Mr. Brooks Movie Review

Kevin Costner has been accused in the past of being stiff and bland as an actor in roles where he isn't playing an athlete. Although the movie itself is riddled with holes and shaky logic, Mr. Brooks proves to be an ample showcase of Costner's acting talents and is, overall, an enjoyable movie.

Costner plays Earl Brooks, Portland's "Man of the Year," business owner, and loving husband/father. He also has a sinister alter ego, nicknamed Marshall, who drives Brooks to kill random people for what appears to be pure psycho-sexual thrills. Instead of having Costner stand around and talk to himself, however, Marshall is played by the wonderfully creepy William Hurt, and although he appears everywhere, he is merely a physical representation of Brooks' inner demons.

Mr. Brooks works because of the amazing chemistry between Costner and Hurt. Costner has to play the restrained family man who just happens to also be a serial killer, which allows him to harness his "blandness" and, with just a slight tweak, turn it into a spot-on portrayal of an amazingly successful person who has to juggle his commitments to his family and business and his murderous impulses. Hurt, who is often called upon to play someone with a screw or two loose, provides as expected and seems like the perfect person to play Marshall. Together, Brooks and Marshall scheme, converse, and even argue like old friends. It's a testament to both actors' abilities that they took a somewhat flimsy script and made it both believable and intriguing.

It's a shame that the same can't be said of the other performances in the movie. Demi Moore plays Tracy Atwood, a stereotypical police detective, and even does that somewhat poorly. I've never been a fan of Moore as an actress, and she doe absolutely nothing in Mr. Brooks to change my mind. Meanwhile, Dane Cook plays "Mr. Smith," an amateur photographer who witnesses one of Mr. Brooks' murders and ends up trying to become Brooks' friend and protégé. Much like Moore, I've never been a fan of Cook's previous movie roles (or his stand-up comedy, for that matter), but he does a serviceable job bringing a level of compassion and energy to Mr. Smith.

What's most baffling about Mr. Brooks is the way the story is sequenced. The strongest (and, coincidentally, most disturbing) scenes of the movie happen in the first hour, while the second hour is spent trying to wrap up the main story and the multiple side plots. It ends up being a case of having too many storylines for a two-hour movie, and if one of the sub-plots had been axed from the final product Mr. Brooks would probably have been a great film. Although it's tough to decide which subplot lends the least to the movie, my vote is the storyline involving Brooks' daughter. Every scene with his daughter stalls the momentum of the movie, and the movie would still feel complete without it. As much as I dislike the Moore's police detective storyline, it's necessary to develop a possible antagonist for Brooks, and thus much more difficult to cut from the movie and have it still feel cohesive.

Even with all of these problems, however, Mr. Brooks is a fairly enjoyable movie. The directing and cinematography do an effective job of building genuine tension, and rarely rely on things jumping out at the viewer. The movie is dark but glossy, which really seems to fit in well with Brooks' personality. The combined effect of Costner and Hurt's amazing acting with effective directing rises Mr. Brooks a level above the dime-a-dozen thrillers that come to theaters every week, and although it isn't a classic, it's at least a fun ride.

Rating: 7/10