82
theory

"Ricochet" is secretly brilliant (Hear me out)

Okay, okay, before you all start throwing tomatoes, let me explain. “Ricochet” (1991). Denzel. Lithgow. Total cheese, right? Everyone always talks about how over-the-top it is, how unbelievable the plot is. And yeah, it's ridiculous. But I think that's the point. It's supposed to be ridiculous. Think about it: John Lithgow's Blake is basically a walking, talking cartoon villain by the end. Framing Denzel for everything, the elaborate setups… It’s practically Looney Tunes with violence. Here's my crazy theory: the whole movie is a dark satire of the media's obsession with crime and violence. Denzel's character, Nick Styles, becomes a celebrity cop, then a celebrity DA. Blake manipulates the media constantly to ruin him. The film’s exaggerations highlight how easily the public can be manipulated by sensationalism and how quickly someone can fall from grace in the eyes of the media. We're meant to be uncomfortable with how gleefully we watch Styles fall. The scene on the bridge? It's so absurd, it's almost comical, but its also a commentary on the whole system. Nobody ever seems to pick up on this, they're all too busy shouting about how goofy it all is, but I think it's a more intelligent flick than it gets credit for. Is it perfect? Nah. Some of the acting (outside of Denzel and Lithgow) is a bit dodgy. But I think it's a genuinely interesting take on the corrupting influence of fame and power, hidden beneath layers of action movie tropes. I will die on this hill. Convince me otherwise. And, by the way, the sheer audacity to have John Lithgow, of all people, dressed up like a dominatrix? That seals it for me. Underappreciated genius. Fight me. (Typo intended)

danthecritic
6 months ago
5 comments
243 views
Sign in to join the discussion

Comments (5)

No comments yet. Be the first to share your thoughts!