![]() ![]() While the main story is quite intriguing or at least seems that way, the overall structure is quite complex. If we leave that aside for a moment - the movie will not be something for a wide crowd I reckon. there are a lot more great actors in this than one can count (and certainly more than most of us have fingers on their hands). What a cast! I mean I only saw the two "players" on that are on the poster - but let me tell you. One thing is for sure Brendan Fraser looks even more porkier because of it. Some scenes look slightly off with its fisheye lens. Soderbergh has gone for a lo fi approach. He ends up with more money even though he was the one being blackmailed. Although one character who mentions he cannot stop making money turns out to be absolutely correct. It becomes the film's weakness as it gets too convoluted as more characters are introduced. By the end you just know no one is going to end up with what they are after. Ronald is having an affair with a gangster's wife. Curt has upset a lot of major people who want revenge against him. Matt for example is having an affair with his boss's secretary. It is just a case of who to trust as everyone has something to hide or an angle. Both Curt and Ronald though find a way to stay ahead and make money out of it. Ronald (Benicio del Toro) and Charley (Kieran Culkin) need to burst into the house of Matt Wertz (David Harbour.) They will then watch over his family as Matt is taken to his office where he must retrieve an important document from his boss's safe. Big money for just a few hours work by a shifty man called Jones (Brendan Fraser.) Curt and two other men. Curt Goynes (Don Cheadle) is a hood fresh out of prison and offered an easy job. It also takes potshots at the automobile industry and their attitude to environmentalism. No Sudden Move has crooks crossing each other to the Nth degree. He now wants to make something more personal, idiosyncratic and still attract a starry cast. Steven Soderbergh has turned his back on big budget movies. ![]() NO SUDDEN MOVE is a decent example of, more or less, straight storytelling for Soderbergh, even if his penchant for experimentation and subverting audience expectations get in the way of it being fully successful. Their weary, haggard appearances make one believe that they are all just desperate enough to lay it on the line for one last gamble that will let them retire once and for all. At first the sight of Cheadle, Del Toro and Liotta may make one think that they are all a bit long in the tooth for their roles, but it works here. In addition to the above mentioned, there are also nice turns by Ray Liotta, Amy Seimetz, Julia Fox, Jon Hamm and an unbilled significant cameo. The acting is what makes the movie worth seeing. And, "Andrews" also seems to be lighting the movie for film rather than digital which causes crushed shadow detail and too bright night exteriors. In a few wide shots, it's not ineffective, but, it's overuse doesn't work. The Cinematography by Soderbergh (using his Peter Andrews pseudonym) is distracting with it's extreme wide lenses distorting the image. The connection is obviously there, but, the constant churn of the stoyline blunts it's effectiveness. Some have compared the subtext of the script with Chinatown. The plot certainly keeps the viewer on their toes and is never less than interesting, but at a certain point the momentum gets a bit slack. Ed Solomon's screenplay has enough twists and turns for a season's worth of a limited series. What follows is a series of crosses, double-crosses and beyond. In 50s Detroit, a low-level mobster (Brendan Fraser) hires three hoods (Don Cheadle, Benicio Del Toro, Kieran Culkun) to shake down an accountant (David Harbour) for some files in his office. Steven Soderbergh's Neo-Noir begins with what seems like a simple set-up. If you told me it was written and directed the Teletubbies filmmakers, I'd believe you. If you had told me this was directed by the Ocean's franchise director and written by the Men in Black and Now You See me writer, I'd call you a liar. If this wasn't for the star-studded cast - who performed very well, I'd say it was a failed B-grade film put together by an amateur writer and director. It stays stale and predictable throughout the entire 115 min slowly paced and dragged out runtime. It struggled identifying itself as a gangster flick, a gentrification movie, whistleblowing collusion within the automobile industry, or a heist caper. ![]() dialogue that was either all over the place or insignificant - and unrealistic. How did he miss fixing some of the many flaws in the scenes and dialogue from the convoluted and boring screenplay written by Solomon? It felt like some scenes were edited by a Ninja blender. What was Soderbergh thinking? What possible benefit could fish-eye lens offer besides being annoying? This is certainly one of Soderbergh's worst films.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |