Omar
Global Moderator
Professione: reporter
Posts: 2,770
|
Post by Omar on Jan 29, 2008 5:08:45 GMT
The third act wasn't abrupt. Lucas does what he does to get vengeance. It's part of the game. Compared to the long drawn out portions before, they seemed to try to tie things up in a nice little bow too quickly. It's tacked on, as in it doesn't go with the flow. The film drives me to this? Of, now they are in the same interrogation room! And now Denzel smiles! The final "payoff" closure aspect of the film doesn't come off as deliberately distance from the rest of the film, it came off as lazy. The themes may have been explored before but it tells a wonderful crime story and was one of the finer films of 2007 It's those reasons why I saw a lot better films in 2007.
|
|
|
Post by Mike Sullivan on Jan 29, 2008 5:19:44 GMT
The story and charecters are worth it though. The film may not have much new to say but the story telling method of it and sheer entertainment makes it a great film.
|
|
Omar
Global Moderator
Professione: reporter
Posts: 2,770
|
Post by Omar on Jan 29, 2008 5:23:20 GMT
The film may not have much new to say but the story telling method of it and sheer entertainment makes it a great film. That is why I would only call it a good film. But I respect your opinion, and I'm glad to see you posting on here again.
|
|
Capo
Administrator
Posts: 7,847
|
Post by Capo on Jan 29, 2008 10:34:20 GMT
Crowe's marital problems were under-explored. Not enough narrative cross-cutting as a whole between the two main guys in order for it to be any kind of Heat. It could have been great (it certainly is, as Mike says, an utterly entertaining film), but it's frivolous and flat. Scott's a fine storyteller; but that sudden shift at the end felt undeserved - as if the whole film was set up to be something other than how it actually turns out. Though I suppose you could counter that point with one about how necessarily and deliberately charming Washington is throughout. In return, I'll argue that he's only charming (not to mention clichéd) because there are other, badder baddies against him. Nobody likes a corrupt cop. These too are caricatures. You can get away with stuff like that in gladiatorial epics, but I felt American Gangster strove for, at least, credible plausibility (being based on a real events and all). It's a shame, then, that it suffers from the most basic narrative flaws.
|
|
|
Post by Mike Sullivan on Jan 29, 2008 22:09:17 GMT
I don't think that Lucas is a cliche, at least in the way that Washington portrays him. Lucas is a fully layered and textured character with his own motivations and potrayed as a business man. It's as simple as that. Sure, there have been other gangsters who've presented themselves as such, but Lucas considers himself a businessman who sells a brand name; "blue magic".
He sells his product to the masses and fills the streets of Harlem with heroin. He's an entrepreneur without regard to the damage that his product does to the people of Harlem and unlike other film gangsters like TOny Montana, it is not greed or addiction that destroys him. It's just the nature of the game he plays. Some win, some win for a while and some loose and the sad fact is that he won for a while and then became a fucking peasant.
Get what I'm going at? Sure, aspects of Washington's charecter have been seen in other crime fims but ten again, all gangsters seem to share some qualities with each other. It's not a cliche.
|
|
RNL
Global Moderator
Posts: 6,624
|
Post by RNL on Jan 29, 2008 23:07:03 GMT
I did think the subplot involving Roberts' custody battle, etc, was a watery attempt at characterisation. Cut it altogether and characterise him in the context of Lucas.
|
|
|
Post by svsg on Jan 29, 2008 23:50:40 GMT
I did think the subplot involving Roberts' custody battle, etc, was a watery attempt at characterisation. Cut it altogether and characterise him in the context of Lucas. SPOILERSI think they did try to show that both of them could take personal hazards to preserve what each of them valued the most: their business/job. You see the custody battle for this guy and there Lucas burning away the coat. Maybe it was to compare them. Anyway, the movie had very minimal impact on me.
|
|
Capo
Administrator
Posts: 7,847
|
Post by Capo on Mar 8, 2008 2:06:01 GMT
I shall have the opportunity to see Blade Runner on the big screen soon... 'Twas the 1982 director's cut. I must say: very unimpressed. I thought it was a load of bullshit, to be honest. I'm not convinced that intelligence can exist independent of emotions. Computers that lack human emotions in cinema seem gifted at sarcasm and teasingly light-hearted wit (are these not human emotions?). Result: "human emotions = able to fall in love". I found some of it (dialogue, slow-motion, that forced feeling of grandeur) quite risible; it looks beautiful, though, and I love the music too. Also like the surreal pace and lengthy bouts of non-action, but the narrative shifts to the droids were dull and problematic. Dunno, perhaps it caught me in the wrong mood, or I caught the wrong cut (I'm pretty sure I'd seen the theatrical cut previously, but it's so long ago now I don't remember). You guys wanna convince me otherwise? I can't really articulate why I found it quite as pompous as I did, so I thought I'd just throw some criticisms out there for y'all to chew on. Which cut are you guys rating?
|
|
RNL
Global Moderator
Posts: 6,624
|
Post by RNL on Mar 8, 2008 2:23:01 GMT
You mean the 1991 cut? That's the "director's cut".
