Good concept, poorly executed.

Exactly the movie you think it is, but not the movie you want it to be.

The acting is good, and the firecracker script has some excellent ideas.

Great story, amazing characters, superb action, enthralling cinematography. Yes, this is something I am glad I spent money on.

Imagine taking a 1970s sitcom about a couple of senior citizen petty criminals, splicing it together with a 1980s TV movie about the hazards of being a street corner hooker and sprinkling in bits of a 1990s indy flick about the dysfunctional dwellers of a squalid hotel lobby that tries to get all heartfelt and meaningful at the end. If you can imagine that, what you come up with is almost certainly better than Night at the Golden Eagle.This isn't by any means the worst movie I've ever seen, but this type of bad movie is probably the worst kind of film to sit through. It's not really stupid or pretentious or incompetent enough for you to have fun with how much it sucks. It's merely so ill conceived that nothing about it works.There are three separate elements to this story. One focuses on Tommy (Donnie Montemarano) and Mick (Vinny Argiro). They grew up together as street thugs who were never good enough to be real gangsters. Instead, they became the sort of small time hoods who stick up ice cream trucks and that's all they've ever been, even though they're both on the wrong side of 60 as this movie opens. Tommy is just getting out after a 7 year stint in prison and Mick surprises him with a plan to move out to Las Vegas and, once and for all, go straight. That plan pretty much goes up in smoke when Tommy brings a prostitute back to Mick's room at the Golden Eagle hotel and kills her.Another aspect of this film shows us 15 year old runaway Loriann (Nicole Jacobs) as she falls in with a disgusting pimp named Rodan (Vinny Jones) and his aging whore, Sally (Ann Magnuson). Rodan works on Loriann's neediness and insecurity before handing her over to let Sally show her the ropes. We see a maternal bond form between Sally and Loriann, until Loriann emotionally ages about 20 years in 15 seconds and becomes even harder and more broken than Sally. This part of the movie made me wonder two things.1. Is the character of Rodan named after the artist or the flying Japanese movie monster?2. Is Vinny Jones a wholesome family man in real life? If he is, the guy deserves an Academy Award because on screen he is absolutely convincing as the sleaziest, most soulless piece of human excrement you can imagine.The final thread to this cinematic tapestry is the interactions between the desk clerk (Miles Dougal) and the denizens of the Golden Eagle hotel lobby. All of them are no more than a half-step up from the gutter and none of them are reaching for the stars. This is the stuff where we're supposed to be impressed with how gritty and realistic things are and at the ironic detachment that turns these people's mental and emotional wounds into sources of humor. Yet it spoils all its cynical aspirations by trying to wring a tear out of the audience by having the lovable, old black buy die.Can you see how mushing all of that together becomes a problem? The comedy can never be that comedic, the drama can never that dramatic and the snarky can never be that snarkful because it's all sloshing together in a movie goulash.Like a great many independent films, I don't think Night at the Golden Eagle was ever meant to entertain anyone. This is the sort of thing where the filmmaker hopes it gets shown at film festivals and people applaud because the folks there convince themselves that it must be art. Well, I don't know art but I know what I like and it ain't this movie.

This film leaves a mark. Don't watch it to be entertained though; what this film sets out to do is show you something unrelentingly grotesque. There is no gloss here, and no hope.Hollywood has a problem. Frequently we see "powerful movies" about the world's poorest and most down-and-out people. The problem is that in real life, the lives of the poorest and most-down-and out people are often banal and undramatic. The Hollywood answer is to inject redemption into the script in order to mask the stink of reality. The results is the Space Mountain of movies, a tamed-down roller coaster experience that deliberately pulls the punches to retain a family--or at least, a hopeful--atmosphere. There's nothing wrong with this approach as long as we remember that what we're seeing is a projection. The problem becomes when we start to believe our own myths.Night at the Golden Eagle is a film that shatters some of those myths. These are the lives of people most of us would rather forget, people with no hope, no future, and only shattered dreams to keep them company. It's rightfully disturbing stuff. Anyone looking to be entertained should stay far away, because Night is a film that is guaranteed to leave you feeling dirty.For all that, it never feels exploitive. Night draws you close to the stench of decay but never cheapens it. There are no false redemptions, no heroes charging in to save the day, not even an "everyman" to ease us into the proceedings, nor are any of the developments glamorized as they might be in a film by Tarantino and his ilk.This film is not perfect. It is so dank that it is almost overwhelming, and not quite close enough to a documentary to shake the need for plot. However, the sets and costumes are incredible. The acting ranges from fantastic to mediocre but never sinks to the level of a WB horror movie.Another reviewer mentioned "racist" content in this film and I am slightly inclined to agree, in that movies of this kind so frequently demonstrate the fall of a young white woman as synonymous with her sleeping with a black or Latino man. This is an example of a theme that might not be as jarring were not a prominent feature in at least 4 films released between 1999 and 2002. I first noticed it in Requiem for a Dream and Traffic and am disappointed to see it featured here as well.My rating: 8/10, but not for everyone.

