"Dangerously Close" is one of those silly flicks that are almost enjoyable as it knows how to give us some tension while treating issues revolving
safety during high school years. It talks about a troubled prep school that uses of its own student body to enforce laws on reckless students who destroy
school property, vandalism and robbery among classmates. But it's a very obvious film where you know exactly where the threat comes from, therefore all the
tension required disappears in thin air and you keep on waiting for its end just to confirm your predictions and ease the pain after the painful misery of
everything.
One-dimensional characters from the start, which is acceptable to audiences who like those kind of devices. J. Eddie Peck plays the nerd-looking and responsible good guy who is torn apart from his punk rebel friends as he's invited to join the security group formed by John Stockwell character, one of those rich kids who likes to cause controlled mayhem in order to enforce law and order. Truth is that group runs secret attacks on the "undesireable" students after school hours, late at night, where they make a trial mockery, convicting those rebels and teaching them some hard frightening lessons.
It's not like all students like a fascist kind of security enforcement, there's opposition even from a teacher, and Peck's character (editor of the school paper as well) is used by the others to present a less negative view of the infamous group. Doesn't help much, as their obscure attacks becomes more and more dangerous, and when students start disappearing from view, our hero becomes intrigued.
Everything is so obvious with "Dangerously Close" that it's annoying. While you I liked the limited acting of everyone involved, but they're all playing a formula (the good guy is good and without flaws; the bad group is bad but it comes with a redemption; the punk friend is only there to cause riot and bring a humorless humor; and the pretty girl is there to cause a rift between the new buddies). Kudos to Stockwell for picking the most "challenging" of the roles, but he's also one of the screenwriters so he knew what he was doing and it's a nice way to see him outside of "Christine" (1983) or "Top Gun".
But I couldn't stand each and every action and fighting sequence. Abrupt and ugly editing cuts where it's hard to tell why a beaten character is up and without injuries when there's change in the shot, or why they move to a different direction; the head of security (or school director, the movie wasn't clear about his function) can physically assault a student without consequences; the local police was a joke; the series of bizarre things makes it all look weird and slightly funny to follow.
Besides the "entertainment" parts, was there an actual good discourse while dealing with how students can secure their own environment and help themselves and the community? Not really. The adults in the room were so absent in this utopic dream that I guess it only proved that teens shouldn't be allowed to enforce anything but their proms. It was basic a clear case of right versus left, and it's easy to tell apart who's right and who's wrong, and the only thing missing were the uniforms. 4/10.
One-dimensional characters from the start, which is acceptable to audiences who like those kind of devices. J. Eddie Peck plays the nerd-looking and responsible good guy who is torn apart from his punk rebel friends as he's invited to join the security group formed by John Stockwell character, one of those rich kids who likes to cause controlled mayhem in order to enforce law and order. Truth is that group runs secret attacks on the "undesireable" students after school hours, late at night, where they make a trial mockery, convicting those rebels and teaching them some hard frightening lessons.
It's not like all students like a fascist kind of security enforcement, there's opposition even from a teacher, and Peck's character (editor of the school paper as well) is used by the others to present a less negative view of the infamous group. Doesn't help much, as their obscure attacks becomes more and more dangerous, and when students start disappearing from view, our hero becomes intrigued.
Everything is so obvious with "Dangerously Close" that it's annoying. While you I liked the limited acting of everyone involved, but they're all playing a formula (the good guy is good and without flaws; the bad group is bad but it comes with a redemption; the punk friend is only there to cause riot and bring a humorless humor; and the pretty girl is there to cause a rift between the new buddies). Kudos to Stockwell for picking the most "challenging" of the roles, but he's also one of the screenwriters so he knew what he was doing and it's a nice way to see him outside of "Christine" (1983) or "Top Gun".
But I couldn't stand each and every action and fighting sequence. Abrupt and ugly editing cuts where it's hard to tell why a beaten character is up and without injuries when there's change in the shot, or why they move to a different direction; the head of security (or school director, the movie wasn't clear about his function) can physically assault a student without consequences; the local police was a joke; the series of bizarre things makes it all look weird and slightly funny to follow.
Besides the "entertainment" parts, was there an actual good discourse while dealing with how students can secure their own environment and help themselves and the community? Not really. The adults in the room were so absent in this utopic dream that I guess it only proved that teens shouldn't be allowed to enforce anything but their proms. It was basic a clear case of right versus left, and it's easy to tell apart who's right and who's wrong, and the only thing missing were the uniforms. 4/10.