"Cop dramas may have a lot to say about our ideas of crime and punishment, but they have even more to say about our fears and fantasies regarding work — its deadening routines, and also its moments of terror and inspiration."
And you say you object to Law and Order "on principle"... what principle? It's a police procedural!
― Harold Media (kenan), Saturday, 7 August 2004 07:15 (nineteen years ago) link
Looked incredible though. Made me proud to be a "Californian".
― adam. (nordicskilla), Sunday, 8 August 2004 04:05 (nineteen years ago) link
it's strange: usually when you have a director who is a bravado visual stylist, the complaint is that they shouldn't write their own scripts. but i hope mann writes his next film himself.
it was amazingly gorgeous. the effect of light shifts and fast movement on the dv was interesting. and yeah, l.a. has never looked better.
― ||amateur!st|| (amateurist), Sunday, 8 August 2004 04:15 (nineteen years ago) link
was he dozing off periodically? he gets a few important plot points awfully wrong. not that it matters terribly, but still.
― ||amateur!st|| (amateurist), Sunday, 8 August 2004 04:22 (nineteen years ago) link
I enjoyed the first thirty minutes - Mann always know how to open a film (Full disclosure:the first 5-10 minutes of Ali is possibly my favorite opening sequence ever), but my desire to enjoy this film was taken over by frustration, boredom, and ultimately, disappointment. It seems like a very odd film for him to make right now.
And Tom Cruise's suit was naggingly identical to De Niro's in Heat.
― adam. (nordicskilla), Sunday, 8 August 2004 04:27 (nineteen years ago) link
poss. SPOILERS...
the shots where smith & foxx were getting off the train, with the light of the dawn behind the electrical towers, were really beautiful. so were those gliding helicopter shots. oh and the most stunning shot of the whole movie: the bottom of the helicopter. do you remember that? wow.
― ||amateur!st|| (amateurist), Sunday, 8 August 2004 04:29 (nineteen years ago) link
― ||amateur!st|| (amateurist), Sunday, 8 August 2004 04:30 (nineteen years ago) link
I do remember that, and I thought, "Wow." It reminded me of Chicago's new bean sculpture.
the last 30-odd minutes were full of the kind of implausibilities and nonsense typical of thrillers
OTM. Possible spoilers here, too...
So he stops to take an axe to the lights in the building? What the hell for? And more importantly, why was he ordered to kill the person he's trying to kill? After the other targets are dead, there's no point in killing that character.
I like Edelstein's review:
http://www.slate.com/id/2104824/
― Harold Media (kenan), Sunday, 8 August 2004 04:36 (nineteen years ago) link
Warwick Davis ..... Oberon
― ||amateur!st|| (amateurist), Sunday, 8 August 2004 04:39 (nineteen years ago) link
― Harold Media (kenan), Sunday, 8 August 2004 04:51 (nineteen years ago) link
― ||amateur!st|| (amateurist), Sunday, 8 August 2004 05:02 (nineteen years ago) link
― ||amateur!st|| (amateurist), Sunday, 8 August 2004 05:07 (nineteen years ago) link
They didn't, but I didn't notice that until after the movie. As in, "You know, movies like that usually make we want a cigarette very badly, but that one had no smoking in it at all!" I appreciated it in retrospect.
― Harold Media (kenan), Sunday, 8 August 2004 05:20 (nineteen years ago) link
― jaymc, Sunday, 8 August 2004 08:23 (nineteen years ago) link
― ||amateur!st|| (amateurist), Sunday, 8 August 2004 08:27 (nineteen years ago) link
― jaymc, Sunday, 8 August 2004 08:30 (nineteen years ago) link
― jaymc, Sunday, 8 August 2004 08:33 (nineteen years ago) link
― ||amateur!st|| (amateurist), Sunday, 8 August 2004 08:34 (nineteen years ago) link
― jaymc, Sunday, 8 August 2004 08:36 (nineteen years ago) link
― jaymc, Sunday, 8 August 2004 08:37 (nineteen years ago) link
― ||amateur!st|| (amateurist), Sunday, 8 August 2004 15:52 (nineteen years ago) link
― dave k, Sunday, 8 August 2004 16:54 (nineteen years ago) link
Also, could have done without that Cliff Notes last line, spelling out the previous reference.
