AdemWeldon

This film was unjustly panned as lethargic and bleak without a purpose. Considering how Hold 'Em has developed into one of the biggest social fads in the last decade, I would say that this film captures every emotional aspect the 'swings' of No Limit typically carry.

I had absolutely no idea how to play the game when I first saw this movie about five years ago. The dialogue is wrought with jargon that almost makes a mockery of itself. Especially since much of the movie is done with voice-over, I can see where critics are coming from. However, the viewer should not allow themselves to get bogged down with it all, we get the gist with well-developed staging and performances.

Damon and Norton play off each other better than Damon and Affleck. Though the story echoes in the wake of Scorsese's 'Mean Streets', the performances seem more detailed than the Keitel/DeNiro combo. The supporting roles add great depth to the film, and Tutorro shines as the wise-old has-been that successfully provides Damon's character with the cold-hard truth he never seems to adhere to (until it is too late).

Above all, we feel compelled to cheer for Damon's Mike McDermott the ENTIRE time. He acknowledges his 'bad' play but constantly tries to explain that this is a game of skill and not luck. This is an important element considering the widely accepted belief that any success in gambling is the result of luck. This may be true in the bloodsucking casinos, but in Hold 'Em you play the chips AND the man.

Now that baseball is out of the Olympics, perhaps we will see a push for a true "WORLD Series of Poker". Then again, I also wanted to see 'Four Square' made into an official event when I was 8, so maybe I'm just talking out of my ass...

Should be commended as a precursor to a pandemic fad that is costing teens (and their parents) millions daily.

*** (of ****)

Right away this title grabs your attention. It has to. It is certainly audacious and somewhat condescending, which is probably why I took it off the shelf. Why not? Every other feature title out there generally spells out the movie anyway, so why not go for something more enigmatic? Next to 2004's 'Primer' this is one of the most interesting titles in the last few years.

The story revolves around a socially disconnected youth that commits a heinous crime without any particular reason. While the actual crime 'shoots for the moon', marvelous editing keeps us from knowing all of the information. The crime itself is not important, so much as how everyone else is affected by the consequences.

An ensemble cast of mostly Gen-Y rising stars promotes believability against the backdrop of modern suburbia. Gosling delivers an even-paced and restrained performance as Leland. Jean Malone picks up yet another troubled and sexually exploited teen role. I mention this because it seems she is certainly capable of more advanced work but continues to choose roles that are hyped with drug use and strong sexuality. Don Cheadle, who is one of the top five best actors working today is somewhat of a let down, but this is mostly due to the weak writing of his character. Kevin Spacey shines as the estranged father although he only has about 2-3 scenes of dialogue. The 'dark horse' of this film unquestionably goes to Chris Klein. After some poor choices and weak performances he reaffirms an acting presence that has not been seen since his role in 'Election'.

Hoge employs some interesting camera and cinematic choices that prevent the film from becoming a WB-drama. The editing takes center stage, and is ultimately what keeps our interest. NOT being spoon-fed every piece of plot and action is a nice change of pace from current industry practices. The simple and low-key production design allows the reality of the film to sink in better for the viewer, thereby disposing unnecessary distractions.

I suspect we will see more of Mr. Hoge's work in the near future.

*** (of ****)