Who better to review a movie than us? No, seriously...
INSIDE MAN
Starring: Denzel Washington, Clive Owen and Jodie Foster
Director: Spike Lee
ALLEN'S REVIEW:
THE GOOD: This film does well in believability, it has some originality, and benefits well from Mr. Owen, who's fairly new to movies over the past few years, and brings something new to the table. Christopher Plummer and Willem Dafoe show up as co-stars, thus filling out a competent cast keeping you essentially interested in everything going on.
Spike Lee is known for adding in moments where the police show off their idiocy and lack of respect for the rights of citizens in a situation the cops know they're being showed up in by the bad guys. Quite amusing.
THE BAD: I've seen quite a few bank robbing movies in my time and this one keeps things simple, yet would have benefitted from a quicker pace. The strong cast keeps things rolling, but it just seemed to take too long at times to get to scenes you knew had to come along in time.
Can't say I cared for the choice of music either, for me it just didn't fit the style of the film.
THE UGLY: Jodie Foster. Anybody could have played her role. Considering how little she seemed to contribute to how events unfolded, I wonder why she was cast. I kept waiting for her big moment and I was still waiting once the credits began to role. Yes she's....a good actress...but considering Denzel didn't bring anything new either, it was more like dual disappointment from those two alleged 'stars'.
VERDICT: Enough going on to keep me entertained I suppose, but considering the names involved in front of the camera, and behind, I expected more. I tend to be tough on films too though..Can't say i'd care to watch it again, let alone own this film. It was decent.
RATING: 3.5 /5
***MANDY'S REVIEW***
mmm mmm good: that'd be Mr. Owen. i mean honestly, there's just something about him...in this movie he's pretty badass. he's smart, he has a great accent, he's brooding in a hot kinda way and i would say that he makes the movie. it's interesting that i so willingly watched him as the good guy mere weeks ago in "Derailed" and yet i sat in the theatre last night thinking "well holy crap. it's go time now". a very formidable antagonist for denzel who was over-shadowed by the lesser known actor...surprise? i think not, but i'll save that for another section.
the storyline was solid. i remember wondering about 20 minutes into the movie what on earth they were going to do with this to make it interesting to watch for 2 hours, but i wasn't disappointed. perhaps that had a little something with having paid a mere $4 for a double feature at Denman Cinemas last night (side note - my new favourite theatre!), but i do believe they were onto something with this movie. it had me squirming in my seat when i recalled my brother's somewhat imminent employment by the metro police force (it's not too late josh! the world needs accountants too!), which is usually a good sign with these movies as it indicates a level of realism.
it's good to be bad: dear denzel washington, you are a beloved icon in the world of acting. you are a handsome man, a prepared actor and good at bringing yourself to your roles. my only real complaint is that you're yourself in ALL your roles. i accepted you in the role you were playing because i've seen you do it so many times! it's about time that you, me and the Academy had a little sit-down to discuss that oscar of yours....please contact me with an appropriate date and time. p.s. if you get me a role in your next movie, i'll reconsider the meeting with the academy and will even post a blog taking back anything on here that you disagree with. thank you for your time.
spike lee. i think for an african american man, he has a unique perspective on policing that lends a certain amount of credibility to interactions between some individuals in the movie and the cops they are dealing with. on one hand, this disappoints me because i have an immense amount of respect for law enforcement officials and i don't like to see a negative image of them spread among the greater population, infecting the minds of impressionable people; it concerns me. however, i would say that he likely didn't go overboard in any fashion... i would also like to comment on his depiction of african american relationships. in a world where we get all our information about everything from forms of entertainment like movies, it's interesting to me that a black director would propagate racial sterotypes. it's in subtle ways, but have you ever noticed that a black couple is always focused on sex wayyy more than anything else? i mean, they try to sell it as just love, but it's more than that. when the focus seems entirely on sex, or at least what we see of the relationship on camera seems to be, it makes that race appear animalistic to an extent. this hardly serves to the benefit of that race of people, or to any people for that matter, but to each his own....i've probably just spent too much time in sociology of media classes. in any case, he doesn't have any trouble finding work for himself and his name brings movie goers to the theatres, so it's working for him.
damn baby, you not ugly, you FUUUUUGLY! this is where i comment on allen's review....HARSH! what does it take to impress this guy?? honestly. i mean, did jodie foster blow me away? not at all, but she never does so i let it go. in fact, as we were walking home from the theatre i had to ask allen what her job title was because it wasn't even made clear in the movie why she had the pull she did.
listen to me instead: ok, so my final thoughts to share with you on this matter is that the film is well worth the watch. i think many of you will enjoy it. i would watch this again if i was with someone that hadn't seen it before. i also wouldn't be inclined to purchase it....but then again, i'm poor. and even if i wasn't poor, i'm a cheap ass, so realistically, it's not like i really bother to buy movies anyway.
star appeal: * * * *
posted by Team of Terror at 9:08 PM
|
3 comments
