• Most new users don't bother reading our rules. Here's the one that is ignored almost immediately upon signup: DO NOT ASK FOR FANEDIT LINKS PUBLICLY. First, read the FAQ. Seriously. What you want is there. You can also send a message to the editor. If that doesn't work THEN post in the Trade & Request forum. Anywhere else and it will be deleted and an infraction will be issued.
  • If this is your first time here please read our FAQ and Rules pages. They have some useful information that will get us all off on the right foot, especially our Own the Source rule. If you do not understand any of these rules send a private message to one of our staff for further details.
  • Please read our Rules & Guidelines

A few reviews

TM2YC

Take Me To Your Cinema
Staff member
Donor
Faneditor
Messages
14,869
Reaction score
2,383
Trophy Points
228
Milk (1998)
Andrea Arnold's
first short film, about a woman's confused struggle to cope with, or avoidance of, the day of the funeral of her miscarried child. It's powerful but I did wonder if the short just existed to build up to the final symbolic/devastating image that Arnold wanted to show.


Dog (2001)
Andrea Arnold's
2nd short, about a teenage girl who identifies herself with a mangy stray dog she meets. It's upsetting stuff, which is acted so well, it's hard to believe it's not a documentary.


Red Road (2006)
Stylistically, Andrea Arnold’s bleak ‘Red Road’ is about as far from Hitchcock as you can get but the premise of a CCTV operator spying on the recently released killer of her husband & daughter, becoming more and more obsessed with him, sounds like one of his voyeuristic plots. Kate Dickie is excellent in the lead role and the story goes to unexpected and shocking but emotionally satisfying places.

 

TM2YC

Take Me To Your Cinema
Staff member
Donor
Faneditor
Messages
14,869
Reaction score
2,383
Trophy Points
228
Tenet (2020)
I probably shouldn't have waited a whole 2-years before watching this a second time, as I lost some of the benefit of understanding the concept better. I got more of the overall existential threat that the "protagonist" is working against and the reasons for it to have come into existence. I got quite choked up in the final scene with Neil which is mostly down to how charming Robert Pattinson is as the character, it's certainly not thanks to the wooden acting of John David Washington. His delivery of the supposedly comic-relief moments is totally flat. 'Tenet' would work so much better with a lead actor who could've extracted the inherent comedy and fun out of the insanity of the premise. The rest of the cast is fantastic though, particularly Elizabeth Debicki. Ludwig Goransson's music really stood out this time. 'Tenet' has flaws but it's such a rush for the senses and a titillating puzzle for the brain, that I was glued to the screen for another thrilling 2.5-hrs. Note to self (for posterity), re-watch this again sooner in future.




Jabberwocky (1977)
I'm a life long fan of Monty Python and of Terry Gilliam but 'Jabberwocky' sits awkwardly between the two. It doesn't look beautiful and imaginative like his later films, it looks barely above the technical level of 'Monty Python and the Holy Grail'. It doesn't have the crafted storytelling, fantasy enchantment and heroic themes, feeling more like a series of misfiring Python sketches strung together. The huge cast all seem to be played by the cream of British comedy talent from the 60s/70s but none of them do anything particularly funny. The one bit that caught my eye was the prologue because Sam Raimi clearly ripped it off 100% for 1981's 'The Evil Dead'.

 

TM2YC

Take Me To Your Cinema
Staff member
Donor
Faneditor
Messages
14,869
Reaction score
2,383
Trophy Points
228
Wuthering Heights (2011)
There have been so many adaptations of 'Wuthering Heights', that you may as well do something different with it. Andrea Arnold retains the Gothic half of this "Gothic-Romance", done in a gloomy, sparse, modern style but the Romance half is removed entirely, in my opinion. Without exception, the characters are all sullen, bitter, cruel and generally awful to each other from the start, so it's difficult to sympathise with them (pity them maybe) and difficult to see the unfortunate events of their lives as being an influence on their awfulness, since they are like that when you meet them. It was 50-minutes in (I know because I checked) when one character finally says something nice to another character, who responds with an appreciative smile. Arnold takes the various vague mentions that Emily Bronte made in the novel as to Heathcliff's ethnicity and brings that to the forefront, showing racism as a cause for the way Heathcliff is mistreated. It works very well, magnifying the resentment he encounters in other versions because of his poverty and adoption. Robbie Ryan's 4:3 Cinematography of the misty, windswept Yorkshire Dales is stunning, except when we have scenes at night, as it's so dimly lit I found it difficult to discern the shape of anything on the screen. Star James Howson is superb, giving an intense, brooding, internalised performance, with few words, mostly with shots of him observing his world. I was confused as to why he's never appeared in anything else (a decade later) but I read he's apparently had serious mental issues.


