Street Smart (1987)

the screenplay was so terrible with absolutely unbelievable, highly unlikely, totally improbable scenario and logic premises. but if we could treat it as a nostalgic production wherein we would have the chance to look at that primitive first generation of desktop computer, the handsome christopher reeve, the still middle-aged morgan freeman, and some of those familiar screen faces male and female, then this movie would suddenly become bearable. but if we return to the reality, then this movie suffers great flaws from the very beginning. how could it possible a struggling street journalist could dream up a documentary report on the dark street of new york? this guy got no experience whatsoever in the pimping, whoring and druggie business in new york street, how could he suddenly dream up such topic and pitch it to his magazine employer? and then, how could a knowledgeable magazine boss would buy it? and the district attorney, the huge new york readers would buy it? if this guy is such a genius writer, he wouldn't still be such poor guy still struggles in the basement of the literary society. there are so many fundamentally impossible and unfeasible question marks on this movie's plot and the scenario. it just looked so unrealistic and unconvincing when i watched this movie. it gave me an impression that the screenplay writer(s) being just as naive and amateurish like the main character of this movie. street smart? not in the least.

If only Paul Newman, Steve McQueen, Jon Voight, or maybe Pater Falk or Robert Blake, or even Robert Redford played that part, it would have been much better. Reeve was weak, and did not deliver what was needed. AND it needed a good soundtrack, something like shaft. There is also some bad editing and direction. What is amazing is the locations. New York has changed so much and so fast, it's really great to see the street scenes I forgot, especially when SOHO was still somewhat not overcrowded. And many interior shots of the run down buildings are just great. What they missed was fitting in a few landmarks, and the fulton fish market, of course. Still, Reeve was good for the comic strip Superman portrayal, but I have never seen him do anything worthy of praise. He had looks, and was well rewarded for that.

Freeman gives his most powerful performance here. I've seen almost all of Morgan's films but I think this is his most outstanding performance. Fast Black is one juicy character and Morgan brings life into it. Christopher Reeve, god bless his sole, is a pretty bad actor. I only seen him in his Superman roles, which I wasn't much a fan of. But here his character gets a lot of screen time and Reeve just can't live up to it. He makes the movie boring. Kathy Baker excels in her role. Mimi Rogers does her part well. The film has an amazing storyline here, but screenplay is 50/50. If Morgan had more scenes the movie would have been way better. Yes there are some really strong scenes, but all of them involved Freeman. The direction wasn't great, if this movie was handled by a better director it would of been memorable. Many people probably don't even know about this movie and that's a shame because Freeman's performance must be watched. Freeman's outburst scene where he puts a bottle up to Reeve's face and gives him a 20 second stare is WOW. And not to forget the scissor scene where he threatens to poke Kathy's eye out...MARVELLOUS. What disappoints me the most, regardless of the many flaws in direction, is that Freeman didn't have a last scene in the climax. In a movie where Morgan kept everyone in their seats, the director/screenwriter didn't hook him up with a proper climax scene. I was expecting something huge, but instead the ending was the same old same old. Overall, the movie is OK, but Freeman's performance is great.

I found this movie to be very entertaining and well done, with good performances across the board. I agree with previous reviewers that the late Chris Reeve's performances in other movies, and at times this one, could be seen as wooden. That being said, I think he played his role extremely well, because it was able to work with Morgan Freeman's outbursts and explosions. Because of the problems encountered by his fabricated story, Reeve's performance was handled well being outside of his environment as much as he was. He was unsure and understated, and being a reporter, being unemotional was in his well being. On the other end, Morgan Freeman was fantastic! Seeing him in a role like this makes you want to see him take on a role where he can be the loose cannon. This movie can show what happens when you "create" a story and you do it TOO well. More people should see it and comment on it.