Shadowboxer

I can't believe I'm agreeing with the other review but Cuba's role did erase snow dogs from my memory. He was phenomenal.

Thats about the only nice thing I can say about this film. It has a number of problems and I suspect Mr. Daniels would not like to hear any of them, the two worst:

1. All shock and no substance. Sex and violence are fine, when they are part of the story. I'm sure Lee thinks they are part of the story, but the film would have been 1000 times better if it were a bit more subtle. This is a difficult point to grasp. I wasn't offended or anything, I just think it looks like he is using this as a crutch instead of art. It comes across as trying to hard to be edgy. It basically loses its impact.

2. Boring Story. So ridiculously predictable. Its really a shame given the great acting and interesting characters. Total fizzle at the end though.

3. Doesn't live up to its potential. Well cast, great acting, beautiful cinematography, but somehow all the pieces just don't fit.

Movie has its flaws like the blonde wig that lasts for years and then disappears without comment but I have to admit that generally the movie was well crafted. It moves at a clip that supports its gory and odd characters. Some of the pairings are fabulous .. are there really people walking among us that are like that? I prefer to believe they only exist in screenwriters minds. Mirren is her usual superb self and Gooding shows he really can act. The question is were they in love or was he simply controlled by her. I did not look forward to a nude scene with a woman her age but it was handled extremely well. Also the music choices were excellent. I haven't seen any comments about that aspect of the film.

The bad: Helen Mirren is miscast. Gotta see it for yourself that she is definitely not the right actress for this role, however good she might be, that is besides the point.

This movie starts out okayish, but gradually gets more stupid along the way. One of those movies I get fooled into thinking it must be worth SOMETHING based on the actors starring in it. BUT it is NOT.

This director has made really excellent movies in the past and future, but this unfortunately is a FLOP.

I just saw this film in the directors cut version on Friday night. I have to say I really enjoyed it. Lee Daniels was at the screening and it was a screening for the investors so nobody was going to pull punches because they had money involved. It took a little while to get into the plot but I was totally sucked in after a while. It will supposedly be released in December and hopefully won't be cut down too much. There were some sex scenes that will probably go because some people in this country can't handle it, but nothing that I felt was gratuitous or just sex for the sake of showing some nudity. Some may also find the violence objectionable but nothing close to SinCity or any war movie ever made. I hope the film does well and the public enjoys it. Who cares what the industry has to say. They promote absolute garbage with a full wallet all the time. Check this one out and form an opinion for yourself.

As another reviewer stated, this movie does break rules. But is that enough? And through all the rule-breaking, there still is a core/central storyline that does seem familiar, to say the least. OK so some people will/might be offended by the sexual nature of the movie and or maybe by the violence. Although the latter isn't quite as brutal as some other movie efforts, you might have seen. Why is this special then compared to those movies? The cast plays into that. Who would've imagined, Cuba Gooding Jr., Stephen Dorff and Helen Mirren (although only the latter is a real surprise here). A nice little movie, but apart from the obvious scenes that try to provoke a reaction (especially in America and the moral standards, that are implied by some), this isn't really a movie that I would call a classic! I thought it was OK, but it won't shake up your world ...