It provided some great imagery for listening to the Kate Bush classic:

 

TM2YC

Take Me To Your Cinema
Staff member
Donor
Faneditor
Messages
14,869
Reaction score
2,383
Trophy Points
228
A review of Paul Verhoeven's infamous 'Showgirls' and a documentary about it ahead, so it's probably best to just put it all in NSFW tags...:eek:

You Don't Nomi (2019)
The spirit of this documentary re-evaluation of Paul Verhoeven's notorious, universally panned, box-office bomb, 'Showgirls' is summed up by the quote about it not being "A masterpiece" or "Sh*t" either, it's a "Masterpiece of sh*t!". Jeffrey McHale's film is an enormously fun ride and a fascinating piece of film culture criticism, taking in packed fan screenings, touring drag shows dedicated to 'Showgirls', poetry books on the film and a musical re-interpretation. 'Showgirls' isn't just discussed as a "So bad it's good" camp phenomenon, it's themes, artistry and profound impact upon some people is given unironic space too. You can at least ponder if Elizabeth Berkley's main character is called 'Nomi' because it's supposed to mean "There is no me", "Know me", or "No! Me!". Like with 2012's documentary 'Room 237' about Stanley Kubrick's 'The Shining', its not necessary to agree with, or even believe, the arguments put across (partly because contradiction is encouraged in the doc), it's just stimulating to hear different points of view. Shots/scenes from Verhoeven's whole filmography are cleverly intercut with footage from 'Showgirls', to reveal connections, repeated motifs and sometimes to make it appear as if the films are literally interacting. IIRC, none of the actual people from the movie are interviewed, maybe that's because they simply refused but it feels more like they weren't asked because their opinions would've tended to put a definitive interpretation on the piece. Even if you've no interest in 'Showgirls', 'You Don't Nomi' is well worth a watch.


I'm glad this documentary introduced me to the song 'Whorrior!' from the musical. The lady playing Nomi can really sing! It's only got 500 views/listens on youtube but 100 of those are probably me ;):


"She's done sellin' her ass. She's gonna kick some ass! 'cause I'm a Whorrior! That's like a whore and a warrior combined." :LOL:



Showgirls (1995)
After watching the ‘You Don’t Nomi’ documentary, I went into this watch of ‘Showgirls’ with an open mind. It’s not just plain bad and dumb, it’s clear Paul Verhoeven is trying to say something satirical about American culture again but it’s often unclear exactly what and which elements are purposefully absurd and crass and which are accidentally bad. For example, Verhoeven shifts his camera from some monkeys putting on lipstick, to showgirl Nomi putting on her makeup, then later wheels past a cage with the same monkeys locked inside.

Despite the unbelievable levels of NC17 full-frontal nudity (rarely, if ever, seen in US movies, outside of actual porn), the portrayal of the three main female character's bisexuality, feels a little reserved. Molly and Cristal are like the angel and devil on Nomi’s shoulders. Cristal is first depicted rising from a red primordial, volcano hell-scape, then later further ascending toward “heaven” in a cruciform pose through a blue neon church arch. I’m sure a lot of people might quickly say the film was misogynist given the content but whenever the mostly vile men in the film do or say something awful, Verhoeven has the camera on the woman’s face, registering their disgust and discomfort, so I’d argue the film is on their side and highly critical of the “patriarchy”. Even the explicit, aggressive, completely nude, lap dance which Elizabeth Berkley does on Kyle MacLachlan, at Gina Gershon’s instigation, has nothing to do with his character’s gratification and everything to do with the power dynamic between the two women in the scene. In the infamous scene where Nomi and Cristal discuss their love of eating dog food, the actual bizarre words of the dialogue are fairly irrelevant to the general sense of verbal sparring and sexual energy being traded between the eyes of the two competing women.

