Dark Streets (2008) User Reviews

Outstanding blues and swing, arresting visuals, bad screenplay

[martys-7 · 3/10 · 6 July 2009]

If you are a fan of Salomon Burke, Etta James, Dr. John, or just love blues and swing, "Dark Streets" would appear to be dream come true. In this tale of a doomed 1930s rich boy turned night club owner, even actresses Bijou Phillips and Izabella Miko hold their own as club singers delivering their songs with plenty of gusto and sex-appeal while the dancers and music scorch the screen. But the music and club act scenes cannot hide the movie's inept screenplay.

Besides the music, the cinematography is also stunning creating the noirest of atmospheres in the middle of the Great Depression. Murderous dark streets, threatening characters, a decadent night club, presented in rich palette of dark hues and swirling camera work. Unfortunately, soon this becomes irrelevant when the plot fails to deliver.

The story borrows heavily from "Chinatown" and 1940s/1950s film noirs, involving electrical power, greed, dissipation, betrayal, and murder. In able hands it could have been a compelling moral tale, but this poorly written movie lacks the required tension to maintain interest resorting to noir clichés (femme fatale) and contrived situations (heartbreak leads to cocaine) with subplots and characters that go nowhere. The dialogue attempts to generate some sparks here and there but the results are noir light - even Bogart and Bacall would have come out flat delivering the lines. To make matters worse, the main character is an uninteresting weakling who does not inspire much sympathy played by Gabriel Mann as if sleepwalking. Parts of the plot are ludicrous: a corrupt police lieutenant who wears a metal chest plate, a large amount of money that is never seeing again, a shrewd hostile governor is set up having sex at the club, characters murdered for no reason, etc.

If you like bluesy music, Busby Berkeley, a 1930s noir atmosphere and flashy camera work, you should enjoy some of this movie. Alas, "Dark Dreams" is neither "Chicago" nor "Chinatown" and while the musical acts sizzle the rest of the movie fizzles. If one would be able to only listen to the music with the voices turn off, it would be perfect. It gets 3 starts only for its music and some of its visuals.

Great jazz, lot of noire, superb visuals... no plot

[p-stepien · 4/10 · 16 October 2010]

1930s. Chaz (Gabriel Mann) owns a hip jazz bar called The Tower - all the clichés are there with ensemble bands and sexy divas headlining the locale. Unfortunately for Chaz the big opening is rife with problems. The power company can't cope with constant outages, his father just committed suicide and debts keep piling up with loan sharks out for their cut. Enter jazz, noire, visuals. And a overly ordinary, uninteresting and forgettable Izabella Miko as the key character of Madelaine.

Basically every scene is heavily stylised (maybe even overcooked in that department) and overflowing with cool collected musical moods. Add to that the constantly floating camera, pretty ladies and high regard for set-pieces - you have a feast for the eye and the ear. Unfortunately that's as far as the movie goes to please it's audience. All the stuff that is normally movie filler comes to the forefront, while the script and plot seems secondary and irrelevant (and some of the dialogue is plain corny). Almost like a 90-minute videoclip... And let's face it - most videoclips start getting boring after 4 minutes...

If you like the music you might prefer to omit the 'plot filler' and focus on the background flow of all that jazz and blues. Even more so that Toledo Diamond really steals the show...

If You Like Blues and Jazz....

[nimbus13 · 5/10 · 21 March 2013]

If you like blues and jazz and movies with the 30's ambiance, you may like this.

It seems like it is suited to a movie you would watch in th middle of the night when you couldn't sleep.

I had never heard of any of the actors, so there was little I could identify with there.

However, the music is fairly good, the sets and props are impressive.

The storyline is hard to follow, but looks fairly derivative.

The costuming is reasonably good.

Part of the plot involves power failures so maybe that was a ruse for the following.

Unfortunately, I think the producers were trying to save money on lighting.

Either that, or, like many movies lately, to evoke mood, the sets are dimly lit.

Don't expect to see many street scenes with vintage automobiles, the number of sets is limited mostly to the nightclub.