That's the only one I've seen (both times on very murky VHS). I'll be watching the "ultimate cut" soon enough.
As far as annoying conceptions of "emotion", try Equilibrium. Makes no sense whatsoever.
|
|
Capo
Administrator
Posts: 7,847
|
Post by Capo on Mar 8, 2008 2:32:40 GMT
You mean the 1991 cut? That's the "director's cut". Yes'm! I'd like to read Dick's short.
|
|
|
Post by ronnierocketago on Mar 8, 2008 4:26:18 GMT
Try THE FINAL CUT..............and really, BLADE RUNNER is and always was a love it or leave it affair.
Even back in its 1982 botched theatrical edit...
P.S. - And I'm with Sullivan on AMERICAN GANGSTER. Then again, considering some of you same folks also didn't like SCARFACE...no surprise really. Not that is a bad thing or anything, but it adds to my theory: Read enough opinions/thoughts, you can predict whatever a person will like a movie or not.
|
|
Pherdy
Ghost writer
Posts: 596
|
Post by Pherdy on Mar 20, 2008 11:05:13 GMT
A revised list: 1. Gladiator (2000) 2. Blade Runner (1982) 3. Alien (1979) 4. Black Hawk Down (2002) 5. American Gangster (2007) 6. The Duellists (1977) 7. Matchstick Men (2003) 8. Thelma & Louise (1991) 9. Kingdom of Heaven (2005, theatrical) 10. A Good Year (2006) 11. Hannibal (200 12. 1492: A Conquest of Paradise (1992) I turned of Black Rain a few weeks ago. Couldn't interest me, think I was tired or something. Wetdog, your average score for Ridley Scott is 4,92/10. Not too big of a fan?
|
|
|
Post by quentincompson on Oct 23, 2008 20:35:43 GMT
1.Blade Runner 9/10 2.Alien 6/10 3.American Gangster 5/10 4.Matchstick Men 5/10 5.Legend 4/10 6.Gladiator 3/10 7.Black Hawk Down 3/10
|
|
|
Post by Anasazie on Oct 24, 2008 7:06:32 GMT
1. Blade Runner (1982) 9/10 2. Alien (1979) 7/10 3. Matchstick Men (2003) 5/10 4. Gladiator (2000) 4/10 5. Body of Lies (2008) 4/10 6. Thelma & Louise (1991) 4/10 7. Hannibal (2001) 2/10 8. G.I. Jane (1997) 1/10
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Oct 25, 2008 3:03:36 GMT
1. Gladiator (1999) **
|
|
|
Post by svsg on Oct 25, 2008 3:27:29 GMT
Gladiator Black Hawk Down American Gangster Gladiator (revised) If not for the beautiful fight scene involving the tiger, Gladiator should get no stars. Russel Crowe was unbearable.
|
|
|
Post by ronnierocketago on Jan 6, 2009 3:01:24 GMT
Saw LEGEND the Director's Cut again, and surprised to find it pretty good, bordering on greatness if only on the terrific aesthetics and Tim Curry's performance.
4 stars out of 5.
|
|
|
Post by Anasazie on Jan 6, 2009 4:35:54 GMT
Of course not, that's the whole point of the film! It's about the importance of life, any life, all life is emotion! What more did you want out of it? It's one of the few geniune art films Hollywood has ever produced!
|
|
|
Post by ronnierocketago on Jan 6, 2009 15:54:09 GMT
Of course not, that's the whole point of the film! It's about the importance of life, any life, all life is emotion! What more did you want out of it? It's one of the few geniune art films Hollywood has ever produced! BLADE RUNNER has always been a polarizing picture. Either People like you and me really love it, and the rest like Capo...just don't.
|
|
Omar
Global Moderator
Professione: reporter
Posts: 2,770
|
Post by Omar on Jan 6, 2009 21:10:34 GMT
and the rest like Capo...just don't. What a dick!
|
|