I suspect that Verhoeven is sometimes deliberately deconstructing film tropes... or he could just have been unbelievably misjudged? He will ahve “that scene” and “that beat” in the script, with the expected cliched music and tone but the dialogue is insane. There is a moment exactly like you’d have in an Elvis biopic where his old manager Sam Phillips visits the now successful megastar and wistfully says something like “I’m glad you made it to the big time kid” but in ‘Showgirls’ Verhoeven has Robert Davi tell Nomi “It must be nice to not have someone c*m on you” and she just smiles and reacts like he's said the Elvis-type line. Molly’s “I can’t thread a needle any more” quip was genuinely laugh out loud for me (a call back to her mentioning chronic masturbation). When Nomi violently avenges Molly, she paints her lips and nipples bright red, which I assume is supposed to be her “war paint”. Whatever criticism people level at ‘Showgirls’ they surely couldn’t deny how incredible it looks thanks Verhoeven's long time cinematographer Jost Vacano. It’s cool the way the film has a looped structure, beginning and ending at the same point, with Nomi striding off to “a new career in a new town” as a David Bowie album put it. I’d advise going into ‘Showgirls’ assuming it’s secretly genius (even if it isn’t) because you’ll have more intellectual fun, than if you simply dismiss it as trash.


^ This new HBO Max trailer is pretty funny and kudus to whoever cut it together, somehow finding enough shots without nudity in them.



I don't recall it getting mentioned in 'You Don't Nomi' but oh my god there is a no-budget straight to VOD sequel starring/written/directed/produced/edited by a minor character/actress from 'Showgirls', with several of the cast returning. This looks so bad it's bad:

 

TM2YC

Take Me To Your Cinema
Staff member
Donor
Faneditor
Messages
14,869
Reaction score
2,383
Trophy Points
228
Somers Town (2008)
For some reason, known only to themselves, Eurostar paid for Director Shane Meadows to make a film set around the company's London terminal at St Pancras. It's an odd funding source but it's a wonderful starting point for a heart-warming film about the friendship between two disposed migrant teenage boys, Marek from Poland with his alcoholic dad, the other Tomo is homeless, alone, penniless (having been immediately mugged as soon as he got to London) and from a place a little nearer, Nottingham in the East Midlands of the UK. It's a beautiful portrait of the two characters and full of deadpan humour too. I know very little about football, but even I laughed out loud when Perry Benson's kindly wheeler-dealer gifts Marek an Arsenal shirt with "Terry Henry" on the back. I loved the acoustic guitar and banjo soundtrack and everything else about this film too.

 

TM2YC

Take Me To Your Cinema
Staff member
Donor
Faneditor
Messages
14,869
Reaction score
2,383
Trophy Points
228
American Honey (2016)
The nearly 3-hour runtime is a bit excessive for what this is but Sasha Lane's subtle performance as Star and the intimate way Andrea Arnold captured it, kept my attention. The group of kids she hangs with are very annoying and are clearly non-actors, improving badly, but most of the runtime is focused on Lane, Shia LaBeouf and Riley Keough. I liked the way we spend a lot of time watching Star quietly observing people and places on her road trip, until she's got something angry and perceptive to say, you can see her intelligence through the way she communicates. The 4:3 cinematography from Robbie Ryan is gorgeous, often capturing rays of sunlight on the margins of American life. The jukebox soundtrack is memorably used at several points, Bruce Springsteen's cover of Suicide's 'Dream Baby Dream' stood out for me.

 

TM2YC

Take Me To Your Cinema
Staff member
Donor
Faneditor
Messages
14,869
Reaction score
2,383
Trophy Points
228
I spent this weekend watching, or re-watching, these five interrelated Terry Gilliam movies and docs...

