Let’s start positive. There are two elements that work in Pierson’s favor: The first is a good story with nice, flawed characters. Each one has motivation and dog in the overall fight. Jeff is desperate for fast money because of his gambling addiction. Best friend Tim idolizes Jeff’s bad boy lifestyle and becomes a dark version of Jeff. Brother Barry is the straight-laced brother, who’s about to lose his job as a car salesman. On the other side is land developer Bob and wife, Tracy. Their marriage is the typical one of greed, distrust, and betrayal.
The other element that works in Pierson’s favor is his use of flashbacks. For an indie film, he’s got the beats down right. He judiciously uses flashbacks to reveal character flaws and underlying plot points. Many before him and used flashback to disastrous results. Pierson seems quite adept. I will say the ending is a little problematic, not to spoil it, but I don’t think the film’s intentions came out clear enough. I think I understand where writer Pierson was going, especially with the flashback to mobster Bunny (Atim Udoffia), but I still have questions.
The weaknesses of the film are often associated with low budget indies. First, the camera work is not the greatest. The shot composition should be much more compelling. There’s a moment the three discover the body of Bob’s neighbor. The shot should be much cooler than was with the camera on the floor at the level of the body. It just didn’t work. Here is where you want to move that camera around looking exciting and dramatic angles.
“He judiciously uses flashbacks to reveal character flaws and underlying plot points.”
The acting is also quite stiff all around. It’s usually an indication that actors are more focused on saying the lines than making the lines feel organic to the character. This issue is solvable through rehearsal and finding actors how have had extensive time in front of a camera, which is not always that easy to find.
Lastly, the pacing of the film is laborious. Yes, I get it’s a noir film, but that should not be the reason the film is slow. The action needed to pick up just a little. Watch the opening diner scenes, where simple acts of ordering at a diner can go on forever.
In the end, a good story and script with much-needed improvements in execution mean that writer/director Josh Pierson has what it takes to ultimately be a great filmmaker. Where Sleeping Dogs Lie shows he’s got a talent for writing thrillers and, if dedicated, will become an even better writer. His weaknesses are in direction and production. This is the point in Pierson’s career where building a strong production team is vital for upping one’s cinematic game.
Where Sleeping Dogs Lie straddles that recommendation line. Watch it because of its story structure, and its intriguing ending. But it’s going to be a long journey to get there.
"…building a strong production team is vital for upping one’s cinematic game."