The shot of the marble floor as TC goes down the escalator is a beaut.
― Chuck Tatum (Chuck Tatum), Monday, 9 August 2004 00:32 (nineteen years ago) link
all 5 seconds of him?
what was that all about? he's the male gina gershon: he makes any scene instantly unbelieveable.
― ||amateur!st|| (amateurist), Monday, 9 August 2004 01:23 (nineteen years ago) link
― jaymc, Monday, 9 August 2004 04:54 (nineteen years ago) link
― Harold Media (kenan), Monday, 9 August 2004 05:00 (nineteen years ago) link
You're kidding me: he'd have been even worse in that role.
― jaymc, Monday, 9 August 2004 05:04 (nineteen years ago) link
― Harold Media (kenan), Monday, 9 August 2004 05:08 (nineteen years ago) link
― jaymc, Monday, 9 August 2004 05:19 (nineteen years ago) link
― jaymc, Monday, 9 August 2004 05:21 (nineteen years ago) link
― adam. (nordicskilla), Monday, 9 August 2004 05:22 (nineteen years ago) link
― adam. (nordicskilla), Monday, 9 August 2004 05:23 (nineteen years ago) link
Except he doesn't grin in the movie. Not at all, if you think back on it. He grimly commands, and reticently sympathizes, and arrogantly instructs. "Charm" isn't in any way a requirement for the role.
― Harold Media (kenan), Monday, 9 August 2004 05:24 (nineteen years ago) link
Ha! Except without "Horse."
― Harold Media (kenan), Monday, 9 August 2004 05:27 (nineteen years ago) link
― Harold Media (kenan), Monday, 9 August 2004 05:29 (nineteen years ago) link
― Harold Media (kenan), Monday, 9 August 2004 05:30 (nineteen years ago) link
I haven't seen After Hours. One of the many, many gaps in my film education.
― jaymc, Monday, 9 August 2004 05:32 (nineteen years ago) link
What phone number can I call you at right now?
― Harold Media (kenan), Monday, 9 August 2004 05:35 (nineteen years ago) link
Which is just as well, because I have to get up in six hours anyway.
― jaymc, Monday, 9 August 2004 05:38 (nineteen years ago) link
― adam. (nordicskilla), Monday, 9 August 2004 05:44 (nineteen years ago) link
Although there is a broad kind of charm
You said it, man. Broad. There is a charm so broad in almost every Tom Cruise role that it always makes me think of actors with more charm and more talent. There certainly is a quality about Tom Cruise that is innately "broad" -- I'll grant you that. That doesn't make hin Jimmy fucking Stewart. Combine this "broadness" with his arrogance, his superior smirk, and the way he is extremely limited in his talent, and he's more like George W. Bush than like any actor with any acutal talent.
― Harold Media (kenan), Monday, 9 August 2004 05:45 (nineteen years ago) link
― jaymc, Monday, 9 August 2004 05:50 (nineteen years ago) link
xpost
fuck washing a cat
― ||amateur!st|| (amateurist), Monday, 9 August 2004 05:53 (nineteen years ago) link
― adam. (nordicskilla), Monday, 9 August 2004 05:55 (nineteen years ago) link
― adam. (nordicskilla), Monday, 9 August 2004 05:56 (nineteen years ago) link
― |||| (amateurist), Monday, 9 August 2004 05:57 (nineteen years ago) link
Right, to a point. The character doesn't rely on *his* texture, though, it just relies on *texture.* It doesn't depend on mega-star power to make it work -- I'd get very depressed if I thought any role did. It's a personality role, sure. Many, many actors have personality. Think... oooh, I like this one... think Benecio Del Toro in that role. Wouldn't that just be thick and delicious?
Truth is, this character is all texture. And a more subtle actor would have provided a more subtle texture. Tom Cruise is incapable of being thick and delicious.
― Harold Media (kenan), Monday, 9 August 2004 05:58 (nineteen years ago) link
― adam. (nordicskilla), Monday, 9 August 2004 06:04 (nineteen years ago) link
mann went to the london film school y'know.
― |||| (amateurist), Monday, 9 August 2004 06:08 (nineteen years ago) link
― kyle (akmonday), Monday, 9 August 2004 06:08 (nineteen years ago) link