The Adventures of Baron Munchausen (1988)
In a sane world 'The Adventures of Baron Munchausen' would've been one of the most beloved and famous films ever made, instead of a fairly obscure one, owing to the new studio regime at Columbia arbitrarily decided to barely release it, so they could blame it's consequent financial failure on the old regime and Director Terry Gilliam, safe in the knowledge that hardly anybody was going to be able to see it and discover what a gem it was. It's true that due to an over-ambitious Producer (to put it kindly), the film had gone way over budget but every dime is up there on the screen. Where else are you going to see Uma Thurman as the Goddess Venus, dancing a waltz through the air, in a volcano palace, serenaded by silver fountains and cherubs. The scale of the sets, the beauty of the costumes and the brilliance of the FX never fail to impress me. But it's not just a technical marvel, the characters are utterly charming, amusing and endearing. If I'm not gleefully smiling, ear-to-ear, then I'm roaring with laughter. Star John Neville completely embodies the main theme in his performance, that the world of the Baron's ludicrous imagination is a place you'd rather live in, than the "real" world. Nobody else could deliver the line "Ladies, I'll require your assistance. Kindly be so good as to remove your knickers." with as much loveable cheek, before the Baron escapes on a hot air balloon made of the undergarments. I love the character so much that near the end of the adventure, when Berthold rescues the Baron (Robin Hood style) by outrunning a sniper's bullet, simultaneously deflecting it back at the sniper and raising a flag of salute, I want to stand up and cheer. Michael Kamen's romantic score adds immeasurably to the magic. The 2008 blu-ray transfer looks fine but wow would this benefit from a new 4K scan of the negative. Can we have one please!





The Madness and Misadventures of Munchausen (2008)
A very entertaining and info-packed documentary on the problems that beset the making of Terry Gilliam's 'The Adventures of Baron Munchausen'. One I've revisited more than once before. Producer Thomas Schühly gets most of the blame for the production problems, for seemingly promising the impossible (on the agreed budget), then disappearing when the proverbial hit the fan, leaving everyone else to try and sort out the mess. Schühly is interviewed too and he doesn't entirely disagree with that assessment, he comes across as quite blasé about everything. Gilliam unfairly acquired a reputation for extravagance from Munchausen but this doc makes clear that once the money problems started, he made creative compromises, negotiated prices down (hardly the Director's job) and significantly scaled back some sequences, plus he turned out a fantastic film that while expensive, looked expensive. The other (unseen) villain of the piece is Dawn Steel, the new head of Columbia, who just dumped the film, as it was a project began by her predecessor David Puttnam. Eric Idle is quite the interviewee, talking about his friends, the way others talk about their enemies but with a mischievous grin.




Lost in La Mancha (2002)
Apart from it's specific subject, I'd forgotten what a good general primer this is for how a film is made, financed and organised, who does what on a production and why, while Jeff Bridges' informative narration explains a lot of technical and logistic terminology. 'The Adventures of Baron Munchausen' looms large over this documentary about a film which fails to complete. Terry Gilliam and some of his long term collaborators refer to Munchausen like "The Scottish Play", fearing 'The Man Who Killed Don Quixote' is going to be a repeat of that situation but it's much worse. At least the Munchausen debacle left a beautiful finished movie. Here, apocalyptic floods, missing actors, military jet flybys and a lead actor who can't act for medical reasons, doom the film. The footage we do see of Johnny Depp in the few completed shots always looks fascinating. A glimpse of what might have been. This doc is essential viewing.




The Man Who Killed Don Quixote (2018)
Terry Gilliam
hasn't made a real masterpiece in 20-years but I haven't disliked any of his recent work either, so that was the level I was expecting from the much delayed 'The Man Who Killed Don Quixote' and it was what I got. When he was originally shooting this film with Johnny Depp and Jean Rochefort in 2000, it would have been the 7th film, after a row of six back-to-back masterpieces, at the top of not just his usual critical acclaim but some big commercial Hollywood hits too. After this was abandoned it feels like everything went wrong for Gilliam, first was his horrible experience working on a big-budget film for the tyrannical Weinstein brothers, then three more films compromised by lower budgets, little fanfare, or his star actor actually dying mid-production. Then when he finally gets 'The Man Who Killed Don Quixote' made in 2018, a vindictive former Producer ties the film up in legal trouble, so it never really gets properly exhibited and I eventually find it today, tucked away on a streaming service, 4-years later.

While I could imagine a young Depp having been better than Adam Driver (although Driver is good), I can't believe Rochefort would've been better than Jonathan Pryce as Don Quixote. He's heroic, endearing and sad. It's clear the script has been updated to bring it into 2018, with thematic subplots around undocumented migrants, Russian oligarchs and Islamist terrorism. Plus I'm almost sure the originally intended script involved literal time-travel, where as this uses dreams, illusions and a costume party to make it merely feel like the characters are slipping through time. This aspect feels like a budget compromise. Gilliam and co-writer Tony Grisoni also changed the protagonist from a cynical marketing executive, to a cynical but once idealistic, film-maker who is making a grubby commercial in Spain (near where he shot a b&w art-film called 'The Man Who Killed Don Quixote'). This change links much better with the Don Quixote story but I'm not sure the other ideas gel so well. The finished movie is good but the story doesn't hang together as smoothly as I'd like and I'm not sure it was worth Gilliam going through all the pain over 18-years to get it made, when he could have put all his energies into other projects. Thematically it's very similar to 'The Adventures of Baron Munchausen' but it doesn't have the same lightness, grandeur, or joy and doesn't so clearly put across it's message about the pleasures of imagination.




He Dreams of Giants (2019)
This follow up to 'Lost in La Mancha' is less of a straight making-of about 'The Man Who Killed Don Quixote' than the previous documentary, it's more an examination of the psychological impact on a film-maker striving to get his work made and fearing that it won't be. I had no idea that Terry Gilliam had tried to remount 'The Man Who Killed Don Quixote' several times over the last two decades. Including being near to start filming in 2015, when then lead actor John Hurt had to sadly bow out due to his terminal cancer. So much time and energy from Gilliam's career has been wasted on the project but Gilliam's dogged persistence is admirable. It's cool to hear that they used the original 20-year old costumes, which had been carefully kept in storage, plus they needed to save that money on a limited budget. Gilliam remained loyal to the original crew, using some of the same designers, actors and cinematographer. Unfortunately the documentary prematurely ends on the upbeat Cannes premiere, so doesn't cover any of the subsequent legal troubles caused by former producer Paulo Branco. Whether this is a true reflection or not, 'He Dreams of Giants' makes it seem like the effort to finish 'The Man Who Killed Don Quixote' took everything Gilliam had, physically and mentally, to get it over the line (including a heart condition). It leaves the sad impression that at 81, it might have been his last movie. I hope not.

 
Last edited:

TM2YC

Take Me To Your Cinema
Staff member
Donor
Faneditor
Messages
14,869
Reaction score
2,383
Trophy Points
228
Cow (2021)
Director Andrea Arnold documents the life of a diary cow across several years, with no voice-over, only a few lines of incidental dialogue from the farmers and no appearance from the film-makers. However, the decision to shoot a lot of it handheld, so close to Luma (the cow) that she is literally bumping into the camera, made me too aware of the presence of the film-makers. It’s not like a nature documentary, filmed from a great distance, where you are able to believe it’s footage of what really happens in an animal's life, ‘Cow’ is a record of what it’s like for a cow to live with a film crew. This awareness of their presence made it difficult to not question every creative decision e.g. is Luma actually looking at something meaningfully, or did they just film her until she looked where they wanted and is the fact that Luma has a tear-shaped marking under her left eye, purely a coincidence, or cynical emotional manipulation? I was unsure about the decision to put loads of reverb on the few jukebox songs on the soundtrack, is the viewer supposed to believe the music is actually being played in the echoey cow sheds, totally by accident and not a decision by the director. Removing themselves from the piece, conversely increased the feeling of their presence for me. All that being said, the life of a farm animal isn’t like nature anyway, it’s animals+humans = something else, so maybe making human influence obvious was the more honest way to do this? Some scenes are beautiful, some are troubling and one bit might be too much for a lot of people to handle. ‘Cow’ is at least unlike any other film.

