This is a coming of age movie written and directed by Mike Binder. As with much fiction, and especially movies that are framed by the later perspectives of a participant narrator (here one of the principal characters, Mort Golden) I expect that Binder's creation is to a considerable degree autobiographical, and I see that he was in fact born in Detroit and would have been just a few years younger than Mort.
Set in Detroit in 1975, it features Mort and two close friends from high school, all aged about 21, and of very different personalities but united by their common situation: largely rootless and morally adrift in a decadent urban environment (that extends across the Ambassador Bridge into Canada), and still driven primarily by the testosterone that nature has presumably bestowed on the male sex to ensure that the community has a sufficient supply of young warriors to defend it. However, there is no functional community here, no adequate fathers in the picture, and no organizational structure like the military draft to discipline and direct the easily provoked aggressions of these young men, and to provide them with a recognizable path to adulthood. So instead they are drifting gradually into a life of crime.
It has been said that the primary imperative of society is to tame young men. In support of this proposition, the vast majority of crimes of violence are perpetrated by young men, principally of the ages of 17-25. Mostly these are crimes of impulse, and in the absence of skills and planning they often result in run-ins with the law or its surrogates, or alternatively with hardened criminals for whom the young men are no match. These experiences can be sufficiently painful to shock them into the beginnings of maturity, but fortunately, one way or another, the vast majority of young men do survive and one way or another find their way out of this potential or actual criminal phase of their lives. Scientific research has found that the brains (and therefore the psyches) of young men are generally slower to mature than those of women, slower in particular to establish the impulse control that the frontal lobes crucially feed back to our underlying emotion-drived animal brains, our core selves. Whether this delay is a direct consequence of the much higher testosterone levels that all biological males have compared to all females, or whether it just the testosterone speaking for itself, hasn't, to my knowledge, been established.
These general remarks are meant to elucidate the themes and backdrop of this movie, which, as I write, is grossly under-rated on IMDB at 6.3. I expect that this is in part because these three candidate musketeers are for most of the movie quite unlikable, and the milieu they inhabit is grungy and decadent. Then too, the movie is the conventional hetero male equivalent of a "chick flick", so probably lost some ratings points by viewers who weren't able to relate.
But the characters and their lives are real and believable, and if the dramatization of their story is largely an exercise in literary and dramatic realism, it is nonetheless effective, has the ring of authenticity, and in place of the conventional happy Hollywood ending, concludes on a satisfyingly hopeful note.
Set in Detroit in 1975, it features Mort and two close friends from high school, all aged about 21, and of very different personalities but united by their common situation: largely rootless and morally adrift in a decadent urban environment (that extends across the Ambassador Bridge into Canada), and still driven primarily by the testosterone that nature has presumably bestowed on the male sex to ensure that the community has a sufficient supply of young warriors to defend it. However, there is no functional community here, no adequate fathers in the picture, and no organizational structure like the military draft to discipline and direct the easily provoked aggressions of these young men, and to provide them with a recognizable path to adulthood. So instead they are drifting gradually into a life of crime.
It has been said that the primary imperative of society is to tame young men. In support of this proposition, the vast majority of crimes of violence are perpetrated by young men, principally of the ages of 17-25. Mostly these are crimes of impulse, and in the absence of skills and planning they often result in run-ins with the law or its surrogates, or alternatively with hardened criminals for whom the young men are no match. These experiences can be sufficiently painful to shock them into the beginnings of maturity, but fortunately, one way or another, the vast majority of young men do survive and one way or another find their way out of this potential or actual criminal phase of their lives. Scientific research has found that the brains (and therefore the psyches) of young men are generally slower to mature than those of women, slower in particular to establish the impulse control that the frontal lobes crucially feed back to our underlying emotion-drived animal brains, our core selves. Whether this delay is a direct consequence of the much higher testosterone levels that all biological males have compared to all females, or whether it just the testosterone speaking for itself, hasn't, to my knowledge, been established.
These general remarks are meant to elucidate the themes and backdrop of this movie, which, as I write, is grossly under-rated on IMDB at 6.3. I expect that this is in part because these three candidate musketeers are for most of the movie quite unlikable, and the milieu they inhabit is grungy and decadent. Then too, the movie is the conventional hetero male equivalent of a "chick flick", so probably lost some ratings points by viewers who weren't able to relate.
But the characters and their lives are real and believable, and if the dramatization of their story is largely an exercise in literary and dramatic realism, it is nonetheless effective, has the ring of authenticity, and in place of the conventional happy Hollywood ending, concludes on a satisfyingly hopeful note.