A shopkeeper must save his son from an angry mob during the 1992 L.A. uprising after the Rodney King verdict.
Chuck says:
Better than expected, Ariel Vromen’s “1992” is a father-son movie set in a pressure cooker. Taking place on the day of the Rodney King riots in April of 1992, the script by Vromen and Sascha Penn manages to shoehorn a heist into the family dynamics, a seemingly odd combination of narrative elements. For the most part, it works, thanks to the ever-escalating sense of tension Vromen orchestrates, as well as the fine work from the strong cast, which includes Ray Liotta’s final performance.
Communication is a problem between Mercer (Tyrese Gibson) and his son Antoine (Christopher Ammanuel). The teen is resentful because of his father’s extended absence, due to a long prison sentence, and is now uncertain how to deal with him now that they’re forced to live together. The tension between them is obvious, the rebellious nature of the young man, present in all he does.
Meanwhile, Riggin (Scott Eastwood) is reluctant to approach his career-criminal father, Lowell (Liotta), about his latest scheme. Seems there’s scads of plutonium at Pluton Metals, where Mercer works, just waiting to be lifted. A dicey proposition, the old man is originally reluctant to take on the risks the job poses. However, once the streets of Los Angeles erupt, due to the Rodney King verdict, he reasons the police will be otherwise occupied. Quickly throwing together a crew, he, Riggin, and the others set out to commit the theft. As this is going on, Mercer is desperately searching the violent streets for his son, which eventually leads him to his place of work.
Moving tautly, the movie provides a microcosm of the racial turmoil that roiled the city. Dissension develops within the den of thieves when the single black member is considered expendable. These tensions ultimately affect the job, which predictably goes sideways. Conversations between Mercer and Antoine deal more overtly with these issues, the younger eager to vent his anger and make a grand statement over the injustices being suffered, the elder advising caution, stressing the need to think about the long-term effects of their actions.
None of these moments feel forced, each emerging organically from the story, each adding narrative weight in the process. As for the familial themes at play, they’re written in broad strokes, nothing stated or done proving to be profound or revelatory. The examples of good and bad parenting are hardly subtle, yet they do make for genuinely dramatic storytelling.
A B-Movie at heart, “1992” emerges as a cut above other films of its ilk, thanks to the fine work by Gibson, Eastwood and Liotta, as well its sincere attempt at social commentary. And while these sentiments may be incomplete, they are well-meaning. As a result, it’s likely the film will stay with you a bit longer than the usual action fare.
3 Stars
