Descartes42 Reviews

American Gangster (2007)

Drab, lacklustre and uninspired

[5/10 · 5 November 2007]

If it were a made for TV movie it would be passable, but as a star studded feature film it falls flat on its' face.

I got no feeling of the time (early 70's), the place (Harlem/New York/New Jersey/Vietnam etc) nor of the characters. You would find more character, depth and sense of place in any episode of Sopranos/Hill Street Blues/Homocide:LOTS. It could easily have been set in the 80's, 90's or even 2000 for all it was worth. There was scant regard to the richness of the environments or the period.

There was very little insight into Washington's character except for a few sparse flashbacks and intermittent lazy exposition and we're not expected to dislike him in any way. By the end everyone is happy and laughing and the moral we're offered is, corrupt cops are bad and get punished whilst Frank Lucas, a cold blooded killer, torturer, crime lord and major league heroin importer is a likable person with a bit of a temper occasionally who only has to serve a measly 15 years having had his sentence reduced from 70yrs aided by the Crowe's character turned defense lawyer!?!?! Most of the supporting characters lacked depth and the subplots didn't really add much to the overall story. As each one dies or just doesn't appear any longer, there is very little sense of loss. Most are just cardboard cutout characters.

There were so many missed opportunities to make this an engaging and enlightening story about an evil man, but Ridley Scott seems to have lost his punch. This is no 'Casino', in fact you would be better off re-watching 'New Jack City' than getting a sore arse sitting through this 2 hours and 45 minutes of two dimensional tedium.

IMDb voters need to get a grip and think more about rating films instead of giving every second rate film like this a 7 or higher rating.

I'm Not There (2007)

What a mess!

[2/10 · 28 October 2007]

I won't go into great deal on this film as it has already stolen 135mins of my life. Basically it is a incoherent, confusing mess of a film that cannot be saved by any of the actors involved. Whilst being a great admirer of Christine Vachon I still cannot bring myself to score it any higher than 2, and that being only due to the cinematography. Todd Haynes seems to be a nice enough person but unfortunately, with so many sycophantic voters/comments people might get the notion that he has created a masterpiece, which this is not.

Knowing a little about Dylan, I actually left the film knowing less! I'm sure he created some great songs too, but again they are so lost in this mish-mash of abstract situations and bizarre representations of his life that it felt more like a trailer for a compilation album than a biopic of a musician.

It's a shame so many feel the need to rate such dire films with such outrageously high scores, misleading others into believing that it is either a complex and highly intellectual film. Don't worry if you see this film and think you might be culturally deficient, you're not, it really is a pile of junk.

Will people please stop giving 10 ratings to any old crap because they like the director/subject.

A classic case of the Emporers new clothes!

The Magician (I) (2005)

A magnetic and totally convincing performance by newcomer Scott Ryan

[10/10 · 6 December 2005]

When Melbourne hit-man Ray Shoesmith discovers that his next-door neighbour is a film student, he commissions him to document his life - the footage is to be released à la Pauline Hanson in the event of his early death. Australian filmmaker Scott Ryan is writer, director and star of The Magician. It's not the violence that Ryan focuses on, but the conversation, the banalities and intensities of human interaction and obsessive interest in detail. The film shows us what makes Ray tick as we witness first hand his brutal efficiency. It's a fake documentary played straight. It's darkly comic and totally draws you in, to the point where you wonder if it's real. It's Ryan's marvellous performance that serves as the glue that holds everything together. His character is a killer, a man who'd as soon pull the trigger as not, but without smoothing out any of the rough edges the actor makes you like him when what you should be feeling is utter loathing. And that's no small achievement. Scott Ryan has a gift for the Aussie vernacular that ensures his remarkable debut (think Chopper meets Spinal Tap) is destined for cult status.

Kiss of Life (2003)

A confusing mess of a film

[3/10 · 14 December 2003]

This film aspires to be something far deeper than it actually achieves and is severely let down by bad to average acting and some very lame dialogue. Whilst the theme is not unique it is edited in such a fashion as to make it incomprehensible.

I'm sure there will be plenty who will disagree and say that this is a stunning debut film purely because it is British, but that is because we have so little to compare.

