User reviews

Drawing on clear influences from recent gritty, crime infused pieces such as 2000's Traffic and 2002's Narc, 2008 film The Take seems to have come and gone at a Canadian film festival before being banished to stores so as to increase profits on DVDs. It would seem there was nary a distributer at said Canadian festival willing to invest in Brad Furman's film; an overall shame, not a crying one but a shame none-the-less. The Take squeezes an amount of substance to do with male machismo; the tearing apart of a family unit; the sub-genre of the vigilante movie and the dealing of the aftermath of a heist plus all the crime drama conventions of mistrust between gangsters: honour amongst thieves, if you will, into 96 minutes. However, all too often these ideas jostle uncomfortably with one another – a persistent vying for power, a struggle between genres and sub-genres; content and study. This renders The Take less interesting than it might have been, but good enough to see in order to observe a moderately interesting, well acted independent American drama.

I think the film thinks it's more powerful and more affecting than it is in actualité. The tale is of a righteous man wronged, and the subsequent fall out it has on both his life and the lives of those around him. But for all the substance, for all the promise and for all the content; to have The Take boil down to a chase sequence on foot that, again, certainly thinks it has more of a sense of drama involved than it actually does, was just a mite disappointing and anti-climatic. Furman likes his visual tricks and gimmicks, with someone somewhere failing to realise that spectacle and visualness ought to have been secondary to this screenplay's agenda as gritty, Hispanic-American living conditions; seams in a family becoming unravelled; a man loosing his mind and sense of masculinity plus brutal shootings during a heist sequence were the order of the day. Furman tells the story with every trick in the book: the visual flair ingredient to the editing and camera work; the speeding up of footage; transitions and the hand-held camera technique on top of a number of scenes set in rooms that are close to all being entirely blacked out for sake of mood.

John Leguizamo plays the role of Felix De La Pena, a man of Hispanic descent living with his wife Marina (Perez) and their two kids in Los Angeles. De La Pena is a nice, upstanding man with a great deal of fondness for his family and the work he does. His large friend-base plus the fact his job sees him adopt a certain role of honour and trust in driving an armoured truck instills a sense of responsibility on top of the other positive conventions. But one day, things go spectacularly wrong when Tyrese Gibson's criminal Adell holds up the truck; has De La Pena drive it back to the HQ before robbing the place of its money and fatally wounding De La Pena. We've seen people shot following heists in films many-a time before, usually hard-bodied; no nonsense criminals in hard boiled neo-noirs, but they'd always get back up again after a brief lay off and plough on ahead, seeking money and revenge. The Take's sequence of wounding feels grainer than usual, De La Pena's pained reaction to his injuries are stark and cutting in ways that I've rarely felt a gunshot wound in a film before. The injury feels more painful than usual because of the film's delicate buildup of the victim: a well mannered; rather slim, though not necessarily 'weak', and supremely upstanding character in De La Pena. From here, a process of recovery for both the mind, body and soul begins as FBI agent Steve Perelli (Cannavale) hunts the wrong-doers.

It's here the film beds down for a long stretch of content similar to one another. De La Pena's sense of self vanishes and he gets a lot angrier a lot more often than usual, with Leguizamo really rather brilliantly portraying this new character: this fresher, more frothing at the mouth person. He installs security equipment in a fit of paranoia and undergoes a process of long recovery that sees him sense a once-present notion of 'manliness' now gone. Subsequently, he cannot make love to his wife; gets agitated as a result and seems to maintain this odd sense of being unable to really 'feel', as if to cry or get upset at the shooting is to fatally expel a sense of male machismo, with an ideology that might read something like: 'men don't cry - men get over this sort of thing'.

I wrote a while ago in an observation on a Finnish film from 2006 entitled Lights in the Dusk about the film's over-emphasising on the 'little-guy' in a big situation. In said film, a hapless turnkey is rendered fall guy so a gang of thieves can swipe some diamonds his job it is to contain. I cited 2001's sprawling and maddening heist flick 3000 Miles to Graceland, in which during a heist sequence at a casino, countless numbers of body guards and members of law enforcement are dispatched like the many nameless, faceless bad guys that pop up at you in certain video games, each one of them as fatally injured as the next. The Take, like said Finnish film, rejects the generic notion to follow those perpetrating the heist and instead opts for an unbeaten route down into the gloomy undergrowth of a victim of the shooting recovering. Needless to say, a lot of people that were shot in 3000 Miles to Graceland would've gone through what De La Pena goes through here – it's when these sorts of films dry up that we know we're in trouble. I notice that at the present time, The Take has a lower IMDb rating than 3000 Miles to Graceland: good grief!