 

unfair

Well-known member
Faneditor
Messages
185
Reaction score
167
Trophy Points
53
Some scenes are beautiful, some are troubling and one bit might be too much for a lot of people to handle.
Well I can guess what that would be, how they handled that scene would probably answer your question about whether the film is intentionally being manipulative or not.

You can find some pro butchers on YouTube (Nick-Kirsten Vukojevich for example) and the work they do can only be described as an art, their speed and precision is kind of enthralling, done humanely of course. So if they portray that as gory or dirty that would give you a clear indication of the intent.
 

TM2YC

Take Me To Your Cinema
Staff member
Donor
Faneditor
Messages
14,869
Reaction score
2,383
Trophy Points
228
Well I can guess what that would be, how they handled that scene would probably answer your question about whether the film is intentionally being manipulative or not.

Hmm, the handling of that scene doesn't really answer the question. Plus Arnold has stated she didn't want the film to have a message and didn't want to be drawn on discussing it. Just kind of "this a dairy cow's life, make what you will of it".



Thor: Love and Thunder (2022)
It's true there is too much joking around in 'Thor: Love and Thunder' but I thought that about 'Thor: Ragnarok' too, yet most people didn't seem to mind so much for that one. The only time it really crossed a line was in the Lady Sif scene, where neither actor/character is taking it seriously for a single second. That's the real problem, actors like Tessa Thompson and Russell Crowe are lazily playing it like they are in an SNL sketch (when they are super talented people). Thankfully Chris Hemsworth still 100% gets the humour of the Thor character but delivers the emotional intensity when he needs to. Hemsworth's nude scene was my comedy highlight. Natalie Portman is trying her best but she's not a great actor to begin with, has little aptitude for comedy and relies on Hemsworth for the "heavy lifting" chemistry wise. Christian Bale gives a powerful performance in the bookend scenes, playing a well motivated and understandable Marvel villain. He shares few scenes with the other actors, which might explain why he was playing his role like he's going for an Oscar, unaware that some of his colleagues were just goofing off. I was happy to see elements from Thor 1&2 (which I liked) get brought back into the mix along with the newer Ragnarok vibe. 'Thor: Love and Thunder' is fine, it's a colourful, entertaining adventure but it's feeling like it's been a long time since Marvel made a truly great movie. Hopefully Ryan Coogler can save the day with 'Wakanda Forever'.

 

TM2YC

Take Me To Your Cinema
Staff member
Donor
Faneditor
Messages
14,869
Reaction score
2,383
Trophy Points
228
^ I forgot to say that some of the god/belief-based humour/setup/vibe in 'Love and Thunder' reminded me of Terry Pratchett's 1992 Discworld novel 'Small Gods'.
 

Gaith

Well-known member
Faneditor
Messages
5,785
Reaction score
291
Trophy Points
123
Sherlock Holmes and the Case of the Silk Stocking (2004) (US Amazon Prime w/Britbox trial subscription)

1600x900.jpg


It would be a reckless exaggeration to call Sherlock Holmes and the Case of the Silk Stocking a "traditional" Sherlock Holmes film. Holmes and Watson's interactions, for one, have a revisionist caustic edge at times, and Holmes is also uncharacteristically rude to several others. The villain, a sexually perverse serial killer who starts taunting flaunting his crimes after learning Holmes is on the case, is straight out of lurid contemporary cop shows, not Doyle's mostly cheerful adventures. But, hey, at least it's set in the correct period, and isn't about Holmes' non-canonical daughter, the Baker Street irregulars fighting zombies, or some other such nonsense.