There are some redeeming aspects of this film, the score being one of them. I am sure that Emily Young can mature into a competent filmmaker if she learns from the failings of 'Kiss of Life'. Ultimately this would be a good student film but certainly isn't worth shelling out for at your local cinema.

At least the Film Council is finally doing what it was created for and is funding new directors in low budget features...even if the result is part of the directors learning curve. Maybe things can only get better?

The Revengers' Comedies (1998)

Absolute drivel!!!

[1/10 · 7 December 2003]

Anyone who thinks this is a good example of British humour has obviously had a humour bypass. A good example of why the British film industry is going down the pan!

Do not encourage bad films like this...they'll only make more!

The Pledge (I) (2001)

What the hell is going on with this movie?!?!

[1/10 · 26 October 2002]

*CONTAINS SPOILERS* This film is an absolute mess! Having heard some good mutterings about this film at the previous Cannes Film Festival, I was expecting an enjoyable nights viewing and all I got was a shameful lesson in how not to direct. I started getting suspicious early on with the appearance of some rapid editing and irrelevant cinematic styles being used in such a way as to be purely for the director to practice some techniques. Unfortunately this was not to stop throughout the film, but things got worse...much worse! Now for those of you who are tempted by a raft of celebrity names this film is a must with the likes of Harry Dean Stanton, Helen Mirren, Benicio Del Toro, Mickey Rourke and Vanessa Redgrave,...except for the fact that each and everyone of these great actors appears for ONE scene only (with the exception of Harry Dean Stanton, who's second scene last about 20 seconds). Admittedly, Mickey Rourke's scene is pretty well acted but at approx. 1min 30seconds doesn't really qualify as Oscar nomination material. In my opinion one or two cameo appearances is okay, but five! That is just heavy handed. In most other films they probably wouldn't even be credited but here they Headline.

Maybe the story could redeem this film? Not a chance! There is no build up, scant regard for informing the viewer of the passage of time (one scene it's snowing, the next it's high summer) and dramatic scenes are clumsily foisted upon us for no apparent reason. A classic example being when Nicholson, Wright Penn and the daughter visit a local outdoor market. This seemingly innocent situation suddenly changes to a panic ridden, dodgy camera movements and high suspense music scene as... the child goes and plays on the swings. There it begins and there it ends. Bearing in mind that the mother has no knowledge of a killer whatsoever, this seems to be totally out of context and is indictative of the few so-called suspense scenes.

Please don't expect any cleverly devised investigation techniques either. Nicholson uses that age old device for locating a suspected black station wagon... buying a petrol station and waiting six months for a lucky break!

All in all an absolute mess of a movie that only inspires me to purchase a cinema in the hope that eventually a good movie will come along!

Road to Perdition (2002)

I'm not mad! This film REALLY is unexceptional

[3/10 · 18 October 2002]

Once again the general film going public are being conned into believing that a film is good just because it is well shot. This is actually a very ponderous, aimless film which is either badly written or badly edited (can't decide which!) but most definitely badly directed in terms of the quality of the end product. The characters are so shallow that it is an effort to have any consideration for them whatsoever and to believe that this film subsequently has any depth is a validation of the power of hype, marketing and the herd mentality. I can only assume that those lauding its merits are under the assumption that this is sophisticated cinema, but don't really understand it and are too embarrassed to say anything that goes against the crowd.

The is a prime example of how audiences are being mis-directed with a couple of stars, a celebrity director with limited talent and an occasional (very occasional) nice shot. I normally love this genre, I enjoyed American beauty, I like ALL of the main actors and yet it still wasn't enough to distract my opinion away from what a very unexceptional film this is. I actually wanted to walk out but unfortunately I always give a film the benefit of the doubt until the credits roll.

If you want beautifully shot period gangster films watch 'Miller's Crossing' (8/10)

If you want to see the dynamics of a criminal and his sibling during the Depression watch 'Paper Moon' (9/10)

If you're the kind of sucker that wishes to facilitate studios that manipulate you into believing that this kind of junk is high quality film making, then watch 'Road to Perdition' (3/10).

And don't forget to bleat like a lamb when you file out at the end of this piece of mutton.