It would be hard to make a case for this film being anything but what it was: theater filler. There are tons of movies in any era that will similarly fall into obscurity. Collateral. Phone Booth. Find Me Guilty. Not that posterity defines what was a "good" film from a given era … but it must be said that while people will be watching The Godfather forever, if you go back to the original time, you'll find that the non-classics far outweigh the classics, in terms of what Joe and Jane Moviegoer bothered to plunk their money down for on a Saturday night.
So does that mean it is unnecessary, or even a waste of time, to take in the forgotten films of a bygone time? Not at all. I find these kinds of films to be pretty interesting … even if it's like visiting a rare book room to see some coeval manuscript instead of picking up a Penguin Shakespeare. (?) If anything, the non-greatest-hits of an era possibly capture the time better than the classics could. The New Centurions is interesting on that level, at least. In essence, this film represents a turning point in cinema, albeit not in any important way. The gritty realism of 70s cinema had not yet taken full root; the flash and experimentation of 60s cinema had not yet found a practical outlet. So The New Centurions represents something in between "Dragnet" and "Hill Street Blues," trying to unflinchingly depict the reality of cop life with none of the moralistic clichés of yore. It doesn't entirely work, but it's certainly interesting to watch. The cast helps – George C. Scott (fresh off Patton) commands the film in such a way that his scenes seem like a primer on great acting; Stacy Keach grows his moustache through the course of the film, thereby giving that classic 'stache its origin story; Erik Estrada (as a cocky young cop), Isabel Sanford (as a prostitute!?!), and Dolph Sweet (as a police sergeant) give the film its requisite "future TV star" trifecta. The storyline mainly follows Keach as a new recruit paired with veteran Scott, demonstrating the gradual disillusionment that wears down even the most wide-eyed young cop. Nearly every scene ends in deflation and disappointment, setting up the usual TV and movie cop clichés and then making a point not to resolve them in an exciting way, to show the "hard-hitting truth." Perhaps because current TV does this kind of thing so much better (an average episode of "NYPD Blue" far exceeds Centurions), the film seems quaint. In fact, it probably would have been a better TV show pilot than feature film … the tone reminded me a lot of the liberal-minded seriousness of "The White Shadow," while the action scenes prefigured "SWAT." The intended humanist worldview comes off a bit heavy-handed (not helped by the very late-60s-style method acting), but there is still plenty to appreciate here. Keach shows a subtle but amazing range. His transformation throughout the film is genuinely deep, but he's so not showy about it that you'd take him for just another hard-boiled cop if you were not paying attention. (Although I should say, he runs like a sissy.) Scott is stunning, especially in his final scene, which I'm surprised is not talked about more as one of the classic performances in film. Some of the action sequences seem deliberately thrown in to cash in on The French Connection, but despite being out of place, these scenes are welcome in that they prevent the film from being overly "message"-driven. An absolutely terrible score by Quincy Jones takes things down a notch, but overall I enjoyed Centurions as a reflection of what typical moviegoing was, circa 1972. We need to remember this kind of movie so as not to buy the Baby Boomers' falsehood that all they ever watched, on a date, perhaps, were Oscar® winners.
Review by |