Theatrical Review of Street Kings

---

Tools:
Send to a friend »

---

"Street Kings" asks the audience to define corruption. Is a cop who goes outside the system to bring criminals to justice corrupt? How about a police department full of officers who watch each other´s backs in an off-the-books investigation when one of their own is killed? Is a commander protecting his subordinates when they get out line corruption? These are the questions the film poses to the audience and asks us to navigate as the characters work their way through a web of deceit and, yes, corruption.

Tom Ludlow (Keanu Reeves) works outside the law when not on duty. He handles busts on his own, always shielded from scrutiny by his boss, Jack Wander (Forest Whitaker). When a regular beat cop-one of Tom´s old partners, not to mention an officer snitching on him to Internal Affairs-is brutally murdered, a series of events is set in motion no one can predict. Evidence winds up missing, investigators look the other way and innocent people die. But do the ends, namely exacting "justice" on criminals, justify the means?

There is a moral ambiguity to "Street Kings," one we don´t see in film very often. From the very beginning, we never know who the good guys are. By the end, we realize there are no "good" guys, no one in the white hat riding in to save the day. That may be the film´s greatest strength: it´s resistance to classifying every single person on screen. Sure, some are better people than others; murder is never right and, at least on that count, they´re all guilty. However, when lives are on the line, is it not at least decent to help the endangered with all the tools the police can muster? In a round-about way, that´s what Ludlow does. He saves children kidnapped by Really Bad Men with the only instrument really available to him: his weapons.

This incident doesn´t set the film into motion, but it does give us an idea of what information Detective Terrence Washington (Terry Crews) is giving to James Biggs (Hugh Laurie) of IA. Washington wants to be on the right side of the law at all times, preferring to go through the proper channels rather than getting the job done no matter the cost. Obviously, this puts him in an untenable role within the Los Angeles Police Department.

"Street Kings" plays with the idea of a corrupt police department from the bottom up to blur the lines between the "good" and "bad." More than the story we´re given, that theme is what the film is about. Who double crosses who…which person dies and which doesn´t…it´s all secondary to what the writers are trying to say. Even when the final twist is revealed in the closing scene, it doesn´t come as much as a shock but a disappointment. A disappointment in the institution designed to protect "we the people" and the men and women with the responsibility. Is no one immune to breaking the rules to suit themselves?

Outfitted with a Hollywood cast including perennial whipping boy Reeves, Oscar winner Whitaker, Golden Globe winner Laurie, Chris Evans, Jay Mohr and Cedric the Entertainer, the acting is usually rock solid…even better, in some scenes. The weak link among the actors is Evans for some strange reason. He´s given a shell of a character to work with, bringing none of the charisma or humanity of the Human Torch to Paul Diskant. It´s an odd performance, one which contrasts with nearly everyone else. Even Laurie, in a few small scenes, is able to tell us more about his character with a look than Evans does with Diskant´s dialogue.

Reeves sheds his pretty boy personae here, giving a performance where we are simultaneously sympathetic and repulsed by the things he does. He more than holds his own with Whitaker and Laurie, both superior actors. There is no appearance of "surfer dude" attitude coming through; just a weary and worn down detective trying to put the ghosts of his past behind him.

Unlike other films, I´m keeping the specifics of the plot vague in order to withhold most of the twists the story takes. Yeah, it should end ten minutes before it does, with the whole final scene tilting the film dangerously close to parody. The number of rounds put into Washington´s body can be comical, from the right perspective. Any number of times through the production, you just have to roll your eyes in reaction to the actions you´re watching. Despite all these issues, the film is constantly engaging.

There is an undeniable energy to "Street Kings" thanks to a rapidly moving script with precious little fluff and a couple kinetic action sequences. Is it a terribly smart movie? Hardly. We all know how these types of movies work. Moreover, every subsequent reveal is a bit harder to swallow than the one before. If the movie hadn´t been tied to a measly 109 minutes-expanding it to 120 or longer would allow a further fleshing out of the world-perhaps the hits wouldn´t be coming fast and furious, allowing each one instead to breathe.

Early on, Tom is told to stay away from Washington. Being movie-goers (or people with half a brain, I´m not sure), we know damn well there is no movie if he obeys. And, like a perfect little movie cop, he doesn´t. (Shocking, I know.) See, if Tom doesn´t tail the detective, if he doesn´t waltz into the mini-mart ahead of two supposed gang bangers, then the rest of the film doesn´t exist. This is a man intent on not following the rules, living life on the edge, he doesn´t see the potential shit storm brewing ahead of him until it´s too late.

While I recommend "Street Kings," it´s this kind of movie stupidity which ends up being hard to swallow. Otherwise intelligent people engaging in stupid actions not because the character demands it, but because the plot does. Despite my misgivings, I´m still giving the film a 6 out of 10.

---

---