If I'd known this was categorically a drama I'd probably not have watched it. But I have a weakness for heist movies of any kind, and I really like Leguizamo, so I gave it a shot. Mistake. Now, the acting was good enough, especially from Rosie Perez, but the editing and choppy/shaky cinematography was beyond annoying, the music way too overdramatic, the action/suspense nonexistent save for the opening scene, and when it came down to it the movie was a recovery drama. As that, it wasn't too bad. Then comes the ending. The, uh, "climax." What were they thinking? A drawn out, fruitless chase scene. I'm not a spoiler reviewer which is tough here but I think I've made my point. The only way you should watch this is knowing it's a drama, and have the FF button at the ready.

The Take I feel is very entertaining, more so when I heard how much money the film makers had to work with. I read some other reviews, and I was surprised to read that many thought ill of it. First off, I'll say it is exceptionally great film, with some pretty good actors for $800,000. It's not the type of film that has over the top stunts, CGI effects galore, which to me is refreshing. It tends to focus on the story, struggles with every day life, and cogs in the justice system. It has a gritty style, and I feel it's really worth seeing if you aren't looking for a "tear it up" action/suspense movie. "Good" acting...6 "Great" story....8

The Take isn't one of those films you'll remember forever, it's plot simplistic, and script not without some flaws, but you will definitely remember the performances by the entire cast.

I always defended Leguizamo as a serious actor, while some claim he's always typecast. I knew he was talented, and he immediately sets the tension in this film. He does a great job in every scene. Rosie Perez was also intense, nice to see her always. Lequizamo drives the film, he's clearly not just a supporting actor. He deserves to be A-listed.

Another honorable mention is the directing of the film. I loved the Urban cinematography! East LA was never covered better. The old fashioned town is shown well, and gritty atmosphere adds to the already dark tale.

Overall, a good old school revenge tale, a modern western perhaps! 7/10

A quality movie, very good character development, it shows how Leguizamo's character grapples with rehabilitation after his near fatal gunshot wound and how his wife Perez's character has to adjust in their relationship. Gibson's character is a strong character both physically and emotionally and these roles suit Gibson as opposed to a Baby Boy role. The police detectives are relentless in their pursuit of justice. Good movie, one negative aspect was the gross sexual scene between Perez and Leguizamo but I guess the director was trying to show how his injury adversely affected their intimacy. I recommend this movie to anyone and I look forward to future work from this director

I got bored several months ago and I saw that this movie was in the instant section, so I watched it. I had never heard of the movie, but I did like the cast. Wow. What an incredible movie. This is a rather slow paced, low budget indie movie directed by Brad Furman (who recently directed the Lincoln Lawyer, another excellent movie). The film tells the story of Felix De le Pena, an armored truck driver who gets shot in the head by a criminal named Adell Baldwin during a robbery. The film revolves around Felix's recovery and the investigation of the robbery. Bobby Carnavale plays a cop investigating the crime, while Rosie Perez plays the wife of Felix. The film ends with an intense and exciting climatic scene. I loved this movie. I thought it was very well made and well executed.

The Take (2007) is a film I recently watched on Tubi. The story follows an armored truck driver who is taken hostage during a heist, shot, and left for dead. After surviving, he struggles with mood swings, chronic pain, and relentless police interrogation. As his mental state deteriorates and his family life suffers, he decides he may need to solve the crime himself to regain control of his sanity.

Directed by Brad Furman (The Lincoln Lawyer), the film stars John Leguizamo (Moulin Rouge), Tyrese Gibson (Baby Boy), Rosie Perez (White Men Can't Jump), Bobby Cannavale (Boardwalk Empire), and Roger Guenveur Smith (Do the Right Thing).

