By Gary Deane
Hollywood has forever struggled to get Elmore Leonard right -- if it's ever bothered to try. Though several of his thirty-odd crime novels have been made into films, far too little of his unique voice as a writer and storyteller has found its way to the screen with much success.
Writer/teacher Barry Hannah has called Leonard, a ‘dry comic nearest’, a fit enough description, but one which would likely kill any elevator pitch before the door had closed. Hollywood has generally taken a brain-dead approach to Leonard, seeing only the obvious in him: a stock of script-ready characters, such as a lead character with an iffy history, but also the right motives and some cool moves; a knowing female who's often smarter than he is; and a bunch of bad guys who manage to find a way to screw up even the best-laid plans. Around these, Leonard holds tight to a plot that has us at first puzzling over how the characters relate to each other and what they’re up to. Then, just as we think we’ve figured it out, all bets are off.
Leonard's novels appear film-ready, with his books structured like treatments. However, that plus millions of studio dollars apparently buy a dry cappuccino and some piles of stink such as The Big Bounce (1969), a weak-minded melodrama, and in 2004, a crudely-struck remake billed as a "crime comedy’". That two such failures would have been born of the same book suggests that Leonard was not a smart choice in a high-concept world.
That said, not every film based on Leonard's titles has been a waste of time -- just most, seemingly unable to negotiate Leonard’s tight straddle between mayhem and drollery, never overplaying his hand. Of the better ones, John Frankenheimer’s 52 Pick-Up (1986) a grim neo-noir adapted from an earlier Leonard book, didn’t even attempt that negotiation, offering a hard-edged reading that backed away from any irony. Directed by Steven Soderbergh, Out of Sight (1998) was fashioned as moody and romantic and settled for quirky charm. Though it wasn’t lame, the movie unfortunately still felt a bit limp.
That leaves Jackie Brown, released in 1997, still the only film adaptation able to lay claim to having captured Elmore Leonard where he lived and breathed. Based on Leonard’s book Rum Punch, the movie features Pam Grier as an airline stewardess who’s picked up by Federal agents at LAX with amounts of cash and drugs. These were supposed to be delivered to a low-level felon, Ordell Robbie (Samuel L. Jackson), who isn’t going to believe that she hasn't by now ratted on him. Realizing this, she decides to go one better and set him up, along with his sidekick, Louis Gara (Robert De Niro), and Ordell’s stoner girlfriend (Bridget Fonda). Jackie needs to come out of this better than she came in (not all that great) and enlists the help of Max Cherry (Robert Forster), a bail bondsman Ordell has hired to get her out following the bust.
While Director Quentin Tarantino takes some liberties with the story, no damage is done. The novel’s Jackie Burke is now Jackie Brown, no longer a trim, blonde, 30-ish cougar but an older black fox with ample curves. Tarantino also relocates the story from West Palm Beach to Los Angeles and messes with countless details. However, the result is a near-perfect film iteration of Elmore Leonard's good work, one in which Tarantino cools his directorial jets and settles for straight-ahead story-telling and a less inflated approach to characterization.
It’s often been an authentic sense of character that's been absent in the films adapted from Leonard’s crime novels (his westerns have done better). MovieGet Shorty and Be Cool jettisoned Leonard’s smart and nervy characterizations in favor of dumbed-down caricatures. Tarantino clearly better understands the complexity of the folks that inhabit Leonard’s world. In Jackie Brown, it's straight-shooter Max who’s prepared to dirty himself to right wrongs for Jackie and maybe to again find romance. Or it's criminals like Ordell, a stone killer who is as mesmerizing as he is frightening.
as she apprehends the poignancy of a middle-aged woman who’s managed to get by on her looks and now has to trade on her wits to escape her dead-end life.
Apart from racial identity, there’s nothing black and white about these characters or the situations in which they find themselves -- though it should be noted that questions of identity appeared central to Leonard. He'd put race upfront from the time of his early westerns and also wrote more authentic female heroines into his crime novels than anyone writing in any genre. His affinities to popular culture and music always were those of generations half his age. It’s not hard to see why Tarantino would be preternaturally drawn to Leonard, starting with the director’s own obsession with genre idioms and pop artifacts.
To his credit, Tarantino also avoids flagrant displays of violence in the film, even to the point of taking what there is in the book down a notch. When Ordell takes care of his ‘associate’, Beaumont Livingstone (Chris Tucker), whom he suspects of snitching, it happens at a distance. When Louis suddenly shoots Melanie for getting on his case one too many times, it's off-screen When Ordell in turn kills Louis for shooting Melanie, it's inside a vehicle and, again, a way off. The violence (though never its threat) is almost incidental, similar to how Leonard had written it.
Though he’d always insisted he didn't do neo-noir, Tarantino obviously recognized Rum Punch’s story for what it was -- not just some hard-boiled hustle-and-flow but something real and raw and human. Which offered comfort to those believers in Leonard, recognizing there are some who tend to regard him as a formulist and, for purposes here, not enough a noirist. However, Leonard, from the beginning, transcended formula to create a genre category unto itself, case-hardened pulp noir thrillers graced with both a dark humor and the heartbeat of real human beings. Jack Brown is all that and more.