martin-secker
अग॰ 2005 को शामिल हुए
नई प्रोफ़ाइल में आपका स्वागत है
हमारे अपडेट अभी भी डेवलप हो रहे हैं. हालांकि प्रोफ़ाइलका पिछला संस्करण अब उपलब्ध नहीं है, हम सक्रिय रूप से सुधारों पर काम कर रहे हैं, और कुछ अनुपलब्ध सुविधाएं जल्द ही वापस आ जाएंगी! उनकी वापसी के लिए हमारे साथ बने रहें। इस बीच, रेटिंग विश्लेषण अभी भी हमारे iOS और Android ऐप्स पर उपलब्ध है, जो प्रोफ़ाइल पेज पर पाया जाता है. वर्ष और शैली के अनुसार अपने रेटिंग वितरण (ओं) को देखने के लिए, कृपया हमारा नया हेल्प गाइड देखें.
बैज3
बैज कमाने का तरीका जानने के लिए, यहां बैज सहायता पेज जाएं.
रेटिंग390
martin-seckerकी रेटिंग
समीक्षाएं9
martin-seckerकी रेटिंग
The movie had promise - directed by The Departed's writer William Monahan and starring an eclectic bunch of British stars Colin Farrell, Keira Knightly, Ray Winstone, David Thewlis and Anna Friel. Even Eddie Marsan, Stephen Graham and Ben Chaplin make appearances.
Unfortunately despite a snazzy score and a stylish flourish, this movie is nothing more than a collection of London gangster movie clichés and stereotypes with an obvious script written by an unauthentic source. The characters can all be labelled with a single word (villain, victim, druggie etc), bereft of any depth or colour.
Farrell plays Mitchell, fresh from prison and determined to go straight, within half-an-hour, he has been offered a choice of two jobs. One working as a debt collector for tough and possibly homosexual (who cares?) gangland boss (Winstone, who else) and the other protecting a damaged & shy actress (Knightly). Needless to say, Winstone doesn't take kindly to being refused and sets his sights on hurting Mitchell as revenge (hasn't he got better things to do?) The movie doesn't ring true at every juncture and the only pleasure the viewer grab, is when watching Thewlis's thinly veiled Withnail impression or with the music on show.
Do yourself a favour and watch Layer Cake instead.
Unfortunately despite a snazzy score and a stylish flourish, this movie is nothing more than a collection of London gangster movie clichés and stereotypes with an obvious script written by an unauthentic source. The characters can all be labelled with a single word (villain, victim, druggie etc), bereft of any depth or colour.
Farrell plays Mitchell, fresh from prison and determined to go straight, within half-an-hour, he has been offered a choice of two jobs. One working as a debt collector for tough and possibly homosexual (who cares?) gangland boss (Winstone, who else) and the other protecting a damaged & shy actress (Knightly). Needless to say, Winstone doesn't take kindly to being refused and sets his sights on hurting Mitchell as revenge (hasn't he got better things to do?) The movie doesn't ring true at every juncture and the only pleasure the viewer grab, is when watching Thewlis's thinly veiled Withnail impression or with the music on show.
Do yourself a favour and watch Layer Cake instead.
The problem here is not the story, the story has legs, no wonder it managed to attract an impressive, eclectic cast of talent. The problem isn't the cast, all roles filled to perfection (with exception to Melanie Griffith who is miscast as the dour, victimised wife). The problem is the flat, unambitious direction and editing.
The Hat Squad are introduced spectacularly, Nolte was obviously born to play this role. One of America's finest and under-appreciated character actors over the past 35 years, Nolte's performance deserves a better film. Chazz is also fine as the passive-aggressive Ellery. Madsen & Penn do well with little (but I wish they had more impact on the story, and given more dialogue).
The movie deserved flair, consistent editing (there must've been loads of scenes lost to the cutting room floor) and some strange ADR work. File this one under missed opportunity, a casual watch that passes without any truly memorable scenes, when it could've been a rival to L.A. Confidential had a different director been appointed.
The Hat Squad are introduced spectacularly, Nolte was obviously born to play this role. One of America's finest and under-appreciated character actors over the past 35 years, Nolte's performance deserves a better film. Chazz is also fine as the passive-aggressive Ellery. Madsen & Penn do well with little (but I wish they had more impact on the story, and given more dialogue).
The movie deserved flair, consistent editing (there must've been loads of scenes lost to the cutting room floor) and some strange ADR work. File this one under missed opportunity, a casual watch that passes without any truly memorable scenes, when it could've been a rival to L.A. Confidential had a different director been appointed.
This movie was fighting an uphill battle from the start - having a concrete release date fast approaching, losing Bryan Singer, now-established A-lister squabbling about character development, hefty studio interference, actor schedule clashes and a lacklustre script.
I don't blame Ratner, I'm sure he did the best he could with the time allowed. I don't blame the cast. The problem was with the script - it introduces too many characters without fleshing them out, leaving big characters out of the storyline (Nightcrawler, Cyclops, Mystique) and trying to be too big in scale. The beauty with Singer's X-Men is that he managed to make complex narratives accessible to the non-fans, he Ratner is forced to subliminally supply the viewer with rapid fire sequences that confuse and distract rather than endear. On the plus side, Jackman now owns the Wolverine character, Janssen is good as Jean Grey/Phoenix and Beast looks pitch-perfect.
All principal actors struggle in vain to sound more than cardboard characters from 1960's Star Trek - I feel most sorry for McKellan & Stewart who can do this stuff in their sleep. How come Halle Berry lost her accent? Was it to taxing? Rogue is forced to sit on the back burner. Cyclops, who was given a rough ride in X2, is dispatched all too quickly. Ben Foster (a talented actor) is given nothing to do as Archangel - stuck with the same facial expression in all of his three scenes. Many fans point the finger at Vinnie Jones - I thought he did very well with what he had - let's face it, there was no way the character could've been introduced to the screen without looking ridiculous - Juggernaut is not even given a death scene worthy of his introduction.
X2 remains one of the finest comic book adaptations to date, so it's a shame that such a groundbreaking trilogy is left to wither and die for the sake of the studio earning a quick buck.
I don't blame Ratner, I'm sure he did the best he could with the time allowed. I don't blame the cast. The problem was with the script - it introduces too many characters without fleshing them out, leaving big characters out of the storyline (Nightcrawler, Cyclops, Mystique) and trying to be too big in scale. The beauty with Singer's X-Men is that he managed to make complex narratives accessible to the non-fans, he Ratner is forced to subliminally supply the viewer with rapid fire sequences that confuse and distract rather than endear. On the plus side, Jackman now owns the Wolverine character, Janssen is good as Jean Grey/Phoenix and Beast looks pitch-perfect.
All principal actors struggle in vain to sound more than cardboard characters from 1960's Star Trek - I feel most sorry for McKellan & Stewart who can do this stuff in their sleep. How come Halle Berry lost her accent? Was it to taxing? Rogue is forced to sit on the back burner. Cyclops, who was given a rough ride in X2, is dispatched all too quickly. Ben Foster (a talented actor) is given nothing to do as Archangel - stuck with the same facial expression in all of his three scenes. Many fans point the finger at Vinnie Jones - I thought he did very well with what he had - let's face it, there was no way the character could've been introduced to the screen without looking ridiculous - Juggernaut is not even given a death scene worthy of his introduction.
X2 remains one of the finest comic book adaptations to date, so it's a shame that such a groundbreaking trilogy is left to wither and die for the sake of the studio earning a quick buck.