Rupert Everett is a pretty decent visual fit for Holmes, if one can get used to his pertually arched eyebrows, and gives a solid performance, albeit one with frequent softness of speech and mannerisms that doesn't give off a traditionally heterosexual-masculine vibe. (It should be noted that Doyle's character was never explicitly identified as straight, IIRC, but, with all the queer-baiting of Moffat's modern-day Holmes, here's a Sherlock played by an openly gay actor.) Ian Hart, meanwhile, is a spot-on depiction of Doyle's Watson: kind, professional, and an all-around intelligent, good bloke.

The production is blanketed by comically thick fog in its exterior scenes, no doubt in large part to cover up the low budget, which is only partly excused by the characters commenting on it being a particular hazy few days. And while Holmes does more or less solve the case, that solution - secret identical twins - is so amateurish, even Moffat's show had a laugh at its expense. It's redeemed, however, by a great early performance by Michael Fassbender, who himself would make an excellent Holmes (without distracting perpetually arched eyebrows, to boot)! Based on his appearance in the credits, I was afraid he'd only have a minor role, so I was pleasantly surprised to see him end up as the villain.

Anyhow, it's a pretty decent tale, as long as one isn't too much of a Holmes purist, and if you like serial killer fiction. For Holmes semi-purists such as myself, it's worth a watch.

Grade: B
 

TM2YC

Take Me To Your Cinema
Staff member
Donor
Faneditor
Messages
14,869
Reaction score
2,383
Trophy Points
228
^ For my money the best Sherlock film and a terrific pair of actors in the leads. Fassender's subsequent fame partly ruined it though because instead of the viewer not noticing his character's presence in scenes, as originally intended, you just immediately go "Hey! isn't that Michael Fassbender standing over there?!". The score is top notch and very atmospheric.

 

TM2YC

Take Me To Your Cinema
Staff member
Donor
Faneditor
Messages
14,869
Reaction score
2,383
Trophy Points
228
Ocean's Eleven (2001)
I've not seen the 1960 original but I reckon this Steven Soderbergh heist thriller is less a remake of that and more an attempt to recreate the pleasures of 1973's 'The Sting'. George Clooney and Brad Pitt are this movies' Gondorff and Hooker, the two grifters, while Andy Garcia is the Lonnegan villain/mark. In the same way, 'Ocean's Eleven' is not just about playing tricks within the plot but also on us the audience. It's misdirection and slight of hand magic. Unfortunately I was tuned into that fairly early, so I couldn't help but predict where some of the mechanics of the plot were going but by no means all of them, there are a lot of fun twists. It's not quite as clever as the 'The Sting' because that's classy enough to not appear to be withholding information from the audience. Pitt is a bit too smug and self-satisfied for my liking but Clooney exudes effortless sexy cool. 'Ocean's Eleven' was highly influential, reminding everybody in 2001 of that old brand of Vegas/Rat-Pack/Elvis glamour and cementing the a-list status of the cast. It seemed like everybody was doing Sinatra covers and crooner albums afterwards. Soundtrack composer/curator David Holmes selected a then fairly obscure 1968 Elvis b-side 'A Little Less Conversation' for use in the score, which was then remixed by Tom Holkenborg a few months later and released as a single, becoming Elvis' only worldwide number-one hit since his death in 1977. I very much doubt the song would've featured so prominently (or at all) in Baz Luhrmann's new 'Elvis' biopic without 'Ocean's Eleven'.

Don Cheadle's attempt at a cockney accent is staggeringly bad and it's not like he needed to do it for any reason demanded by the plot. To a Brit, hearing it almost causes physical pain, to watch a talented actor fail this hard and embarrass himself in a $450m movie. To be fair, it's not all his fault, Ted Griffin's screenplay sprays British slang words all over his dialogue with clearly no idea where the words should land in a sentence. That the other American characters can't always understand him is an intentional joke but I couldn't understand him either sometimes. It's like me writing dialogue for an American film like "I'll period you right there" because you know "period" means stop in American English, so that use makes perfect sense right? Or "Those are some candy moves" because sweet = candy :LOL:.

