You know what? I'm tired of giving movies the "it's so well made" escape clause. Regardless of how well made this film is, it is also a pretty substandard example of story telling. The implausibilities are substantial (the "harrowing" final scene slipped into comedy for me) and the characters are largely unexplored. From this you have to conclude that the point of the exercise was to produce something grim. Well they've certainly done that, it's pointlessly grim alright. The audience goes away with nothing but some loose ends to ponder. In this way it is like too many films that simply want to dazzle audiences with technique while contriving to send them home miserable, as if that's what a 'good' movie should do. This film and all films like it - are lazy and empty pieces of story telling.
Reviews
6 Reviews
Death at a Funeral
(2007)
Stone faced
11 November 2007
I know the whole world is laughing at this film, laughing so hard it hurts. But I thought it was terminally unfunny. Point 1 : the script is utterly witless. Not a single clever line in the whole thing. I would challenge anyone who loves this film to quote a funny line. OK. You could say it's slapstick - the humour is in the action. So why is most of its running time taken up with very unpleasant people yelling unfunny things at each other? This is a film made for boomers who still find the idea of old people swearing hilarious, who still think stoned people are just a riot and who still rate poo jokes as the most hysterical fun. Predictable, plodding, old fashioned and unfunny. Yep. That about sums it up.
Noise
(I) (2007)
At Last! No heroin addicts.
31 May 2007
That's right an Australian drama with no heroin addicts. It is possible and it can still result in high quality piece of cinema.
This isn't to say Noise is a light piece. No, no. It's is a very serious-minded and thoughtfully produced film. The mood is carefully and slowly created and the places where things happen feel real (though I will say there were some overly self-conscious scripted moments that didn't ring true to me). And like life some of the big questions in this movie go unanswered.
It's a brave thing to do but as an audience member, you realise Noise isn't trying to be a police drama or a murder mystery, though those elements are both there. It's more about how things just happen people come into your life, events take you over and you can't control any of it, all you can do is deal with the consequences.
Noise is one of those rare films that stays with you for some time after you see it. No car chases, no explosions just emotional engagement and a place to consider how you're coping with the hijacks and loose cannons in your own life.
This isn't to say Noise is a light piece. No, no. It's is a very serious-minded and thoughtfully produced film. The mood is carefully and slowly created and the places where things happen feel real (though I will say there were some overly self-conscious scripted moments that didn't ring true to me). And like life some of the big questions in this movie go unanswered.
It's a brave thing to do but as an audience member, you realise Noise isn't trying to be a police drama or a murder mystery, though those elements are both there. It's more about how things just happen people come into your life, events take you over and you can't control any of it, all you can do is deal with the consequences.
Noise is one of those rare films that stays with you for some time after you see it. No car chases, no explosions just emotional engagement and a place to consider how you're coping with the hijacks and loose cannons in your own life.
Toooo loooong = dull
28 May 2007
The problem with this film and it's a big one is the script.
It looks great and the cast is generally good to excellent. But the script The film is made up of scenes that should either have been cut by a third or cut out all together. The dialogue labours heavily over a "who cares" and extremely convoluted so-called plot and it just goes on and on and on with barely three actual jokes to brighten its running time of over three hours.
In the hands of a nimble and witty script writer there's no way this film would have clocked in at three hours and it certainly would have been a much, much better movie. As it is, its exhausting and dull length is the result of very poor story telling pure and simple, creakily papered over by special effects and big bucks.
I would challenge anyone at any given minute in this movie, to explain what's going on and why. And I mean that from the very first scene which has no plot connection with the rest of the film at all. And of course, characters are constantly doing things to get the movie to the next scene rather than because it makes sense for them to do it.
My score of three is for the effects and the cast. The actual movie is a woeful waste of time and resources.
It looks great and the cast is generally good to excellent. But the script The film is made up of scenes that should either have been cut by a third or cut out all together. The dialogue labours heavily over a "who cares" and extremely convoluted so-called plot and it just goes on and on and on with barely three actual jokes to brighten its running time of over three hours.
In the hands of a nimble and witty script writer there's no way this film would have clocked in at three hours and it certainly would have been a much, much better movie. As it is, its exhausting and dull length is the result of very poor story telling pure and simple, creakily papered over by special effects and big bucks.
I would challenge anyone at any given minute in this movie, to explain what's going on and why. And I mean that from the very first scene which has no plot connection with the rest of the film at all. And of course, characters are constantly doing things to get the movie to the next scene rather than because it makes sense for them to do it.
My score of three is for the effects and the cast. The actual movie is a woeful waste of time and resources.
The Good Shepherd
(2006)
In two words - excruciatingly dull
27 February 2007
I have never seen as many people leave a cinema as I saw with this movie. Honestly, it bordered on an evacuation. And this film deserved it. Dull. Dull. DULL. The pacing was mannered - interminable, lengthy pauses and empty-headed stares into space - beyond all expectation of entertainment. It was like Bobby D wanted to strangle the drama right out of his story.
And it looked like a Calvin Klein ad. The lighting was so fake and the art direction so self conscious. This was an ego exercise on a grand scale.
Next time Robert De Niro says he wants to direct a movie, someone should take to him with a baseball bat.
And it looked like a Calvin Klein ad. The lighting was so fake and the art direction so self conscious. This was an ego exercise on a grand scale.
Next time Robert De Niro says he wants to direct a movie, someone should take to him with a baseball bat.
Boring people doing uninvolving things
25 May 2005
I notice from the voting breakdown that 47% of voters gave "Revenge of the Anagram" a full 10 points. Sad. I suppose that's what happens when you give 15 year olds the vote. Based on Yoda's dialogue alone the film would rate a 2 at best and Yoda's advice about emotional connection to Anakin was just a dreadful piece of pseudo-profound nonsense. The Wookies made more sense.
And the word "younglings". Just embarrassing.
That I gave this film 4 is based purely on the visuals. As so often happens, the technical guys came through in a big way while just about every other aspect of the film made their effort pointless. More proof, if we need it, that great special effects don't make a great film.
The reality is that the last three films have been a spectacular waste of resources, still leaving "Empire" as the Star Wars high water mark. The film George Lucas had least to do with is by far and away the best film in the series. And no amount of voting 10 for a dull piece of technical eye candy is going to change that.
And the word "younglings". Just embarrassing.
That I gave this film 4 is based purely on the visuals. As so often happens, the technical guys came through in a big way while just about every other aspect of the film made their effort pointless. More proof, if we need it, that great special effects don't make a great film.
The reality is that the last three films have been a spectacular waste of resources, still leaving "Empire" as the Star Wars high water mark. The film George Lucas had least to do with is by far and away the best film in the series. And no amount of voting 10 for a dull piece of technical eye candy is going to change that.
Tell Your Friends