Unforgettable L.A. Heist Thriller: ‘1992’ Reveals Dark Side of Historic Notorious Day!

Given the title “1992” and the accompanying image of Watts’ own Tyrese Gibson, it would not be unreasonable to anticipate the 1992 Los Angeles riots, sparked by the Rodney King verdict, to be at the heart of this B-movie thriller, directed by Ariel Vromen. Instead, the riots play a secondary role in the storyline.

True, the movie takes place on April 29, 1992, a day that has become infamous (and has been immortalized in a song by the SoCal band Sublime). However, the protests that escalated into a revolt merely serve as a backdrop for a heist movie, wherein a group of seasoned thieves go up against a former gang member. The film does not provide much insight into the events that unfolded on that fateful day in L.A.’s history.

Gibson portrays Mercer Bey, or “OG Merc” as he was known among his former associates in the neighborhood. Recently released from prison and trying to lead an honest life, he works at a factory producing catalytic converters for Pluton Metals. He is also striving to be a responsible and consistent father to his teenage son, Antoine (Christopher Ammanuel).

Scott Eastwood stars as Riggin, who is planning one last robbery (it’s always the last one, isn’t it?). He persuades his younger brother Dennis (Dylan Arnold) and friend Copeland (Clé Bennett) to join him in an audacious heist on the platinum vault at Pluton. He then ropes in his father, Lowell (Ray Liotta), into the scheme. They decide to carry out their operation on the day of the civil unrest, knowing that the LAPD would be otherwise occupied.

A series of unfortunate occurrences and questionable choices lead the entire cast to the factory, and a series of impulsive and violent decisions result in tragedy, pitting father against father, and son against son. It could have been a story right out of a Shakespearean play, if only it were a bit more captivating. The premise of the script, by Vromen and Sascha Penn, comes across as a high-concept mishmash, merging two concepts (“‘Heat,’ but during the L.A. riots”) without delving deeper into the themes and concepts at hand.

Gibson, with his rugged demeanor, always commands attention on screen, and the late, great Liotta is suitably fearsome. However, the rest of the story is filled with unclear motivations and stakes. Liotta’s character, Lowell, is initially reluctant to participate in the heist, but his mind changes inexplicably fast. He brings along a wild card, which triggers the violence, and things quickly spiral out of control. Mercer and Antoine, who have stumbled upon the heist, now have to fight for their survival.

Vromen’s decision to veer away from the riots in the latter half of the film proves to be a wise one. The depiction of the chaos in the first half is cringe-inducing: it’s a cheap and clichéd representation of the turmoil. It feels contrived and politically regressive. Mercer’s admonishment of his son for participating in the riots feels jarringly outdated in a post-Black Lives Matter America.

Even the visual aesthetic of “1992” feels outdated and lacks depth. All exterior shots of Los Angeles are desaturated and have a yellowish tint. The cinematography during the night scenes and inside the factory is far more sophisticated, with the clever use of light and shadow within the enclosed area. However, the geographic layout and some of the plot coincidences are as puzzling as the film’s messaging. The 96-minute runtime seems repetitive and endless.

This film, despite its association with the riots, doesn’t seem interested in exploring any of the related issues. Vromen and Penn would have been better off crafting a simple father-son heist movie, rather than attempting (and failing) to execute this high-concept film.

Katie Walsh is a Tribune News Service film critic.