 

Moe_Syzlak

Well-known member
Messages
3,453
Reaction score
1,163
Trophy Points
118
I admit I really love Ocean’s Eleven. I can’t stand any of the sequels. The female version (8?) was better than any of the direct sequels. It’s such a perfect ensemble piece. Cheadle is the weak spot as you note. I kept waiting for him to reveal at some point that he isn’t really British and for the rest of them to be like “yeah we know.” The symphonic Clair de Lune (a composition usually played as a piano piece) is so perfect for the fountains and the ending of the heist proper. It’s far from a perfect movie but I do love it.
 

unfair

Well-known member
Faneditor
Messages
185
Reaction score
167
Trophy Points
53
I can’t stand any of the sequels. The female version (8?) was better than any of the direct sequels.

Eh, I thought the direct sequels were somewhat fun while Ocean's 8 seemed to be an emotionless cash grab with the name of a popular franchise it had no relation to pasted on the cover. Seemed like they were hoping between the name and the cast they could cash in on the audience, sort of like a series reboot cashing in on the credibility of the original that it's completely unrelated to. As gender-flip movie pitches go that one should have been a home run with a cast of that caliber, and instead it was devoid of any sort of emotion or investment in the plot or characters.
 

Moe_Syzlak

Well-known member
Messages
3,453
Reaction score
1,163
Trophy Points
118
Eh, I thought the direct sequels were somewhat fun while Ocean's 8 seemed to be an emotionless cash grab with the name of a popular franchise it had no relation to pasted on the cover. Seemed like they were hoping between the name and the cast they could cash in on the audience, sort of like a series reboot cashing in on the credibility of the original that it's completely unrelated to. As gender-flip movie pitches go that one should have been a home run with a cast of that caliber, and instead it was devoid of any sort of emotion or investment in the plot or characters.
And yet was still better than the direct sequels for me. YMMV.
 

TM2YC

Take Me To Your Cinema
Staff member
Donor
Faneditor
Messages
14,869
Reaction score
2,383
Trophy Points
228
I admit I really love Ocean’s Eleven. I can’t stand any of the sequels. The female version (8?) was better than any of the direct sequels. It’s such a perfect ensemble piece.

I was only really interested in the first three just because it's Soderbergh but I might give that a go too.

Ocean's Twelve (2004)
'Ocean's Twelve'
has been described as one of the worst sequels ever, which it isn't but it's not great either. It feels like a classic case of shooting with an unfinished script and expecting the mere presence of your all-star cast and talented director to magically fix everything. If you don't know what you're doing, or where your going, just stuff more stuff into the movie and let your Hollywood stars improv dialogue. It's like one of those difficult albums where the band have spent all their time touring and going to celebrity parties, so now they don't know how to write about normal life any more. Steven Soderbergh amuses himself (if nobody else) with meta jokes, such as the character played by Matt Damon (who was now a much bigger star thanks to two Jason Bourne blockbusters since the first movie) asking for a bigger role in the next heist. The thieves bicker about their gang actually being referred to as "Ocean's 11", movie genre cliches are pointed out in the dialogue and you know everybody thought having Don Cheadle coach Julia Roberts about doing a convincing accent was just the funniest thing ever. Cheadle's cockney accent doesn't seem quite as stunningly bad this time and he's at least using slang correctly. All that being said, the scenes featuring Bruce Willis as himself and Julia Roberts' character impersonating the "real" Julia Roberts were a lot of fun. The smugness that was mostly contained to just Brad Pitt in the first adventure infects most of the cast here. However, I can't deny I wasn't entertained for 2-hours.

 

Moe_Syzlak

Well-known member
Messages
3,453
Reaction score
1,163
Trophy Points
118
^^^ To clarify, I don’t find any of them particularly good, but the reboot was at least trying ti be something other than excuse for a bunch of famous friends to get together and say “look how much fun we have being famous!”
 

Masirimso17

Well-known member
Cover Artist
Messages
2,138
Reaction score
238
Trophy Points
93
I also saw Ocean's Eleven very recently, fairly enjoyed it. Sad to hear about the sequels, I had no idea they were poorly received, maybe I coulda enjoyed them more going in blind (which I still want to do, as much as possible). Also interested in Ocean's Eight.
 
Top Bottom