Feb
26
House of Games (1987)
February 26, 2010 | |
themselves, as Mamet’s film explores with a certain joyous streak of mischief
some of the tricks of the trade.”
Reviewed by Dennis Schwartz
This is Broadway playwright David Mamet’s film directorial debut.
It’s a stylish dramatization of an unhappy shrink whose expertise is in
dealing with addictive and obsessive behaviors. The shrink is searching
for answers about her weaknesses through her connections with a confidence
hustler, and risks losing the status she achieved in her orderly and safe
world as she takes a walk on the wild side. Mamet’s direction is flat,
his then wife Lindsay Crouse fails to give an uplifting performance as
the shrink, and the film loses credibility as it bogs down into an unconvincing
academic morality lecture filled with illogical psychological reverberations
when all is said and done. What intrigues is the con games themselves,
as Mamet’s film explores with a certain joyous streak of mischief some
of the tricks of the trade. The scams fill the screen with an entertaining
glance at those who have a need to con others. The film ties together the
legit field of psychoanalysis with confidence players and boldly states
the two are often similar hustles requiring the vic or patient to trust
them completely.
Best-selling author of Driven and successful psychiatrist, Dr. Margaret
Ford (Lindsay Crouse), treats a compulsive gambler patient named Billy
Hahn (Goldstein). He tells her that he lost $25,000 to a gambler named
Mike (Joe Mantegna) in a bar/pool hall called House of Games (an obvious
metaphor for Mamet’s world of deception) and if he doesn’t pay him by tomorrow
– he will die. This impels Maggie to go out on the limb for her patient
and confront Mike, telling him that she knows he won’t kill Hahn because
he will go to jail. Mike then works a staged hustle on her, where he says
he will tear up Hahn’s IOU, which was only for $800, if she acts as a “tell”
(those small giveaway looks that poker players unconsciously use that give
away their hand) in a big-stake poker game so he can cheat a big-time gambler.
She signals Mike that his opponent known as the Vegas man (Ricky Jay),
touched his ring finger. This is supposed to mean that he’s bluffing. When
Mike calls his bluff and then loses $6,000 Maggie is tricked into footing
the bill, that is, until she sees through the scheme and the fake gun (a
hint of the violence that’s to come later) the Vegas gambler pulls to act
out his part in the scam. But this action excites her, and she returns
to seek Mike out again. She tells him that she wants to write her next
book about his confidence racket, and Mike agrees to have her follow him
and his team around. The shrink is outwardly confident, but inside she
feels insecure and is coming to the very confident con man for help in
regaining her confidence. She feels contrite that she can’t really help
her patients with the overwhelming problems they have, and wants to dig
deep inside herself to see why.
This time the uptight shrink lets her guard down and falls for the
confidence man’s lines and goes to bed with him. He then lures her into
a scheme she can’t resist participating in, of a briefcase filled with
$80,000 that’s found in the street by Mike, his con man partner Joe (Nussbaum),
and a businessman (Walsh). She’s the mark, but she doesn’t realize it until
she’s taken for $80,000 and her deep addiction to con people is revealed.
Though her learning experience comes at a heavy price, she is grateful
that she feels alive and has learned who she is.
For professional help she goes to her mentor, Dr. Littauer (Skala).
He tells her “When you do something unforgivable, forgive yourself.” Both
trades seem to rely on having self-confidence as their mainstay and do
not seem concerned that they might be swindling another so that only they
can benefit.
Mantegna and the ensemble cast of Mamet theater regulars, deliver
their stagy lines with a precise staccato cadence, an aggressive crispness,
and in the distinctive manner the playwright intended. Their performances
are right on the mark. In this study of human nature, it shows how trust
can be misplaced if given to the wrong person — it can even bring down
someone not driven by greed or someone who is earnest in their search for
solutions to their problems. The lessons from experience often have a wicked
sting, and Mamet has a good ear to hear those inward cries.