The cast is impressive, and the acting exceeds expectations, especially from John Leguizamo and Rosie Perez, whose portrayal of a strained marriage felt authentic and emotional. The setup is solid, and Leguizamo's mental unraveling is well-executed. The family dynamics are a strong point and help ground the film. Tyrese's character, however, felt unnecessary, and the full-circle ending leaned a bit too far into the unbelievable. Still, the strong performances and engaging character arcs keep your attention.

In conclusion, The Take is a fairly average film but worth watching if you're in the mood for something a little different. I'd score it a 6/10.

Well, it was nothing what I expected- it was a lot worse.

There was no development of character and there were so many scenes that were irrelevant to the plot and totally cliché. Lenguizamo did a fair job but oh boy, he can't save the film. Rosie Perez is fun to watch.

The gritty, dark look of the film was overdone, hard to watch and it gave me a huge headache.

If you want to see a great gritty film, watch Memento.

Overall, I wouldn't recommend that one, unless you're a huge fan of Lenguizamo.

There is a time and a place for shaky, hand-held camera work. This irritating technique continues to be the most over-used in Hollywood. I nearly turned this film off after the first 4 minutes because I was experiencing motion sickness. And this was all while the protagonist was getting up and getting ready for work. Even when you are trying to show action as it might be seen from a live news camera I would still make a case for trying to show the action as it might be seen by the human eye -- steady and focused even when the viewer is moving. My perception is that shaky camera work is used in the same way that too much background music is used -- to compensate for mediocrity in the film itself.

I stayed with the film to the end because a lot of others felt it was a good film and John Leguizamo can be counted on for a fine performance. I thought the movie itself was only OK. Story line developed slowly and often tediously to a somewhat satisfying conclusion. I would have rated it a 5 to 6 with better camera work. I'm glad I saw the whole thing but I will never need to see it again.

Woah.

The Take is a drama starring John Leguizamo, Tyrese Gibson, Bobby Carnavale, and Rosie Perez. Leguizamo plays an armored truck driver named Felix who is shot in the head in a robbery by Tyrese Gibson. The film mainly involves the aftermath of the shooting and how everyone was affected by it as well as Felix wanting revenge.

This movie is excellent. Leguziamo gives an extraordinary and very powerful performance. Tyrese Gibson gives the best performance of his career as a very brutal and frightening villain. Rosie Perez and bobby Carnavale were also excellent.

There are plenty of reasons to hate this movie. It's low budget. It's slow paced. The camera is a bit shaky at times. But this didn't bother me. The storyline is very engaging and the conclusion is very intense and satisfying. Get past a few plot holes and you'll be satisfied.

No spoilers here. What could have been a good, gritty L.A. crime/revenge flick was spoiled by SLOW pacing and the ridiculously overused shaky camera technique and grainy and way-too-dark (to put it mildly!) final cut. I'm not an expert on film, so I don't know what you would call this extremely washed-out look, but it spoiled the movie. Many scenes were so dark as to be completely unwatchable. I am SO SICK of these "hip", modern film techniques. What is so awful about not shaking the camera and allowing viewers to actually see what's going on?

If any aspiring filmmakers are reading this, take it from me (a total movie junkie): STOP SHAKING THE CAMERA! STOP WASHING OUT THE COLORS! The story and acting are what matters to us. Please stop trying to bring attention to the direction. I've been a professional musician my entire adult life, and to me a film director should be like a good bass player: If the song sounds right and I don't notice anything wrong, then he's doing a great job!

Some of these negative reviews are interesting. Of course you're not wrong, everyone has a right to their own opinion, but come on. One reviewer is complaining about how it's not an action movie, another is complaining about plot holes. You wanna see plot holes? Watch Death Sentence, another revenge film which is rated higher than this despite not making any sense. This film is amazing. The performances are amazing. The story is intriguing and gritty. The ending is really intense. What's with all the hate? sure there are some problems occasionally, but all in all, it's a really, really good movie. I thought it was incredible.

