The Zammer Review
The Little Things delivers an average suspense movie, but its exploration of demons that haunt us and wrongs we cannot right falls flat.
The Little Things, directed by John Lee Hancock (to my dismay, not of Declaration of Independence fame), follows police officer Joe “Deke” Deacon (Denzel Washington) as he returns to Los Angeles County to aid in a serial killer investigation in a case strikingly similar to the one that led to his transfer five years prior.
Detective Jim Baxter (Rami Malek) appreciates Deacon’s “pay attention to the little things” approach to police work and quickly saddles up to him when they home in on a suspect.
Enter Albert Sparma (Jared Leto), the greasiest, dingiest man I do believe my eyes have ever had the displeasure of encountering. That isn’t just because of his physical appearance–which was amazing thanks to the hair and makeup team–but what we watch him say and do. I do not know a single thing about Jared Leto except that he’s also in a band, but he embodied the essence of this character so well that I might just grimace in repugnance on impulse if I saw him in real life.
Deacon and Baxter are certain they’ve got their sorry excuse of a man, and that’s enough to justify a less-than-legal investigation–especially once the countdown begins on the FBI taking over the case.
Throughout the investigation, Deacon is haunted by ghosts of the last case, and we learn more and more about what exactly conspired five years ago…
Review
I like the Inception-style ending employed here, where it is purposely ambiguous to leave the audience pondering the same question Deacon likely is.
Did Albert Sparma kill Ronda Rathbun and the other women?
Something about it fell flat, though. If there were another potential suspect, or if Sparma were introduced earlier, it would have made for a more dramatic turn of events. I also got the sense that Deacon felt he was balancing the karmic scales by protecting Baxter’s innocence, sanity, ability to sleep at night, whatever you want to call it; yet at the end of the day, I can’t overlook that this is a movie about two cops who cover up two unintentional murders.
I would have felt more invested in Deacon’s character if I got glimpses into his life before the cold case. Instead, we got a man returning to parts of his old life, delivered piecemeal before learning the big secret of the five-year-old case. Having Baxter be a secondary main character and introduced as an image-conscious cop meant that, given the thriller genre, I didn’t know if we could or should trust his character.
It might have made a more compelling film if Baxter’s was the perspective we got–a loving father and husband whose career has thrust him into the considerable limelight of the 90s. Then another cop, Deacon, comes along and drags Baxter down with him. The stakes are automatically higher.
Deacon was a locked safe, shrouded in too much mystery to understand and root for, much less sympathize with when the big reveal happens. This was no fault of Denzel Washington’s performance, but the screenplay itself.
In general, the score was fitting and balanced. There was one moment, though, where the music took me out of the story. When Baxter receives the red barrette, the score is fresh, like the start of a brand new day with a triumphant and hopeful quality. Why then, did this scene immediately switch to the longest, most drawn-out scene of Deacon burning Sparma’s belongings? This was supposed to be a big gut-wrenching dream crusher of a moment, to realize that Deacon sent Baxter false hope. I wish the uplifting music had slowed and taken a sinister, or at least hesitant turn, then the frame changed to a shot of the remnants of Sparma’s burnt things and the barrette pack.
Clearly, I find myself thinking about this film a lot. But, not in the way a five-star thriller makes me think about its plot, themes, characters’ motives, and connections to the real world and my life. Instead, I find myself asking questions like “What is the director trying to get across here? Why the copious amounts of mangled female bodies? Was it necessary?–because I still didn’t get what the story was about.”
I also kept thinking about those actresses who bared their naked bodies to play corpses. If it was some statement about the graphic nature of police work, I think the point could have been made without the gratuitous female mutilation. If it was some commentary about how women are taken advantage of by men, what does it say about how these actresses, likely with few credits to their names, were portrayed in this film? And in 2021, the direct-to-stream model was relatively new, so they probably saw no royalties from the film premiering on HBO Max in addition to theatres. A big movie with a $30M budget, three Oscar-winning male actors, and no female main characters; I can’t help but feel this was another case of women being taken advantage of by men.
I’m giving this three out of five stars because the movie was quite watchable–it had suspense, intrigue, and great performances; however, it ultimately left me unsatisfied, disappointed in the characters, and confused at the director’s intentions.
THE ZAMMER REVIEW 2.0 