing us to Dito Montiel in his mid-30s to early 40s played by Robert Downey Jr., an impressive name considering Montiel is a first time writer/director. As a matter of fact the entire cast is impressive when you look at it from that perspective. Dito is at a reading of his newly published book and as he lays down the groundwork for the film we are quickly taken back in time to the early '80s in Astoria, New York and a young Dito (Shia LaBeouf) staring at the audience.
Photo: First Look Home Entertainment
"My name's Dito. I'm going to leave everybody in this film…" he says and we begin.
We are introduced to Dito's way of life and the young thugs he runs with. A couple of his friends are minor neighborhood annoyances, but Antonio (Channing Tatum) is the actual bad seed. Taking this into account, he is also the character that keeps the film running and what I perceive to be Dito's inability to realize that as a first time director actually works to the film's advantage.
One word I wrote down while watching was "unforgivable", which is exactly what this film is. Actions are taken and no time is left for pondering or consoling.
So, you got beat with a baseball bat. Well let's do something about it? There's no time for crying.
It's unrelenting. As an audience member you see what is eating away at each and every character. Dito wants to get the hell out of Astoria, anywhere looks good. California? Sure. Antonio is looking for someone to love him and care about him, and he is damn sure going to make sure everyone suffers because of it. Nerf, well Nerf is the runt of the group. A sad little man. Then there is Giuseppe in a moment that is entirely unbelievable and as it turns out that's exactly what it is. However, it too is treated with a calm and cool hand. One thing I will say for Dito is that he realizes that focusing on the blood and guts of violence isn't exactly what gets at an audience, it is how the characters in the film react to that situation that has an effect on those watching. This is where Tatum shines.
Photo: First Look Home Entertainment
There are several other good performances in this film outside of Tatum, yes, but considering I already believe Chazz Palminteri, Dianne Wiest and Robert Downey Jr. to be good actors it didn't surprise me as much. What did surprise me was Tatum's ability to give a meat head character a heart. Tatum is able to bring true emotion to the scenes he is in and it really seems like he found a character he connected with. I have no idea if that is true, but this is the best I have seen him and has me now considering giving Stop-Loss a chance, when before I was passing primarily due to his involvement.
Recognizing Your Saints seems to have lost something in the translation, but it doesn't seem like Montiel was setting out to tell his story as much as he was trying to tell a story with his life serving as the groundwork. While it isn't a perfect film it definitely has some signs of a director that may have some potential if the next time out he doesn't throw every single idea he has up on the screen and restrains himself a bit.
I particularly thought it was inventive to go to black and just toss up text from the script on the screen as the actors read their parts. This may be something he had seen before (I don't remember ever seeing it just like this) or it may have been because the scenes didn't work as filmed, either way I thought it was pretty engaging. I also liked his use of a quick cuts interspersed with moments of black in one of the pivotal scenes toward the end of the film. He shows a lot of guts, he just needs to settle down a bit and perhaps his next outing, which is called Fighting with Tatum again as well as Terrence Howard, will be more of a success than this little known film that received a majority of positive reviews but never found an audience.
Links from Other Sites You May Like
Showing 2 Comments
~ PLEASE NOTE ~
If, in any way, your comment is an attack on the author of this post or a previous commenter, your comment will be deleted without question.
Add a New Comment |
Click to Read Our Commenting Rules & Guidelines
You skipped "Stop-Loss" based off who was acting in it?? Didn't you know Kimberly Pierce directed it? She also directed "Boys Don't Cry" (which I'll most likely have watched by the end of this month if not by the end of this week), which is apparently a fine film indeed. A great director can always make something of a bad actor–as "A Guide to Recognizing Your Saints" proved. Then again, that's the only movie I've seen Channing Tatum in, so in my mind he seems like a perfectly fine actor.
If there was one thing that bothered me about "A Guide to Recognizing Your Saints," it was this: the story was great, the characters were great, and for the most part the style was good. But occasionally Dito Montiel would thrown in some gimmick of filmmaking–some use of sound (or absence of sound), or some camera trick, or most noticeably breaking the fourth-wall–and it didn't entirely work. It seemed… amateurish. Then again, this was Dito's film debut. I'll keep an eye on "Fighting," see if he improves. He has great potential, I feel.
Oh, and another tiny annoying thing was the profanity. Did anyone else find it odd that the F-word was used on an average of two or three times a sentence? I am not even joking here. Here's an actual quote from the movie:
Laurie: You want it straight? 'Cause I'm the only fucking one who's gonna tell you for some fucking reason. You killed him. You killed your father when you left. Are you hearing me? You fucking killed him. You left a trail of blood when you left. So forget me, forget all this shit, forget it, alright? You killed your mother, and you killed your father. And for the past fucking 20 years, he's been dying — just waiting for you to come home. Say 'Daddy, you fucked up.' 'Daddy, I fucking hate your guts.' Daddy whatever the fuck you need to get out of your angsty little fucking head..
Dito: Touch my head one more fucking time I'm gonna go nuts..
Laurie: Go ahead, go fucking nuts. Go fucking nuts. Let it out. Stop fucking running away. You think you're a fucking man, that's just a fucking tail between your legs. Go home and take care of your mother. Go home and take care of your father. *That’s* going to make you a fucking man. That's all you got left. 'Cause if you don't do that shit, it's too fucking late.
And that's basically how all the dialogue goes… the entire time. There's a certain point where swearing becomes gratuitous, and of course that point varies tremendously, depending on the motive for profanity and the skill of the filmmaker. "South Park, "Full Metal Jacket," and "Pulp Fiction" are all noted for their copious amounts of profanity, yet they did things right. It's sort of hard to define, but you can just feel when too much is too much. In "A Guide to Recognizing Your Saints," it's too much.
But as I said, that's a small complaint (for me, that is). Overall, it was a good film and worth checking out.
All I can say is this was a fantastic film. Raw, gritty and honest. It is rare to see films that show the true side to growing up. It's on the same lines as "Thirteen" or "Saturday Night Fever". I saw it for the first time last night.
I read the book a few years ago. I think the key point people need to understand is the movie is BASED on the book. Just like most period-piece movies today. Most of the characters are based on many different people. That doesn’t mean that what happened didn’t happen. It just happened to other people in his life and not the characters in the movie. Read some of the interviews that Dito Montiel gave about the movie. He explains it all.
I can see where the profanity may be overwhelming to some, but really is shows the anst and frustration that all the characters were feeling. The lack of showing their true emotions and never really saying what they were really feeling was expressed through the profanity. How many times did you want to say something and you couldn't get the words out and all you can say is F*@k?
I am one of the few people who really doesnt go to see movies anymore. At least blockbusters, so I didnt know most of the actors. But I can honestly say they ALL gave an amazing performance.
This movie is worth seeing again and again… And read the book too.