Watched: 10/09/2025
Format: Amazon
Viewing: First
Director: Shane Black
Between 1962 and 2008, author Richard Stark (real name: Donald Westlake) delivered 24 Parker and Grofield novels. Between sometime around 2010 and 2017, I read all of the Parker and Grofield books, mostly in order. And I've re-read some since, including this year. That's not a guarantee of anything for you, but it is a sign of something that this was the series I actually stuck with it.
Over the years, the books have been adapted here and there, but during Stark's lifetime, he had a rule that the studios not use the name "Parker" in their adaptations. Likely because the studios always made changes, and he was protecting the essence of his character.
With Stark/ Westlake's passing, his wife allowed the studios to try another go at an adaptation, this time using the Parker name. And, thus, we got the 2013 mid-tier film, Parker, starring Jason Statham and Jennifer Lopez. We talked about it here and here.
If it's for regular movie watchers who don't care about Parker or Shane Black - it's going to feel off, but they won't know why. If it's for Shane Black fans, it's not anywhere close to his best stuff. If it's for Parker fans... we're used to disappointment.
Written and directed by action/comedy auteur Shane Black, Play Dirty (2025) is not based on any one Parker novel, and seems to borrow elements from a few, changing significant details, using character names and then changing the characters. It is intended to be a modern Parker, and it seems to want fans of the books to say "that's him! That's finally Parker!" while introducing a new audience to the idea of Parker. But it never feels like Parker, while this version absolutely does Parker-ish things. Nor does it feel like the writing of Richard Stark, even when the characters and borrowed beats feel familiar.
To those choosing to watch the movie as their evening selection because it's free to stream for Prime members, it's going to mostly work as a quirky heist movie with a lead who is Mark Wahlberg. And his band of merry thieves.
The problem with making a Parker movie in 2025 is that (1) Parker would not get involved with a heist as high profile as the one in the movie unless he had some very specific conditions met and (2) the movie can't help but keep escalating the explosions and very public gun play - taking a page from recent Netflix action movies like The Gray Man, which are fun, forgettable films where the explosion budget is very high. Parker dropping a freaking NYC metro train onto a city street is just not really in his playbook. Especially as doing so would likely destroy the items he's trying to heist, rendering it from invaluable to trash.
It's hard to know what are studio notes, but not so hard to pick up on what is Shane Black if you've watched his movies since the 1980's. He, rightfully (usually), gathers that hanging on for the joke instead of just moving at full throttle through an action sequence pays off. He takes delight in the absurdity of people in a loving way, but also knows these are fictional characters and you can take any of them out at a moment's notice if the action calls for it.
But credit to superstar casting director, Sarah Hailey Finn. LaKeith Stanford was a perfect Grofield. Keegan-Michael Key was a solid choice for Ed Mackey. Thomas Jane probably should have been Parker, now that I think about it, but he fills his part just fine. And seeing vets of a few years ago like Tony Shaloub show up as solid as ever is gratifying. Not to mention Gretchen Mol and, yes, that was Peta Wilson. It seemed like Chukwudi Iwuji really had something to do here, and then... not really?
And, yeah, Wahlberg was bad casting, but I suspect that was Amazon and not Finn. If you want a movie, you need to have a star. But stars don't want to play Parker. They want to play a cool dude who does shoot people.
Look, there's just too much... movie stuff. In 24 books, Parker never talks about where he came from or who he is when he's not on the job. What little we see is when he tags up with Claire or when a book starts with Parker somewhere with a woman he's going to part ways with in the next few hours. Him talking about lessons he learned at age 8? Man, if that happened, I have zero memory of it and it'd be weird if he did - maybe in one of the last few books.
The overly complicated disaster/ action scenes have janky CGI, which normally I shrug off, but in non-sci-fi context, it looked pretty bad and made it feel like a cartoon. The explosions and gunfire seemed like they'd raise so many questions and alarms, the Parker of the books would have just holed up in an apartment for two weeks with Zen until the coast was clear and then leave town at 4:00 AM. He would not have kept on trying to improvise his mission with the people around him who'd not pulled it off.
We have a weird relationship to violence on screen. Because I know I come into any Parker movie with a lot of baggage, I was doing a quick look to see what folks online thought about the movie who have no idea who Parker is, don't care, and just want to watch a movie. And it seemed like my concerns about the half-way approach to Parker as it gets handled in movies, especially when you pivot to comedy (and there are funny moments in Parker books, but they aren't "comedies"), bears out.
Without the voice of the narrator (and a kinda meh performance by Walhberg), Parker just seems like a bland-dude who is particularly violent in this movie. No one is afraid of him except one mobster - and everyone should be a *little* bit afraid of Parker, except maybe Madge (Peta Wilson). Parker's a planner, that's his thing. The books are either about him planning something and it comes off (in the first 8 books or so), or they pick up as the plan went to hell, and now Parker is picking up the pieces. By showing *both* in the film, it just makes Parker and Co. look bad at their jobs.
All that said, LaKeith Stanford is kinda perfect as Grofield. I think he read those books and took them to heart.
Anyway, as a Parker fan, I didn't really find the movie satisfying. As a Shane Black movie, it felt like one of the less interesting entries in his filmography, but a moderately entertaining two hours. As a heist movie fan, none of it added up, and it was a mess.
I doubt I'll think about this movie much ever again.
No comments:
Post a Comment