Joe the King (1999)

This movie was, firstly, nothing like what all the summaries, plots, etc. The mother wasn't abusive at all; maybe a bit neglectful, but I would call even that a stretch. In fact, the only 'abuse' is once when the father swats him, and we hear about the second time, when the brother tells Joe that his father punched their mother. Neglect, yeah, there's a lot of that. Were they crappy parents? Yeah, definitely. But to make it out like this kid 'suffers horrible abuse' is just insultingly ridiculous. Secondly, there was not a single character in this whole film who I really cared about at all. The parents were stupid, dense, and thick, the brother was willing to turn his back on Joe at any time, the teacher (played by a very disappointing Ethan Hawke) was -at least this was my impression, I'm sure people will disagree -a retarded moron, who didn't really care about Joe at all, the people at his job who alternate between nice and 'evil horrible monsters' so quickly it's not believable, and Joe's friends who end up betraying him, or turning their back on him. Again, most of this firm is unbelievable. Almost all of the characters go from evil demons to loving saints at some point, mostly in the blink of an eye. I also believe that the so called 'abuse' in this story helps perpetuate a large part of what is wrong with America today. There are real kids out there, who live in constant hell, not knowing whether or not today will be the day a family member takes the abuse too far and kills them. But I have continually seen films like this, and often times in real life, where a kid mouths off, his parent swats him, and it's 'OH MY GOD, THEY BEAT THE POOR CHILD!'. No. Joe had it pretty damn light compared to a lot of kids. All that aside... There still was not a single redeeming quality. Not even Joe himself. The boy brought on ninety percent of his own problems by being retarded. Horrible, horrible movie, with nothing going for it.

I've seen this film in Cinematheque - the best Cinema in Hanoi.A little boy who named Joe make me think about my neighbor. He's a wild boy, he stolen, he's smart, he's scoundrel...He was my friend when i was young.After that, i didn't know about him...He seemed to be a criminal.But he' not a bad man. I can affirm. Sometimes, when i was a filmmaker, i wanted to build my character like him, like my friend. But I couldn't. Until i saw this film, i cried. Cried for my friend and for me.Over me this film impressed so much ! I don't know why this film don't get so many marks.I think it's not a worse film, maybe it got some trouble about slangs.

If anyone out there believes that this directorial debut of Frank Whaley is "AMATEURISH", let's just see what you can do with a camera and budget that won't pay for your daily life. Don't judge about movies, only give your opinion. I don't believe amateurish is even a word. You best watch the movie again and make sure it isn't on an amateur level. I do believe folks out there couldn't make a well made movie with a budget as low as Whaley had for this movie. Maybe try something like, "this movie seemed to have some realism to the story, and yet I haven't lived a life like that young man, I do believe that this could happen."No judgment calls on movies, you liked it or you didn't. Oh and by the way this movie is well thought out, and well organized. Under the circumstances, it hit a home-run at our house. Being from Austin, TX where the "STARS" are bright, and not the ones in the sky, the ones from Hollywood, you sure can get a sense of realism and learn how to discuss movies. Ethan Hawke would know something about that since he comes from the same city as I do. Watch this movie, you truly will like it.

"Joe the King" was described as a semi-autobiographical work by Frank Whaley. That's why I was surprised when I heard the DVD commentary, and Whaley didn't mention anything relating to his own childhood. No "this character is based on..." or "this scene was based the time when I..." But maybe he just didn't feel like revealing that information. Because the kind of pain the main character experiences throughout the story must be at least somewhat genuine. It must've been drawn from some sort of real-life experiences. I'm often a sucker for movies like "This Boy's Life" and "A Bronx Tale," about young ones growing up with troubled childhoods. So I expected to embrace this film. At first I found the movie highly compelling. After a while, I began to lose my emotional connection with the characters. That's when I realized that the drama in the film is pretty much one-sided. I think Roger Ebert hit the nail right on the head when he said, and I'm paraphrasing, "The movie is so steeped in resentment that we never get a chance to see this child behind his shield of misery." We never get a sense of his hopes and dreams, and what he does to try to overcome these unfortunate incidents. I didn't have a troubled childhood, so I'm not speaking from experience, but the boy should've found some sort of salvation. Maybe through books, maybe through music. What I gathered was he was fascinated by blues music, but the music itself wasn't his salvation. Every adult character seems to be portrayed as an out-and-out heavy. There are a few scenes where the father and mother display subtle hints of emotion, though there certainly could've been more, but the rest of the characters are as evil as comic book villains. Even the local pawnbroker seems to have it out for Joe. I'm sure one of the elders treated him nice at least a few times in his life. One of the most heavy-handed scenes is when the teacher asks Joe to tell the class the occupations of his parents. His father is the school janitor, so naturally he doesn't want it to be revealed. The teacher torments him until he finally reveals it. When he does, a girl in class laughs at him and he rightfully throws a pencil at her head. The teacher calls him to the front of the class, pulls down his pants and paddles his rear end. Now, what public school on earth has teachers who are allowed to abuse their students like that? I know in other countries they still do that, but not in America. In real life, Joe could've ran to the principal's office to report the abuse and they would've dragged that teacher out the school. This is an example of Whaley trying too hard to gain the audience's sympathy. The performances are good for the most part. Val Kilmer does a fine acting job and shows that if he weren't so damn difficult to deal with, he'd have a lot more parts. The only performance I must criticize is that of Noah Fleiss. He's definitely not a bad actor, and you can do much worse in the child actor department, but he's only OK. He doesn't display a large range of emotions like, say, Haley Joel Osment. And that's not good since the film centers on Fleiss and he is the glue who holds the film together. And I also must establish that it's never revealed why the character is given the nickname "Joe the King." This is not a bad film, and it is compelling to a degree, but if Whaley paid more attention to the mechanics of the narrative, it could've been a lot more powerful, like "This Boy's Life" or "A Bronx Tale." My score: 6 (out of 10)