The first time I saw this it blew me away. Since then it is probably one of my favourite movies of all time - why? The stylishness, the grittiness, the acting and the passion. You can tell that the people involved in the project really put their all into it and truly believed in telling a good story. The story itself is, on the surface, something we've heard of before - typical heist gone wrong yada yada. But what makes this so special is the clever character study and the evolution we see in John Leguizamo's character. This is one of his best roles - the acting is top notch. Rosie Perez is equally impressive in her role and the passion bleeds from the screen. You can tell Director Brad Furman wanted to stay true to the roots of the characters - he did go to Boyle Heights and filmed within the neighbourhoods wherein the story is set. On the commentary to the film he talks about the issues this raised due to guerilla style filming and some of the risks involved. The evolution of Leguizamo's character, a man just trying to make an honest living and provide for his family, who gets caught up in something outside of his control and has to fight through the ruins of the aftermath. It's truly wonderful to witness - the lawnmower scene and his anger is felt through the screen as he battles the scars he's been left with as a result of the events. Having seen Furman's other films, I still consider this his best for its unique nerve and sheer determination to make this project feel realistic and gritty. 9/10 - For the brutal and hardcore acting, cinematography and gritty realism - do not miss this!

I went to this film randomly in Santa Monica one day and I was incredibly surprised with the performance of John Leguizamo and Rosie Perez.

The director (Brad Furman) brought out subtleties in his character that were touching and personal and he gave the best performance that I can remember him giving.

The LA environment was captured in a very raw and gritty manner that makes the audience feel like they can smell the scents of the city.

When the film was over, I felt surprised because the time flew by so fast.

The cinematography was vibrant and the film had a forward moving energy that was truly captivating.

I recommend this film highly and I applaud the filmmakers!!

When I watch the Director/Producers Comments on a rental, it is because I think a film is worth it. This was worth it. I am a big Film buff, I have been around the Industry all my life. I rate this movie a 10 in every aspect. Totally filmed in Boil Heights (East L.A.), Filmed in what they call Gorilla Filming (not done in a studio, but on the Fly). Very realistic, it was as if you were looking out your widow watching your neighbor. It is so realistic in the reaction and emotion of the characters. I have never seen better acting by John Leguizamo and Rosie Perez. The rest of the cast is perfect for their roles. I don't praise movies like I praise this, one of the best I have seen in many years.

When you have $800,000 to make a film with an actor like Leguizamo and you're on location in a perilous neighborhood…and, when you have the passion and integrity that these filmmakers exhibit, it's difficult not to champion the spirit of independent film-making. As opposed to the grossly budgeted wastes that studios constantly call "films", here we have a filmmaker and a cast dedicated to story and to capturing something of the human condition. Hollywood pretends to have the answers and consequently puts out garbage because it makes money and justifies the jobs of bloated, overpaid executives who wouldn't know "art" if it bit them in the ass. Our culture goes to see these movies because their options are limited because of the far reach of the distribution system in place. That is why Soderbergh and others like him have experimented with non-conventional ways of distributing a film, so that money and time, our most valuable resources, are not squandered, but used wisely to reach more people with stories that are told using hearts, not egos.

I was at the premiere of "The Take" in Toronto last year and was very touched by the "Q&A" that followed the screening. To see this filmmaker stand in front of so many people and thank his parents, his cast and crew in a way that shared the adulation instead of hogging it for his own personal gain…this was encouraging. To learn of the trials and tribulations on this particular film was eye-opening and gave me a better understanding of what goes on "behind the scenes", particularly with little to no money. I'm learning that to get a film made outside the studio system is next to impossible. Many talk, few dare and even fewer actually do. Mr. Furman should be commended for his work, on screen, of course, but sometimes, where somebody might find a story lacking on the screen, if they look towards what happened off-screen, they may be heartened to know that art and artists are fighting hard everyday to bring their perspective of the world to as many people as possible. Nothing is perfect and a film that has all the answers (as most studio films try to convey) is not doing it's job to present the questions.

"The Take" is dark and bleak at times, but underlying its grit is a story of hope, reconciliation and the fight of the human spirit. It is really easy to judge and critique, but for those who have never made a film, perhaps try before you disparage the work of what I consider to be one of our great, future filmmakers and story tellers.

Oh, on a side, yet important note, the performance of John Leguizamo was one of the most real and heart-breaking of seen of his, and he's a fine actor.