What I think the producers were trying to do was get the flavor of "Chicago" However, it seemed like they tried to do it without any storyline to speak of, as a non-musical.

How are films like this made when deserving scripts lie unproduced?

[fordraff · 1 November 2009]

The following contains A MAJOR PLOT SPOILER!

This film is as bad as they come and was a total waste of 83 minutes. It is supposedly a film noir, but all it has is the look of noir, and it's not a very good imitation of the real noir look, either. The film is based on a musical called "City Nights" by Glenn M. Stewart, which may account for why most of the film takes place in one set, the Tower nightclub. At first, this nightclub is interesting to look at, but later it becomes boring--same old stuff--and claustrophobic. Aren't we ever going to get out of here? The plot is contained in about four expository speeches rather than being conveyed through action and discovery by the characters. Chaz Davenport's father was murdered, though his death is ruled a suicide, and Chaz is disinherited. We later learn that Chaz's uncle killed the father. It all has to do with the The Consolidated Power Company in LA that Chaz's father and uncle own and their need to control the power in the city. To do so requires the cooperation of the state's governor. When Chaz's father doesn't show enough force in dealing with the governor, the uncle kills him and takes control. Yada, yada, yada, who gives a damn? In case you're wondering, there is no happy ending. Chaz ends up shot to death by the uncle, as if this ending will give the film the necessary punch-up that it's lacked all along. Instead, it's just a blah. Why? Because the characters are never developed in depth; I never cared for the characters or what happened to them, whether they lived or died was of no matter.

Gabriel Mann, who plays Chaz Davenport, would be appropriately cast in the Dobie Gillis TV series. He's definitely a good boy, 1950's style. The best that can be said about Bijou Phillips as Crystal is that she learned her lines and said them without stuttering. Izabella Miko, who plays the singer Madelaine, bears a startling resemblance to Michelle Pfeiffer, which only makes clears all the talent that Miko lacks. And Elias Koteas as the Lieutenant ought to be ashamed of himself for appearing in such junk.

The dance numbers are but a poor imitation of Busby Berkeley routines, lack any variety, and quickly become boring. The songs are ordinary, and it appears all the singers are dubbed with singing voices that are no match for their speaking voices.

Some of the dialogue is risible, which will give you the only laughs you're going to get here.

Since this film was based on a musical, why not keep it a musical? But then it would have to compete directly with "Chicago," I suppose, and that would be a disaster for "Dark Streets." I thought that perhaps the filmmakers were trying to make a ballad--a story in song--but that gives them too much credit.

Starts off well and steadily goes downhill until the eye rolling end

[rlange-3 · 5/10 · 21 May 2010]

If you like blues music in a glitzy chorus girl setting you'll enjoy the good but not great soundtrack and initially fun choreography. The sets -- uh, make that set for most of the movie -- is initially intriguing. The problem is, the movie never goes anywhere once the table is set. The choreography becomes repetitive, the nightclub becomes boring, and most of the rest of the movie is the distinctly unlikeable protagonist walking around in the dark and talking to people. None of the acting is outstanding, the plot not only telegraphs what is coming, it rather explicitly lays it out in the narration, leaving no room for twists, surprises, tension, or anything else. It's like reading through a book you didn't really want to read just because there is no other way to reach the end. You keep hoping a gem will show up but... alas. Talk about the blues.

What Happened?

[bringonlywhatyoucancarry · 6/10 · 3 September 2009]

I was looking forward to seeing this film as someone I know was involved with the production. But the movie I ended up seeing had nothing to do with what they told me was shot by the director. All I can figure out is that it was chopped up and edited to the point where it no longer made any sense. And the casting was awful. I read a copy of the shooting script. This is not the movie I read at all. I've been told this happens all the time to movies. Too many cooks in the editing room end up spoiling the soup. Boy, this movie should be used as an illustration on what not to do to material in an editing room in film schools.

The soundtrack is great but it's so overwhelming that half the time you can't even hear the dialog. What started out as a sci-fi noir ended up in a blender.

Maybe someday someone will make the movie I read and heard about. That one was truly original and could have been great.