merklekranz
"Johnny Skidmarks" is uneven to the extreme. This sometimes black comedy, sometimes thriller, sometimes noir, sometimes violent movie, teeters on the edge of being either entertainment or nonsense. The plot is initially interesting. A police freelance photographer sidelines taking blackmail photographs of unsuspecting clients with a planted hooker. While completely disassociating himself from the victims, Peter Gallagher plays the role of the photographer very low key. Even more low key is his on again off again romance with Francis McDormand. Her role seems like it belongs in a different movie, and adds nothing to the already well stretched plot. In the end the wheels finally come off regarding John Lithgrow's good to bad transformation, and the concluding torture scene turns into one gigantic plot hole. - MERK
Deusvolt
Johnny's last name is Scardino so why did they call him Skidmarks? Although it wasn't explained in the movie, it is obvious that the moniker had something to do with his occupation - a crime and accident scene photographer. He took photos of vehicle skid marks, see? It seems that Skidmarks was not a regular police employee but a freelance photographer who got assignments from the cops to take photos of crime scenes, similar to a reporter on "string" basis. Obviously, he didn't have much talent otherwise he would have been into photography involving advertising, modeling, art or whatnot. He reminds me of itinerant photographers who used to frequent parks, churches and tourist spots and overcharged for their unimaginative photos.And so Skidmarks made a living taking flash photos of gruesome scenes. As long as the pictures were clear and showed everything the investigators wanted, they were OK. Doubtless his dreadful job had made Johnny morally numb. He really didn't even "see" the subjects of his photos. Which was why he was into a blackmailing racket where his co-conspirators faked police raids while he took photos of men caught in compromising positions with prostitutes. In one of these raids, the victim turned out to be a "friend," a detective in the police force who frequently engaged his services. But because he has been so inured to the reality of crime and the unpleasantness he encountered daily in his work, he did not recognize his friend. It seems that he completely detached himself from the scene so that he did not hear his friend's pleas to help him.His failure to do so leads to a series of murders.This is certainly not a "feel good" movie. It is tragic but not a tragedy because the hero lacks both honor and hubris. Nevertheless, it is a riveting watch as it combines character study and suspense. One's sympathy goes out to both Skidmarks and the murderer who whacked the members of his gang and stalks him.
gary-cole
This movie started out slow, then slowed to a snail's pace, and then took off in a ridiculous , and contrived sprint to the finish. Please don't misunderstand, I'm all for "suspension of disbelief". I understand it's role in viewing a film, however, Johnny Skidmarks demands far too much suspension of disbelief ; as well as,suspension of logic in general. I kept waking up my wife to show her how bad this film had become. I have the utmost respect for the actors, many of whom, I've enjoyed in other films but they dropped the ball on this one. Lastly,Skidmark's relationship with Frances McDormand was about as stale andunbelievable as any I've ever witnessed. There is a reason this film went from Sundance to HBO.
Chris Quigley
John Lithgow's best performance in many years as a homicidal cop, on the brink of madness. Lithgow is both funny and at times scary in a role that, after seeing Cliffhanger, seems that he was destined to excel. Although having a slow start, the film gains momentum and gears towards the rollercoaster finish in which Lithgow's character delights. Although, never a classic, it is a pretty decent effort.
AD
