Collegian Venues - your weekend starts here
  Collegian Chronicles



Get a deal with Daily Collegian Coupon Corner
  The Digital Collegian - Published independently by students at Penn State
ARTS
[ Tuesday, March 27, 1990 ]
 
Rob Lowe proves that his acting is as bad as he is in his film 'Influence'
Film Review

Collegian Arts Writer

When Rob Lowe's home video exploits came to light the ensuing scandal did more than damage Lowe's reputation; it created a barricade that will never again allow people to take the young actor seriously.

From Lowe's first line in Bad Influence, it is obvious that Lowe's ordeal has not made him stronger. It is a pathetic, wimpy delivery, reminiscent of his previous lackluster performances.

This is the film that is supposed to raise the actor from the dead. Instead, it just reaffirms Lowe's inability to bring forth a meaningful portrayal.

Lowe is Alex, a petty criminal and mindbender, whose deranged sense of friendship ruins the life of yuppie Michael (James Spader). The two meet when Alex saves Michael from a beach hoodlum. After some predictable action, Alex insists Michael to turn 360 degrees and do things he never realized he could.

Alex makes it a point to ask Michael two questions: what do you want more than anything? What are you afraid of?

Alex then takes care to provide answers to both these questions with much success; he fixes it so Michael's main competition for a promotion withdraws from consideration, and shows Michael's X-rated video exploits to Michael's fiancée.

These two actions, while at first angering Michael, later turn humorous, and Michael is even thankful for being freed from his dull existence.

To make an endless plot even longer and more absurd, Alex, as twisted and sick as he is, commits a heinous crime and makes Michael look like the villain. So Alex becomes someone to fear more than fear itself; a madman bent on completely destroying Michael's life.

Screenwriter David Koepp constructs an interesting, but somewhat predictable screenplay with a thoroughly contemptible villain. The Alex character is disgusting, he has no redeeming qualities whatsoever. Conversely, Michael is a squeaky clean workaholic with sensibility and safety. Koepp's screenplay creates characters of value, but lacks a solid and coherent story in which they are connected.

On the whole, Bad Influence is not a bomb. Director Curtis Hanson uses lighting and surprise to positive ends. One reason Lowe is not utterly laughable is Hanson's constant use of harsh lighting to make Lowe look villainous.

Hanson's shot selection does invites the audience to follow the action quite passively, but the gore is handled with delicacy.

But the film's center is certainly Lowe. Bad Influence was in mid-production when the unfortunate videotape surfaced. Lowe allegedly videotaped himself and two women -- one a minor -- having sex in an Atlanta hotel room.

Instead of having a potential hit on his hands, the film has turned into a gruesome reminder his misfortune. Lowe's unlikable snake even parallels real life events -- videotaping and the general invasion of privacy are major motifs in the film.

Why Lowe is receiving critical attention for this is a mystery, as again, he is undistinguished and altogether vacuous.

Bad Influence is not the movie that will bring Lowe back into the spotlight. It is just an average thriller with more bark than bite.

 

Send an Opinion Letter to the Editor about this article.


   





TOP  HOME
Blogs  About  Contact Us  Back Issues  Advertising 

Copyright © 2008 Collegian Inc.
Requested: Sunday, July 06, 2008  2:12:37 AM  -4
Created: Wednesday, May 07, 2008  6:09:34 PM  -4