Mal-Content

Tonight, on a whim, I decided to watch the movie Malice from my DVD collection. It made a pretty big impression on me when I saw it in its original theatrical run back in 1993. I think I've watched it once, maybe twice since then, and still recalled enjoying it. But until tonight, I'd never watched it knowing beforehand that it was written by Aaron Sorkin.

All those previous viewings were before Sports Night, or The West Wing, or Studio 60 ever came around. Somewhere in there, the films A Few Good Men and The American President were made, but it was only in the last few years that I connected it all to writer Aaron Sorkin.

The thing is, the writing isn't entirely his. It turns out this movie is based fairly closely on a made-for-TV movie that came three years earlier. Sorkin was brought in to add a subplot and give the dialogue a polish. But his stamp definitely shows. While there may not any of the "walk and talks" that would become his television trademark, there are many memorable lines, at least one epic monologue, and plenty of other speech patterns familiar to anyone who's a fan of any of the television shows I mentioned.

The cast is pretty unbelievable. Headlining it are Alec Baldwin and Nicole Kidman, and mixing it up with them is Bill Pullman (in a role that actually comes off just like Bradley Whitford, had Sorkin only known him a few years earlier and had the clout at that time to cast him). George C. Scott and Anne Bancroft have small but very important cameos (especially the latter). Bebe Neuwirth and Peter Gallagher fill in secondary roles. And the rest of the movie is littered with faces who would, over the next 15 years, become far more famous: Brenda Strong, Joshua Malina, Tobin Bell, and even Gwyneth Paltrow, years before anyone knew who she was.

The writing is incredibly precise, like some fragile structure perfectly held together from which no piece could be removed. Seemingly unimportant characters create red herrings as the plot twists along. Minor moments along the way pay off larger moments in the final act. There is a bit of a strange subplot involving a serial rapist, a plot that actually gets resolved halfway through the movie, yet even that serves a very specific purpose, bringing certain information to light that's vital to moving the main story along.

But I have to admit, that no matter how well-crafted the writing, no matter how great the acting, there is something just slightly... well... trashy about the whole affair. How Malice wasn't the most completely over-the-top thing put on film that year is a testament to just how well those other elements were working; without them, the whole thing would play like some "Very Special Episode" of a schlocky daytime soap opera.

Yet, what can I say? I liked it. I still like it. I rate it an A-. And really, the "minus" is just cause I think I feel a little guilty for liking it. I recommend it, and yet, if you saw it and hated it, I probably couldn't think any less of you.

But then, we all have a movie or two like that, don't we?