Early previews has called this a return to form. Hardly. This was for me, a major disappointment.
The moment the film begins, its as if it intentionally tries to confuse us as to what the hell this film's all about. Describing the plot is close to pointless. After all, Guy Ritchie isn't adept in the old art of storytelling, his films ran along the lines of sitcoms - a series of events instead of an actual story. Which wasn't a bad thing in the case of Lock, Stock & Snatch because emotional resonance with the audience was irrelevant. The goal there was to generate laughter. But RocknRolla is only funny in minor - and I DO mean minor - spots. What's more, it also doesn't help as it begins: of how it mentions that Britain is on the up in the property market. Seeing as of now the country is currently enduring credit-crunch problems, inflation rises and a major decrease in property value. You'd be surprised how automatically dated this makes the film.
Its unfair to judge a new film based on the director's previous efforts, but when its Guy Ritchie - who's been running on the same formula for the past 10 years - you can't help but do so. This film was advertised and touted as a return to form ala Lock, Stock and Snatch, but after the first time I watched those two, I loved them. Not looked at them with total scorn. The moments of humour and wit is few and far between, and some lines of dialogue and monologues try to add a little swagger but come off as pretentious and are inches away from falling into self-parody and returning to Revolver territory. And when the best laughs this film can generate involves around a character's homosexuality, you know this film is headed for the pits.
The performances here are strong, but it still doesn't account for the dialogue which just goes nowhere. The entire persona of Tom Wilkinson's cockney villain is almost entirely derived from Bob Hoskins in the Long Good Friday and Tony Kebbell's "Johnny Quid" (the RocknRolla of the film's title) is pretty much a totally pointless character - honestly, did this guy have any purpose in this film other than that he stole the painting? > No. In the end it doesn't help when the film's excuse for a plot is merely a bunch of distractions to hide what is really - a completely mediocre film. Its so convoluted anyway, its virtually nonsense.
Unlike Lock, Stock and Snatch, where all the characters and their situations are established, in this film they're not and it finishes with too many loose ends and plot holes, and contrivances. - What actually happened to Thandie Newton and the Russian with that painting? - Where did the whole Lenny's frame up of the characters come from then? - Will all this be revealed in Ricthie's intended sequel? Who knows? And who cares? Because if that were the case, the best described feeling that this would generate would be that you were cheated.
Guy Ritchie's flashy hyper-kinetic style is what keeps this film from being a total bore, but now's the time where he should stop writing scripts.
The moment the film begins, its as if it intentionally tries to confuse us as to what the hell this film's all about. Describing the plot is close to pointless. After all, Guy Ritchie isn't adept in the old art of storytelling, his films ran along the lines of sitcoms - a series of events instead of an actual story. Which wasn't a bad thing in the case of Lock, Stock & Snatch because emotional resonance with the audience was irrelevant. The goal there was to generate laughter. But RocknRolla is only funny in minor - and I DO mean minor - spots. What's more, it also doesn't help as it begins: of how it mentions that Britain is on the up in the property market. Seeing as of now the country is currently enduring credit-crunch problems, inflation rises and a major decrease in property value. You'd be surprised how automatically dated this makes the film.
Its unfair to judge a new film based on the director's previous efforts, but when its Guy Ritchie - who's been running on the same formula for the past 10 years - you can't help but do so. This film was advertised and touted as a return to form ala Lock, Stock and Snatch, but after the first time I watched those two, I loved them. Not looked at them with total scorn. The moments of humour and wit is few and far between, and some lines of dialogue and monologues try to add a little swagger but come off as pretentious and are inches away from falling into self-parody and returning to Revolver territory. And when the best laughs this film can generate involves around a character's homosexuality, you know this film is headed for the pits.
The performances here are strong, but it still doesn't account for the dialogue which just goes nowhere. The entire persona of Tom Wilkinson's cockney villain is almost entirely derived from Bob Hoskins in the Long Good Friday and Tony Kebbell's "Johnny Quid" (the RocknRolla of the film's title) is pretty much a totally pointless character - honestly, did this guy have any purpose in this film other than that he stole the painting? > No. In the end it doesn't help when the film's excuse for a plot is merely a bunch of distractions to hide what is really - a completely mediocre film. Its so convoluted anyway, its virtually nonsense.
Unlike Lock, Stock and Snatch, where all the characters and their situations are established, in this film they're not and it finishes with too many loose ends and plot holes, and contrivances. - What actually happened to Thandie Newton and the Russian with that painting? - Where did the whole Lenny's frame up of the characters come from then? - Will all this be revealed in Ricthie's intended sequel? Who knows? And who cares? Because if that were the case, the best described feeling that this would generate would be that you were cheated.
Guy Ritchie's flashy hyper-kinetic style is what keeps this film from being a total bore, but now's the time where he should stop writing scripts.