Most writers wish more than anything that they could develop their own distinctive voice, like famed playwright David Mamet has done. The problem with people recognizing the way you say things, though, is that it makes it really damn obvious when you've got nothing to say. Edmond is an empty, meandering, quizzical and fairly self-involved bit of blather. If this script didn't have Mamet's name on it, it likely would never have been produced and certainly wouldn't have attracted such a talented cast.
Based on a stage play, this movie follows the journey of upper middle class New Yorker Edmond (William H. Macy) as he decides to leave his wife and sets out across the city to get himself laid. He humorously haggles over price with several strippers and whores, bangs a pretty young waitress, gets beaten up by some streetside hustlers, beats the ass of a deceitful pimp, commits a senseless murder and alternately rages and pontificates about predestination, social graces and the racial and societal preoccupations of upper middle class New Yorkers.
The first observation to make about this film is that Edmond and the waitress he picks up for a one night stand are the only characters to have actual names. Everyone else goes unnamed during the movie and is listed in the credits as "Matron", "B-Girl", "Whore", "Interrogator", etc. It's my experience that when characters in a story don't have real names, it's usually a sign of either lazy writing or affectation. Either way, it's a bad sign and indicates what you're watching or reading is excessively contrived. That's true of Edmond, where unreal people say and do unreal things. They're never living their lives, only playing parts and mouthing dialog that isn't nearly as clever as Mamet believes and isn't at all insightful or thought-provoking.
When you look deeper into this movie, you discover that there's no reason for anything that happens in it. Why does Edmond leave his wife? Why is he bitter and frustrated? Why is he so cheap when it comes to paying for sex? Why does he commit murder? There's no explanation for any of it other than "just because". Now, Mamet may have been attempting to make the randomness of human behavior the point of his story. That purpose still wouldn't make it interesting or entertaining.
One of the jumble of things this film throws against the wall is white racism. It's nothing more than William H. Macy and Joe Mantegna spouting off bigotry both malevolent and condescending, only to see Edmond wind up seeking salvation from the late-night services of a black Baptist congregation. Again, Mamet may have been trying to say something about the clueless racial pretensions of white folk, but that intent doesn't produce anything meaningful or revealing.
If you've ever watched good Mamet before, it'll be easy to recognize this as bad Mamet. Edmond has the same rhythms, tone and verbal ticks and habits being applied to an idea that doesn't go anywhere because it has nowhere to go. It's a bit like listening to a great singer belt out an awful song. Imagine Celine Dion doing a rendition of some nonsense rap song about women's butt cheeks. It would only be enjoyable as parody or satire, which this movie clearly isn't trying or intended to be.
Edmond is blessedly short at just over 80 minutes long. That's still 80+ minutes that would be better spent doing something besides watching this film.
Based on a stage play, this movie follows the journey of upper middle class New Yorker Edmond (William H. Macy) as he decides to leave his wife and sets out across the city to get himself laid. He humorously haggles over price with several strippers and whores, bangs a pretty young waitress, gets beaten up by some streetside hustlers, beats the ass of a deceitful pimp, commits a senseless murder and alternately rages and pontificates about predestination, social graces and the racial and societal preoccupations of upper middle class New Yorkers.
The first observation to make about this film is that Edmond and the waitress he picks up for a one night stand are the only characters to have actual names. Everyone else goes unnamed during the movie and is listed in the credits as "Matron", "B-Girl", "Whore", "Interrogator", etc. It's my experience that when characters in a story don't have real names, it's usually a sign of either lazy writing or affectation. Either way, it's a bad sign and indicates what you're watching or reading is excessively contrived. That's true of Edmond, where unreal people say and do unreal things. They're never living their lives, only playing parts and mouthing dialog that isn't nearly as clever as Mamet believes and isn't at all insightful or thought-provoking.
When you look deeper into this movie, you discover that there's no reason for anything that happens in it. Why does Edmond leave his wife? Why is he bitter and frustrated? Why is he so cheap when it comes to paying for sex? Why does he commit murder? There's no explanation for any of it other than "just because". Now, Mamet may have been attempting to make the randomness of human behavior the point of his story. That purpose still wouldn't make it interesting or entertaining.
One of the jumble of things this film throws against the wall is white racism. It's nothing more than William H. Macy and Joe Mantegna spouting off bigotry both malevolent and condescending, only to see Edmond wind up seeking salvation from the late-night services of a black Baptist congregation. Again, Mamet may have been trying to say something about the clueless racial pretensions of white folk, but that intent doesn't produce anything meaningful or revealing.
If you've ever watched good Mamet before, it'll be easy to recognize this as bad Mamet. Edmond has the same rhythms, tone and verbal ticks and habits being applied to an idea that doesn't go anywhere because it has nowhere to go. It's a bit like listening to a great singer belt out an awful song. Imagine Celine Dion doing a rendition of some nonsense rap song about women's butt cheeks. It would only be enjoyable as parody or satire, which this movie clearly isn't trying or intended to be.
Edmond is blessedly short at just over 80 minutes long. That's still 80+ minutes that would be better spent doing something besides watching this film.