About 3 ½ years ago, I came across a copy of this movie in the video store. I had never heard of it, and knew nothing about its general reception. I read the blurb on the back of the case, and thought it looked interesting, so I decided to rent it. By the time I watched it, I think I knew it wasn't the most popular crime thriller ever made, and like probably many other viewers, I was disappointed, finding it to be a rather weak film of its genre. Earlier this week, I rented it again. I couldn't remember it that well from my first viewing, and decided to give it a second chance. This time, I had lower expectations than before, but was expecting to be more impressed than I was the first time, which I was. That doesn't mean I didn't notice any severe flaws this time, though.
Roy Egan is a retired thief who is lured out of retirement by his younger brother, Lee, for a major jewel heist. Lee has chosen two other partners for this robbery, Jorge Montana and Skip Kovich. The heist is a success, but afterwards, Skip gets greedy and suddenly kills Lee and Jorge! He tries to kill Roy as well, but the veteran thief manages to get away! After this, Roy swears to have his vengeance for the killing of his brother, and sets out on a mission to find the whereabouts of Skip! During this mission, his foe realizes he is searching for him, and is obviously not going to make it any easier for him. Roy isn't the only one who has suffered a loss in the family as a result of Skip's greed and insanity. The lunatic's other victim, Jorge, has left behind his wife and kids. His widow, Rachel, is eventually involved in Roy's mission after she learns what has happened to her husband.
Harvey Keitel plays the starring role of Roy Egan, and does a decent job, but this may not be the case with the entire cast. I didn't care much for Stephen Dorff as Skip Kovich, but I'm not entirely sure if that was because of the actor's performance or because of the character. The characters in this film are generally pretty shallow. There isn't much emotional depth or detail to them. However, at least there are some characters I could sympathize with, most notably Rachel Montana, and I guess Roy Egan to a certain extent. There are fairly weak moments, such as some unnecessary sex scenes (at least one involving Skip and his girlfriend), the film drags at times, and the dialogue may not be perfect. Despite these flaws, there's still at least some suspense, as well as poignant moments, and enough to keep me interested until the end, during my second viewing, that is.
Now that I've seen "City of Industry" twice, I don't exactly think it's bad, as I definitely found more redeeming qualities the second time than I did the first (I'm not sure if I really found any the first time), and a major reason for this is that it just MIGHT be a better film to watch alone. On the other hand, it's still a flawed thriller, flawed enough for me to see why it's so polarizing and has been widely overlooked since its release in the late 90's. I wouldn't have really been missing out on THAT much if I had never noticed this film in the video store several years ago (meaning I still wouldn't be aware of its existence now), and I certainly wouldn't consider it a must-see for anyone, but if you like this genre, maybe this movie will do. Just don't expect anything too brilliant or original.
1 out of 2 found this helpful.
Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink