Underneath (1995)

User Rating:

6.3/10   

Director:

Steven Soderbergh

Writers:

Don Tracy (novel)
Steven Soderbergh (screenplay) ...

Release Date:

28 April 1995 (USA)

Genre:

Crime | Drama

Tagline:

For passion, betrayal and murder... there's still no place like home.

Plot:

Michael Chambers returns home to celebrate his mother's marriage. Michael had been ousted from his home...

Plot Keywords:

Armored Car | Hitman | Professional Hit | Pool Table | Pool Hall

Awards:

1 nomination

Cast

Peter Gallagher	...	Michael Chambers
Alison Elliott	...	Rachel
William Fichtner	...	Tommy Dundee
Adam Trese	...	David Chambers
Joe Don Baker	...	Clay Hinkle
Paul Dooley	...	Ed Dutton
Shelley Duvall	...	Nurse
Elisabeth Shue	...	Susan Crenshaw
Anjanette Comer	...	Mrs. Chambers
Dennis Hill	...	Guard Tom
Harry Goaz	...	Guard Casey
Mark Feltch	...	Guard George
Jules Sharp	...	Hinkle's Assistant
Kenneth D. Harris	...	Mantrap Guard
Vincent Gaskins	...	Michael's Partner

Also Known As:

The Underneath (USA) (promotional title)

MPAA:

Rated R for some violence, language and sexuality.

Runtime:

99 min

Country:

USA

Language:

English

Color:

Color

Aspect Ratio:

2.35 : 1

Sound Mix:

DTS

Certification:

Australia:M | Iceland:16 | France:Unrated | Finland:K-16 | Denmark:16 | South Korea:18 | UK:15 | USA:R

Filming Locations:

Austin, Texas, USA

Company:

Populist Pictures

Trivia:

The name 'Jeanette Scott', mentioned during the hospital scene, is actually the name of the film's Set Decorator.

Quotes:

[first lines]
Susan Crenshaw: Are you getting off at Austin?

Movie Connections:

Version of Criss Cross (1949)

Road to nowhere

These days, Stephen Soderbergh has a reputation as a director capable of pleasing arthouse critics and mainstream fans alike. Personally, I'm unconvinced of his claims to greatness even now; but it's certainly clear, whatever its absolute merits, how "Underneath", which dates from 1995, is lacking in slickness compared with the director's subsequent works, which it nonetheless resembles in form if not in competence.

Basically, this is a bank-heist thriller, but shot in a very tricksy style. To list a few of the devices employed, we get colour-filtered lenses, flashbacks (confusing because the main character has a big grey beard in the chronologically earliest scenes, and thus looks younger when supposed to be older), disjunctions of speech and image (used more successfully four years later by Soderbergh in "The Limey"), edgy-camera work, contrived (though sometimes powerful) scene-framing, and the pseudo-documentary time stamps that flash up on screen almost at random. In fact, it's less of a mess than the length of this list suggests; but it never seems natural. The viewer always feels that he is being set up. What is not clear is why.

The real problem is that it is very hard to care about any of the characters. Soderbergh hints at motivation, but fails to follow through. One could argue that the film is trying to be intelligent, leaving the viewer to fill in the gaps. The problem here is not that this is difficult (except at the very end) but that it happens too often - there's more gap than substance, the script plays with itself instead of fleshing out. With no real insight into human nature here, the end result is not so much bleak as pointless.

There are many worse, more stupid films than this. But trying to be clever does not in itself make a great movie. These days Soderbergh does clever without trying. Whether that makes his recent work better, or simply better-disguised, is an interesting question.