Night at the Golden Eagle is a gritty film, yet gritty isn't half the word to describe it. Even though films such as Pulp Fiction, Reservoir Dogs, The Usual Suspects and even the mediocre Way of the Gun have all been praised for their gritty atmosphere, Night at the Golden Eagle blows them all away with a gritty atmosphere that perfectly replicates the locations depicted in great novels from pulp legends such as Mickey Spillane and Dashiell Hammett. Night at the Golden Eagle is pure pulp, with an emphasis of illustrating the means streets and back alleys themselves rather than the story of the two old ex-convicts and the other people in between. The result is a fantastic movie, that utterly shows what life in a slum is like and the lives it creates for the poor people that cross upon its path.However, viewers seeing this movie should not look for story, because it is non-existent or weak at best. The story of the two-old ex-cons is never really developed and leaves the audience somewhat confused since the director wants to be "Tarantino-like" and ambitious and switches between three sets of characters. While the story of the whores, both old and young, is a nice interlude, the emphasis on the two old black men is rather pointless. It is nice the director decided to show the laziness of some people, yet a good chunk of the movie is just dedicated to the old man watching TV, which deprives the audience of further understanding the more important characters such as the whores and ex-cons.Yet despite this strange blunder by the director/writer with the story, the acting is great. The two men do a great job at their parts, giving great and quite believable performances as the two ex-cons, with both giving great mixtures of cynicism and paranoia in their dialog. Their acting is truly enjoyable, and makes the audience only yearn for more. The young girl does an admirable job as the young whore, for she constantly is the only reminder of innocence throughout all the chaos and sleaziness of the hotel. Hence, her performance sticks out greatly and is a sleeper performance that deserves some recognition, but probably won't because of the serious holes in the plot.It's a shame this movie isn't more recognized because it is a fantastic film with a fantastic atmosphere that literally puts the settings in Tarantino and Guy Ritchie flicks to shame. While movies these days tend to be more glamorous and over the top, this movie is the epitome of an indie film, breaking the rules in all sorts of ways in order to depict an environment that only great pulp authors dream about. The story is disappointing, yet after watching the film, the audience really doesn't care about the film. The only thing stuck in their minds is the maniacal characters, the sleazy hotel and its dirty surroundings. This is truly a masterpiece "pulp indie" film that should be seen by any kind of "crime fiction" lover, and shows audiences there is more to "pulp" than a few guns, broads and some "Tarantino-esque" dialog. Not to say that I don't love the man, but a little variety is necessary, and this film fits the bill perfectly.My analysis: If you consider yourself a fan of the "Pulp" genre, see this or you're truly a "pulp" poser.

The danger of real life is that if you invent something, there is someone waiting in the sidelines for the opportunity of the invention. Adam Rifkin was waiting for movies to be invented so he could unleash "Night at the Golden Eagle". Naw, that's wrong. The whole idea of movies probably kicked him in gear and this film was born afterward.None of that matters, of course, but it is so interesting to wonder where the "spark of art" comes from.This film is art. It's not an art film though I'm certain it will be shown in such theaters. This is a raw film, wipe away the gloss and sheen, there isn't much, bring on the stench of being a trapped loser, hopelessness in multiple layers, high enthusiasm for a future that does not exist but so much pumping blood and hope we try to rally.What kind of film is this? It is grim.That's the best word I know.Grim.Grim done so well you can smell the seemy rooms, you want everyone to take a shower, the bed sheets have stains of people that aren't in the cast, a pretty girl smiles to reveal a mouth full of braces and a future of hopes that aren't going to happen.Tears run down cheeks and leak into lips so you taste the salt.There is an incredible nasty scene filmed as reflection on a pupil.Where did that idea come from? Who is that insane?Kudos to Mr. Rifkin for building life's underbelly with jarring reality but the genius of this film is in Francesco "Checco" Verese's cinematographry. Almost sepia monochromatic, every scene, every still that could be pulled from the movie is like a "Life" magazine shot. Filmography students could study any shot, any, for shadow and foreground and depth.If you invent movies, someone is going to come along and grab us all by the short hairs and do this.I don't want to watch but I can't look away.Genius that won't reach everyone.Rent, watch, take a shower.