Reviews

I didn't bother to read reviews. I saw it listed on pay TV and looked at names like Coen, Clooney, Malkovich, Pitt and McDormand. It had to be a winner.

No.

The script was weird. Things didn't connect well and there was superfluous stuff that didn't move the story forwards. Even in a dark comedy, there needs to be structure.

Perhaps the first scene and the last scene were the best in the whole movie, but neither made much sense on their own, or together.

I'm glad it was on TV, because I was able to feed the dogs and make coffee and do a few chores while it ran. I could still follow the movie (I almost typed "story") and figure out what everyone was doing, but it still wasn't entertaining. I think I chuckled twice.

So, it set me thinking: how can top names get together and make something so bad? Then I remembered "Ocean's Twelve."

Having read the screenplay on Project Greenlight, I was keen to see how it turned out. It was true to the script, which is what one would hope when the director is also the writer, but there were scenes which could have been deleted without diminishing the impact of the film. When I read the script, I got the feeling of a comic-book story and there's nothing wrong with this--gritty, tough, seamy underside of a big city. Somehow the film didn't quite carry this across and seemed to be trying to add more credibility to what could be just a good, slightly-clichéd action flick. One thing that I thought was that it was shot on video. Some of the scenes definitely lacked the sharp crispness of film and I was surprised to see the Kodak logo in the end credits. I was also surprised that they could shoot it on film and keep it in the AUD1M budget. Shooting on video could have actually added a grainy dimension which would suit this film noir genre. The choice of music was as good as it gets.

I didn't read the novel, but I probably will after seeing the movie. I want to see how Phuong, the girl, is developed as a character.

Michael Caine rarely disappoints and, once again, his performance as Thomas Fowler, the jaded correspondent for the "London Times," meets expectations.

Brendan Fraser as Alden Pyle, opthalmologist, come spy, was convincing enough, but the character was slightly unbelievable.

What really disappointed me was the lack of opportunity given to Do Thi Hai Yen, as Phuong, to be anything but a bagatelle over which the men struggled to posess. Yes, possess: I really saw little emotional love expressed.

The backdrop was the decaying years of French Colonialsm in Vietnam and this was handled with skill by the cast and crew. The dynamics between the male protagonists blended well with the fighting but totally overshadowed the potential that the women could have had.

Nevertheless, it was good drama and another notch in Phllip Noyce's achievements.

I'd had this in the DVD player 5 minutes and realized I'd hired it before. Oddly, I couldn't recall how it finished. Twenty minutes in and I knew why I didn't know how it finished--I'd not been able to sit through it all before, so this time I made a sandwich and sat down to suffer it in its entirety.

I was going to blame the director for messing up a good script, but then I realized that it was a writer/director auteur type thing. Some work well, others are catastrophically bad. The plot was sort of OK, the execution awful and the pathetic attempts at humour were totally out of context in such a movie. So was the gratuitous violence--sort of like a Year-11 schoolboy story.

As far as acting goes, Francesca Brown aquitted herself quite well; the rest were average to bad. Maybe they just needed the money.

Most unbelieveable scene (and there were many): The model aircraft posing as a real plane in the opening scene.

Someday I'll be smart enough to make a list of forgettable movies that I must not hire when I go to the video store. I think I'll start that list tonight.

The four-hour miniseries is, when well executed, one of the most entertaining forms of modern drama. "Prime Suspect 6" is a vivid demonstration of how a well-crafted script put in the hands of a competent director and a dedicated cast and crew can provide cliff-hanging suspense and emotional excursions for viewers of a wide range of ages and backgrounds.

Helen Mirren is possibly at her best in "6" as the ageing senior detective, constantly battling the establishment as she tries to manage a big caseload when a particularly brutal murder opens a Pandora's box of leads, lies and loose ends.

My prize, however, goes to Peter Berry for his writing. The story lets us slowly explore the minds, motivations and especially the passions of all the main characters and makes good use of historical events and present-day tensions to construct a drama of the highest quality. His story has strong Hollywood elements, and for this style of drama, that's precisely what's needed.

If you missed it this time, don't miss the repeat or definitely rent the DVD when it's out.

I'm glad I waited until this flick came out on free-to-air TV. All it cost me was missing "Speed." The flop was the script, and no matter how good an actor is, or a director, if the story is weak and the plot points don't seem to mesh, then it's going to fail. I'm always curious after seeing a movie that doesn't work how the investors feel when they see the first cut (if the producers invite them to...) I'd be inclined to cut my losses and say, "OK it's going to cost too much to try and make this a funny film, just release it as it is." Maybe this is exactly what happened.

It seems that one major step to the success of a dramatic work is to write from the perspective of a disturbed mind. Shakespeare did this masterfully with Hamlet, and Paul Schrader has done no less with Travis Bickle, the New York Cabbie not long out of the mindless action of the Vietnam war. The story is unpredictable as is the mind of Travis. Robert De Niro demonstrates his brilliance in character interpretation under he flawless direction of Scorsese. The grimy underside of New York (but it could just as easily be Sydney or London) is gutted and exposed for us to explore through Travis's jaundiced eyes. His impetuous actions take us with him on a seamy ride through his meager life as though we are in the back seat of his cab. After twenty-thee years, this movie still stands as a monument to the fine art of cinema.

Good set design and creative lighting and camera work carry this film from bad to ordinary. The plot is an amalgam of re-hashed stories with no really original elements to lift it out of the mediocre. Nick Nolte (probably under the director's influence) puts in a melodramatic performance reminiscent of amateurs doing Shakespeare. Ewan McGregor does carry the film along, but, despite performing well, Josh Brolin can't make an incredible character believable. One thing I can't understand is why film makers when doing a corridor chase (yawn) still have to have the obligatory scene in a basement with stark lighting and pipes everywhere. In all other respects, the sets and locations were fine. If you want to give your girlfriend the creeps, you could get it out on video.

This story of a boy who slowly uncovers the secrets behind the deaths of a number of children in a small community attempts to address too many issues, and consequently has trouble in tying the sub-plots together. The scenes of harsh reality conflict with the unconvincing surreal ghostly images. It could have been a lot better, and this possibly states a strong case for not having a writer/director/producer, but allowing the diversification of creatives to produce a more coherent feature.

Hostage dramas are getting really passé, but this one should remain on the bottom shelf in the video store gathering dust. Unbelievable characters in impossible settings create a third-grade movie. When desperate criminals hold a family hostage in their own home (yawn) there is at least the opportunity for some good characterization. Instead, this film wanders in too many directions, has to many points of conflict and loses the viewer. The big question is how did such a good cast get caught up in this? Not one performance stood out as worthy of comment.

If your main reason going to the movies is to see Brad Pitt going through every imaginable facial expression (and a bit of his pectorals) then you'll probably enjoy most of these three hours. Claire Forlani has a wondrously enigmatic face, but it was too enigmatic for too long. One expects more from a film that comes from the same stable as "Scent of a Woman." The four writers surely could have done more with the ingredients they were given. A promising young doctor and Death? They just let the opportunity slide. Anthony Hopkins did his usual performance, but possibly the best act was Jeffrey Tambor, playing the apple-short-of-an-orchard manipulatable guy married into a New York boardroom. This movie did create one landmark: probably the longest, most protracted audience scream I've ever heard. If you see it, you'll know when it happens.