The Outfit (1973) ****1/2

 

Here's another film based on Richard Stark's “Parker” novels, and this one got the author's seal of approval. Donald Westlake (aka Richard Stark) said “The Outfit” was "one movie made from a Stark book that got the feeling right. That movie is done flat, just like the books."

The film is based on the Stark novel of the same name, with Richard Duvall playing the main character, named Earl Macklin here. Earl and his brother Eddie once robbed a bank that was connected to the Mafia, which everyone in this era refers to as the Outfit. The Outfit kills Eddie and attempts a hit on Earl, so Earl goes on the offensive. With his girlfriend Bett (Karen Black) and his old partner Cody (Joe Don Baker), Earl starts robbing Outfit operations, working his way up to a showdown with the main Outfit boss himself.

In the novel, the main character, named Parker, doesn't just rob Outfit operations; he writes letters to dozens of fellow criminals across the country, instigating them to pull their own Outfit robberies. His little revolution brings the Outfit to its knees. It's a fun concept, but pretty unrealistic. The movie dispenses with the rallying-the-troops aspect; it's just Earl, Bett, and Cody pulling robberies. Otherwise, this is one of the most recognizable Parker novel adaptations I have seen. Quite a few scenes are lifted straight out of the book, and, as Westlake himself admitted, this movie gets the tone right.

4.5 stars out of 5

Play Dirty (2025) **1/2

Before his death in 2008, beloved crime writer Donald Westlake was so prolific that he had to write some of his books under other names. His more hard-boiled crime stories appeared under the Richard Stark moniker, featuring the laconic heist-man, Parker. Numerous films have been based on the Parker books, with varying degrees of quality and fidelity to the source material. My favorite, to date, is Brian Helgeland's “Payback Straight Up: The Director's Cut.” Released in 2006, it is dramatically darker and flatter than the 1999 theatrical version, and captures the spirit of Parker much better. The theatrical version is entertaining, but it does the usual Hollywood thing of turning Mel Gibson's Porter (Westlake would not sign off on using the Parker name.) into a hero instead of an anti-hero.

The latest effort at a Parker movie, “Play Dirty”, also does the usual Hollywood thing. Mark Wahlberg plays Parker, (Donald Westlake's estate has been much less protective than he was of the Parker name.) a cold, cool thief who is a genius at planning and pulling off big robberies. We meet Parker in the middle of a heist that goes a little bit off the rails and then goes completely off the rails. Betrayed and left for dead, Parker survives to hunt down Zen (Rosa Salazar), the woman who double-crossed him. Zen convinces Parker not to kill her, but to join her on a much bigger heist. Parker assembles a team of crooks to steal a priceless treasure out from under the noses of the Mob, the U.N., and a Latin American dictator.

“Play Dirty” is inspired by the Parker books and characters rather than being based on any of the actual stories. I would have no problem with that if writer/director Shane Black had written a story that honored the character. Instead, he has basically given us a “Fast & Furious” movie. This should be no surprise. Black is known for writing “Lethal Weapon”, and his directing credits include “Iron Man 3” and “Kiss Kiss Bang Bang”. He is not exactly a paragon of subtlety and restraint, and he clearly doesn't “get” Parker or Richard Stark. The essence of the Parker character is a detached rationality. The idea that he would team back up with this Zen character who had just double-crossed him is ridiculous.

The movie does have its high points. Mark Wahlberg is not a convincing Parker, but he is entertaining enough on his own merits, and he has a good supporting cast. Parker fans will recognize some names from the book series, including Stan Devers (Chai Henson) and Brenda and Ed Mackey (Claire Lovering and Keegan-Michael Key). Lakeith Stanfield is particularly good as Grofield, a Parker series favorite who had 4 Richard Stark books of his own. In fact, the tone of “Play Dirty” leans more toward the lighter-hearted Grofield books than the hard-boiled Parker books. I wouldn't mind seeing Stanfield stick around to make a Grofield movie, maybe with a better screenwriter. As for “Play Dirty”, I think it will be disappointing to fans of the book series, but it is reasonably entertaining as a straight action movie.

2.5 stars out of 5

Beyond the Gaze: Jule Campbell's Swimsuit Issue (2024) ****

 

For a weekly publication like Sports Illustrated, the perpetual problem was producing enough content to fill a magazine week in and week out. (They now only publish monthly.) This is especially true in late winter, after the Super Bowl, a slow time for the big, popular sports. In 1964, editor Andre Laguerre came up with a brilliant way to help fill in the slow time: a swimsuit issue. He tapped fashion editor Jule Campbell to produce the new issue. It would prove to be one of the most profitable decisions in publishing history. Campbell stayed on as editor of the Swimsuit Issue for 32 years, turning it into a juggernaut that would produce the majority of the profits for the magazine.

In “Beyond the Gaze,” Campbell's daughter-in-law, Jill Campbell, does a deep dive into the history of the Swimsuit Issue, interviewing models, photographers, editors, and Jule herself, as well as some feminist critics. I saw the documentary at a film festival, and I got that usual film festival glow. By the time we had watched the film and the Q&A with Jill Campbell, I left feeling like I had just seen the best film ever. After some time, I cooled on it just a little, but it is still well worth watching.

There are really 2 stories in this documentary. One is about the magazine and the business empire it spawned. The issue made stars out of models like Elle McPherson, and the interviews with these women are enlightening. We learn how fraught modeling can be, working nearly naked with male photographers and directors, who are sometimes inclined to take advantage of the situation. For the Swimsuit Issue, Jule was always there directing the shoots and then selecting the photos, weeding out the more lascivious shots and ensuring that only the more tasteful pics made it into the magazine. These portions of the film are copiously filled with footage of the photo shoots, so it's pretty easy on the eyes.

Then there are the critics, representing the usual bizarre alliance between man-hating feminists and the religious right. The one thing they both hate is pictures of beautiful, scantily-clad women. Probably my only real criticism of the documentary is that Ms. Campbell gives these critics more air time than is really needed. I think it's right that she includes their voices, as they do make some valid points, for what they are worth. The magazine does objectify women. It also objectifies women as soft, feminine, and vulnerable in a magazine that is otherwise supposed to be about athletics. Points taken. By the end, this film keeps circling back to these same critics restating the same points. She could have cut their screen time by half without losing anything useful.

The best documentaries blend a personal story with a big-picture theme, and Jill Campbell does that here. The second story in this film is about Jule Campbell at the end of a long, productive life, being cared for by family and developing symptoms of dementia. Through all this, it's gratifying watching her re-visit and discuss her life's work and catch up with several of the models she worked with over the years. There wasn't a dry eye in the theater by the closing credits.

4 stars out of 5