When I first began hearing about this movie, the premise, as I understood it, was that George Reeves'apparent suicide was in fact a murder, heading into the movie with that in mind, I was a little surprised, although not terribly disappointed to find that this movie is less about a murder mystery and more about man trying to find his path to stardom. What makes this movie ultimately so frustrating is that it wastes time and energy trying to give you a parallel storyline with Adrien Brody, as the self-important amoral private eye, who is trying to fix his life, this was an unnecessary and at times tedious plot line and as good as Brody is the better storyline and performance belong to Affleck. With some better editing and a more focused view of what this story should be this would have been an outstanding movie. Ultimately it seems that rather than take a chance on the performances generating buzz, the producers decided to sell a mystery that never fully materialized, as opposed to a layered and interesting character piece about a man not many people knew about.
Reviews
4 Reviews
A History of Violence
(2005)
Bill Hurt got an Oscar nod out of this
31 January 2006
I saw this movie in theaters, and I was very surprised by Bill Hurt's appearance and even more so by his performance...It came off as a little gimmicky like he was the second choice for that role because they couldn't get someone cooler Christopher Walken, Joey Pants, or anyone who would be more believable as a gangster. Bill Hurt has a very, very limited range to begin with, at least I think so, and this role was beyond a stretch, I didn't believe him as that character for one second, his attempt at a Philly accent was not even admirable, how must Ed Harris feel, he was great in this completely menacing and cold, he gave the best performance in the movie and no recognition. I thought Bill Hurt was the biggest mistake in the movie, terribly miscast....but maybe thats just me.
Collateral
(2004)
Everyone shines
9 August 2004
Based on early reviews and previews I fully expected Jamie Foxx to steal the show. My expectations for Tom Cruise were considerably lower; after numerous mediocre performances and only a few good ones, (Interview with the Vampire and Jerry Maguire) , the only excuse I could make for Cruise is that he is such a big star you can never see the character he is playing. But in Collateral he literally pops off the screen I have never seen him act with such force and presence. Undoubtedly Cruise was aided by Foxx taking his abilities to another level, already known for his comic wit and gift for mimicry, Foxx shows he can be subtle unassuming and pitiable. Their performances were enhanced and enabled by Michael Mann's masterful direction his use of angles and different filters give this picture a raw reality, Mann shows us the unglamorous side of LA and he shows us humanity at its most vital and vulnerable.
The Village
(2004)
(Spoiler)Themes of Universality and Social commentary pervade this thriller
2 August 2004
Warning: Spoilers
For me The Village was a giant social commentary wrapped in the guise of a thriller, the best apart about this is that it was never apparent until the end when it was revealed that The Village was in modern times. Once this revelation took place all of events of the movie took on a different meaning. If you look back on Nights last film signs there was a definite religious undertone and statement being made, from my perspective Night was again trying to make a statement; this time about the evil of man, the power of love, and the capability for strength in all of us. When Lucius got stabbed my initial thought was, WOW, but then I thought how will they defend themselves without Lucius, who was clearly the strongest and bravest member of the village. That single act sets the stage for Shymalan's commentary to take center stage; you just don't realize it until it's over. The stabbing of Lucius by Noah, makes the attempted utopia a failure all of the elders were trying to escape the pain of loss that they believed was brought on by modernity, they were some how convinced that if removed from those circumstances they would be safe from the evil of man and the pain of human emotion. By having Noah commit such a heinous act Shymalan is showing that the capability for passion, rage, and violence exists within even the most innocent. Shymalan balances that by making Ivey the heroine, blind and alone Ivey was easily the most vulnerable member of the village but drawing upon her love of Lucius she finds the strength to kill Noah and save Lucius. Ultimately I think the most interesting question raised is how much would we give to get back what we lost ? The villagers forsook modern life and all its accoutrements including vital medicine under the seeming belief that money and possession drove man to evil acts, and reverted back to an ancient lifestyle devoid of material wealth in favor of sharing working toward a common good. But when the utopian concept is proved wrong, by Noah they still want to go on. I think this was daring effort by Shymalan and it builds nicely on the themes he has covered in previous movies. It might seem like a stretch but that's what I got after seeing the village.
Tell Your Friends