Review: "Pride and Glory" too real to be entertaining

Sometimes you can gauge the quality of a film by the preponderance, or absence, of television ads in the second week of the film's release. In case you haven't noticed, New Line Cinema is no longer promoting "Pride and Glory."

"Pride and Glory" is not a complete failure. It's well acted, gritty, dark and depicted in a  harsh, no-hope-for-the-future style. The film often reminded me of a successor to Scorcese's "Taxi Driver," not that I'm comparing the quality of the two films, but that "Pride and Glory" takes place in a New York that has grown bleaker and more dangerous since Scorcese's day. It's all a point of view, I suppose, albeit a dark one.

The film is billed as a multi-generational police drama based on police loyalty, corruption and family betrayal. The story begins with four cops being killed in a drug bust gone bad. As Ray Tierney (Edward Norton) starts to investigate the crime he soon learns that a cop was involved in helping the killer get away. As he gets deeper into the investigation he finds that his brother-in-law might be the rogue cop and his real brother might be covering it up.

The film has two basic problems. First is that except for its almost documentary look — handheld camera, no dramatic lighting and excessive grainy picture — it's a story that we've seen too, too many times.

Second is that the harsh realism is just too much. Of course I'm a big fan of realism, but films are art, and that's why they cost so much to make. A concerted effort to remove all the things that make movies fun to watch ends up being a strange amalgam of style and storyline that would fit better in a documentary — which would be a must-see film.

Or as it is often said, If you want to make a point, write a book.

The history behind the film is also interesting. Gavin O'Conner, the film's writer and director, has tried for years to get the film made. Studios, he said, felt the film was too dark, or too real for audiences and would not fit within their line-up. It seemed just another example of the big bad studios deciding what the public should see. Well, the film was too dark, the ending was a bit weak, and just because the director's family closely resembled the film family did not mean this specific screenplay should have been made.

I'm not going to suggest I know how to take a $50 million  gamble, but I will say that if in doubt, $50 million would be a hard check to write.