Change Your Image
richnindy
Reviews
The Departed (2006)
Very disappointing
I hesitate to even add a comment at this late date, especially after so many people have echoed my own disappointment with this movie, but clearly Scorsese won the Oscar because of his fine work on "Mean Streets," "Taxi Driver," "The Last Waltz," "Goodfellas," etc. I know a lot of people consider "Raging Bull" his masterpiece, and although I do not care much for it, I would even understand an Oscar given to Scorsese for it.
But this bloated mess? I can't believe how LONG the damn thing is -- especially considering that the original is so much more powerful at only 100 minutes. And don't tell me the length was to provide greater character development -- the characters were much more expressive in the original and their relationships to each other were much better developed.
And as others have mentioned: the profanity is nonstop, and the ending is laughable. And for once I can really say I had WAY too much of Jack Nicholson.
Little Children (2006)
Haunting
"Little Children" is a fairly faithful adaptation of Tom Perotta's excellent satire of suburbia, and although I cannot imagine exactly what I would cut, it is paced execrably. I had the same problem with "In the Bedroom:" Todd Field is obviously amazing with actors, but he is not a "born director" and hasn't a clue how to draw viewers into a movie. The movie is never actually boring but it plods along and seems about twice as long as it is.
That being said, it sticks with you like almost no other movie I have seen recently. Images and scenes keep flashing into my memory. Particularly memorable was Phyllis Somerville as the mother of a convicted sex offender. Her every scene is lifelike and yet amazing. Her love for her (deeply flawed) son is so deep and so affecting, it will stay with me for a long time to come.
Likewise, Jackie Earle Haley, as her son, creates a complex characterization, both pitiable and horrifying. (The amazing yet creepy scene he has with Jane Addams manages to bring both together.) Kate Winslet and Patrick Wilson play the major characters, and although Wilson is probably perfectly cast and Winslet is often amazing (the fleeting changes in expression in a single shot sometimes brought me close to tears), their characters seem less startlingly original than Somerville's and Haley's. (That was not true of those characters in the novel.) Jennifer Connelly, and especially Gregg Edelman, are wasted as their spouses. I was particularly sorry that the character of Mary Ann, superbly played by Mary McGann, was radically truncated from the book.
And I was even more sorry that the quiet yet emotionally satisfying conclusion to the book was replaced by a garish new ending. OK, the book's ending was far, far from "cinematic," but it at least made sense for the characters involved (Sarah, Ronnie, Mary Ann and Larry). This new ending is . . . OK, disappointing is a mild word for it.
But the biggest disappointment is the studio's apparent trashing of the movie's distribution. The movie was released LAST FALL to generally decent reviews, but made it to my own city -- a somewhat major metropolitan area -- four months later. Apparently the movie has made about a tenth of what it cost, but it's expertly cast, and the audience I saw it with was quite receptive. Obviously, it's marketable, but the studio chose to dump it. After Mr. Field's dedication to the project, as well as Mr. Perotta's and the entire cast and crew (evident from the care in making the movie), that is the real crime.
Another Gay Movie (2006)
Absolutely the worst
Yes, I am gay, and yes, I have a sense of humor, and yes, this is one of the worst movies I have ever seen in my entire life. And no, not because it is gross, and not because there is too much sex, but because there is not one single funny moment in the entire movie. I sat there stupefied -- too inert to turn the damned thing off.
I saw Todd Stephens' "Edge of Seventeen," and OK it was kind of amateurish, but it had a good heart. This movie has nothing but kind of cute guys. That's it. And I agree with other posters that much of the "parody" is (or should be) extremely offensive to gays or lesbians or Asians or really most anyone. And it doesn't even show that much skin, despite what other reviewers have said. (It is not "full of frontal nudity" -- it has a single closeup of Richard Hatch's johnson.)
Friends recommended this movie, and maybe it's better seen in a theater full of people (rather than rented and seen at home, as I did), but the laughter would be by association rather than anything genuinely funny in the movie. I also watched "Little Miss Sunshine" on DVD at home, and it had me laughing out loud.
Run as far away as you can from this movie. Rent something by John Waters. Anything. Amazingly, incredibly bad.