Blog

#140RVW

Sweeping vistas of Canada sit in for Montana in Oscar-winning cinematography. Story is old-timey epic that mostly survives all the drama…

What’s more:

The producers must have been excited by the prospect of making a new Gone With The Wind. That’s exactly what this feels like: a grand, sweeping epic of love and loss. You can practically see them writing out the copy as the film was being made.

But far be it from me to say that’s a bad goal. I think there’s a place for epic movies, and for the most part this succeeds quite well. It’s over-dramatic often, and smacks of Hollywood a few times, but the story largely stays entertaining and the acting is quite good. The WWI sequences are particularly fine.

One thing I will say: I don’t know how I was expecting this to end, but this ending wasn’t it. I don’t think anything that happens after the two-hour mark in a movie can reasonably be called abrupt, but it does seem like they suddenly realized they didn’t have any more film canisters with them so they better wrap in a hurry.

In the end, it doesn’t hugely matter what you think about any of this; it’s obvious why you’re here: pictures of that hunky Brad Pitt. Well, here’s one more:  

Poster:

Trailer:

Bechdel Test:

FAIL

#140RVW

Very original heist film, set in Gulf War, provides unique look at hard to pin down time in history. DP Sigel creates visual masterpiece…

What’s more:

The polarizing subject matter likely keeps people away from this one, which is entirely their own loss. Regardless of your feelings about the Gulf War, it remains a unique and interesting time, and this film may be the most original viewpoint on it. I personally don’t consider this to be a political or message-based war movie. I think there is something of great merit whether you supported the war or not; the movie may have a message, but it’s not a message movie.

The premise is great; good enough that when writer/director/prima donna David O. Russell heard the idea for a story by John Ridley called “Spoils of War” about a Gulf War heist, he immediately sat down and wrote the story of Three Kings. Allegedly that’s all this movie has in common with Ridley’s story, but he still was given credit for coming up with the story. We’ll probably never know the full story.

But what a great setting. It can’t really be called a backdrop for the heist story; more of a character or even the story itself.

The acting is excellent. Clooney had truly become a leading man with Out of Sight the year before, but he ups his game and turns in a great acting performance here. Marky Mark & Ice Cube are both surprisingly effective; probably the last time anyone looked at Wahlberg as an “aspiring” actor. But Spike Jonze is a revelation…

The look of the film is its most unique feature. Cinematographer Newton Thomas Sigel deserved an Oscar nod at least for a truly original picture. Shot on different stocks, including transparent, to replicate the look of the newspaper reporting of the war, he uses filters and color timing and a variety of techniques to keep up with the constantly changing moods and settings.

Great audio work here, as well, bringing a realism and grittiness while avoiding the usual war movie effects.

Poster:

Trailer:

Bechdel Test:

FAIL

#140RVW

Actually just as good as its reputation suggests. A modern psuedo-noir classic from Altman. Tolkin’s tight screenplay exceeds his own novel.

25 words or less:

Altman makes tight and gorgeous thriller with Hollywood as the main character. Tim Robbins is captivating as exec who is in over his head.

Poster:

Trailer:

Bechdel Test:

Pass, technically, as 2 detectives talk to each other.

#140RVW

Almost exactly average. If they’d just filmed it like a normal western instead of trying to make it music video-y it may have become more…

What’s more:

Sort of covered this with my review of the sequel. (Young Guns II) “Virtually all of the criticisms of it are valid; it definitely had that MTV-style over substance thing going on and the actors looked like little boys playing cowboys & indians. (Actually, in hindsight this may have been ahead of its time a little on the use of music video styling in filmmaking.)”

“But for all that, I liked it. While not probably expected to be a beacon of historical accuracy, it was probably more on the money than any other film on the Kid, and certainly takes the subject matter seriously. There are lots of fun little moments, particularly early on with Terrance Stamp. The brat pack of young actors actually handle themselves well and the biggest problem with the movie frankly is it’s so Hollywood. It feels like the big production that it is and subtlety is out the window.”

Other than that, I’d just like to say that Jack Palance is almost always a subtraction by addition kind of actor, and this is no exception. Also that I can’t watch or even think about this movie without remembering the Dennis Miller bit where he refers to the movie as the one where everyone in it is Martin Sheen’s son but none of them have his name. “Charlie Sheen, Emilio Estevez Sheen, Lou Diamond Philips Sheen…”

Poster:

Trailer: