Crime is King

This movie is a very mixed bag. First of all, it's not at all what I expected. I thought this was going to be a comedy where guys stage a heist dressed up as Elvis impersonators. And whilst it kind of is that, it's more of a crime movie and the heist takes place in the first thirty minutes with the rest of the runtime dealing with its fallout. This was very disappointing because based on the premise I was prepared to watch an Ocean's Eleven type of movie where the majority of it is the gang staging the heist and then executing the plan in the last act. There really is no planning involved in this and it just gets straight to it with the robbery being rather disappointing and unrealistic but also somewhat fun due to to how crazy and violent it is. I also wanted to see more of Kurt Russell's stellar Elvis impersonation which he has done so well in the past. There were a few scenes in which we got to see it but not enough when I expected him to be doing it throughout the whole film.

Surprisingly it is Kevin Costner that steals the show in possibly his only role in which he plays a villain, at least the only one where I've seen him do that. He is really unleashed in this movie in a way that I certainly haven't seen before, acting completely different from his usual shtick. Furthermore, the movie looks decent in terms of cinematography and the rest of the cast is also fine. As bad and insanely stupid as the movie is at times it really is entertaining. I can't give it a bad rating when I genuinely enjoyed watching it for the most part despite my complaints. It's the type of movie where you might be getting bored but suddenly Ice T appears hanging from the ceiling mowing people down with uzi's (this actually happens). At times it's laughably bad, especially during the terrible CGI intro and at times a decent enough crime film. However, the one thing that really annoyed me was the soundtrack which is very much of its time as it mostly consists of terrible early 2000's techno and we only get one or two Elvis songs. I'm sorry but In an Elvis themed movie I expect 90% of the soundtrack to be the King so to get techno instead was really grating. All in all though, despite the awful music the movie is certainly watchable and fun for the most part with the show-stealing performance by Costner being its main selling point.

Like True Romance, and Pulp Fiction this film is movie junk food that I love to eat. Film purest will classify this film as crap, and so it is; but this is crap that the masses want and the movie elite hates. For action films this is great, a few slow parts, and the action scene at the end got a little predictable, with the high kill counts, but rebounds with a great ending. An old western show down, and being a road movie it gives the junk food escapism I love and need. The acting is great, Costner plays such a great jerk in this film, his attitude makes the viewer dislike him, like a bad guys in wrestling. Costner should keep playing bad guys. I believe this is his strong point. Russell plays the hero or the not too bad bad guy. Russell character is the all American type he acts too the tee. Stay at the end of this film for they have a bonus with the credits, an Elvis video and a funny out take from the film. Taker easy, and give yourself a break and watch this film.

`3000 Miles to Graceland' isn't quite as dopey as the cover art featuring Kurt Russell and Kevin Kostner clad in Elvis regalia would suggest. Although it breaks little new ground in its already overworked genre, the film does emerge as an efficient crime drama thanks to a gallery of interesting characters, some impressive performances and Demian Lichtenstein's flashy directorial style.

After a shaky first half hour or so, in which the film seems to be struggling to establish its direction and tone, the movie miraculously hits its stride and, thereafter, never really lets up. The story centers around a band of ex-cons, united by their almost obsessive love for the King of rock'n'roll, who decide to knock over a Las Vegas casino dressed as Elvis impersonators. Predictably, the heist serves merely as the pretext for one of them, the obviously psychotic Murphy (Kostner), to cold-bloodedly eliminate his accomplices. The fly in his ointment turns out to be Michael Zane (Russell), the most principled one of the group, who survives the holocaust and spends his time, along with a pretty single mother and her precocious child, trying to keep out of Murphy's way.

In terms of plotting, the film follows a pretty traditional route for this kind of film. However, the characters here seem a bit more fleshed out than they often do in some of those other films, particularly Zane, who seems caught between his criminal inclinations and his innate goodness as a human being. Cybil, the single mother played by Courteney Cox, likewise seems conflicted between genuine love and emotion and the excitement of easy wealth and a life lived on the edge. But it is Kostner as Murphy who sets the real tone for the film. His portrayal of a steely-eyed psychotic killer literally sets the teeth on edge, as he callously mows down scores of policemen and innocent bystanders who happen to get in his way. He makes for a truly soul-cringing villain. Russell, who played the actual legend back in his own younger, more halcyon days, makes a fascinating subtle counterpoint to Murphy's unbridled ruthlessness.

The film is not, however, a total success. For one thing, the violence often seems excessively brutal, graphic and mean spirited for a movie that seems to want to be a lark of sorts (after all, a movie featuring robbers dressed as Elvis impersonators can't be bidding to be taken too seriously). Moreover, the plotting, which far too often relies on unlikely coincidences to keep it rolling, also borders frequently on the incoherent. Finally, the morally ambiguous ending doesn't really sit well with those of us who find a couple of thieves, no matter how charming they may appear to be, unlikely candidates for heroism in the context of a `happy' ending.

All in all, however, `3000 Miles to Graceland' will probably appeal to those who like their crime dramas offbeat, quirky and filled with interesting characters.

3000 Miles to Graceland (2001) This is a tricky film to rate and review. Do I rate it based off of how entertaining it was or do I rate it based on how terrible it is. I guess I'll meet them somewhere in the middle.

To start with the positives, 3000 Miles to Graceland is very entertaining and keeps you watching. It has a lot of cool effects and great action sequences, and a relatively decent storyline, though ridiculous in many ways. One other thing I have good to say about it is that it has some pretty good cinematography, not always, but often. With an all star cast like they have (personally I love Costner's character) its hard not give it a chance and I think it deserves people watching it, at least fans of action films.

On the other hand, the film is actually pretty terrible. Very bad acting by most of the cast, and a lot of generic and stupid dialog. As I mentioned, it does have a good root idea for the storyline. However, trying to be cool, and more action packed weakened the plot and made the film get worse as it progresses. Top all this off with an obvious and yet unfitting ending and you have 3000 Miles to Graceland.

I think a lot of people will like this film if they are going into it looking for a hardcore action film and not looking for an overall good film. It will keep you entertained but I think whether you like it or not you will probably agree that the action is the only thing holding the film together and making it watchable.

6/10

Scrolling through the 135+ comments, I'm amazed at how outraged so many viewers are at the "excessive violence," "explicit sex," "foul language," etc., etc., etc. C'mon. A film is advertised as Elvises robbing a Las Vegas casino during an Elvis convention. How much more lead in do you want? You expect, action, thrills and ... content? Amazing. Listen. This is one of the funniest, outrageous films I've seen in a long time. Yes. The story's incredible. But, in any film, we have to consider the level at which we're willing to "buy in." I mean, some people were outraged at the farting scenes in Shrek. Now, they're complaining because Russell and Costner-- especially the latter-- are too violent. Well, let's go back a year or so when Russell and Costner both made Wyatt Earp films, playing the title roles. From my view, both vehicles were ghastly but entertaining. So, I submit that what we have here is the COSTNER and RUSSELL Revenge vehicle. Costner is always on the leafy edge, whether he's dancing with wolves, building baseball fields for ghosts or water-skiing as bait for sea monsters. Russell, whose track record in shoot 'em-ups is no less than Stallone or Arnie, is likewise coming off some hound dog roles, such as being an automated soldier, a remake of his Escape from New York (LA? Why'd anyone want to go there in the first place?) and the sci-fi Stargate. Now, we get these two guys in a mindless, black comedy, full of S&V-- the most since the cult film Thursday-- with quirky twists and turns. Mindless violence? Yes. Gratuitious sex? Yes. Entertaining? Yes-- but only if you don't take it too seriously. I loved it.