The Big Bang

If you're a fan of the detective genre, this movie is worth a watch.

The use of lighting and color throughout the film was a huge boon as it really drew you further into the mystery and storyline. The script was clever, maybe trying to be a bit too clever in linking metaphors and accurate(?) science.

The acting was above par-excellent from the entire cast and it is only when the scenes rely a bit too much on the script where things seem to struggle. (Whoever wrote the insults however get's a solid A-)

Is the movie cliché? Yes. However, I never found myself trying to fill in the next line or scene because I was never really bored watching the story unfold.

The soundtrack felt well suited and the overall polish on production was good.

I was pleasantly surprised with this one. Hope you are too!

Some very good acting (especially from Sam Elliot), an unusual script filled with sometimes strangely funny references to cosmological and particle physics, and a jazzy style of direction lead to an inexpensive, yet engaging "private detective" story. Antonio Banderas' Latin, fish-out-of-water accent (the detective) initially seems odd for such an iconic American role, but in short order, it just blends-in with the many other off-center characters and events that populate the film.

It's flaws are irrelevant and understandable considering its limited budget and shooting schedule; it's a refreshing hour and a half of entertaining stuff that smartly never takes itself too seriously.

A private detective (Antonio Banderas) is hired to find a missing stripper. A simple job turns complicated when everyone he questions ends up dead.

I can imagine Antonio Banderas looking at this script and weighing in his mind if he wants it or not. Then he gets to the sex scene, and he says, "I'm in." (And I have been told he helped in casting Autumn Reeser, so this makes it even more likely.) The script is interesting, sometimes a bit bizarre, but for Banderas that is the clincher, for sure. Other than that, despite being the main character, he is actually the least interesting part of the movie.

The press release compares the film to "Sin City" and "Big Lebowski". I can see "Lebowski" somewhat, but agree completely with the "Sin City" comparison. That was actually the first thing I thought of after a few minutes of analyzing the style. The film uses odd angles (sometimes to a dangerous extreme) and saturated colors. I thought in many scenes the backgrounds were even more beautiful than the foregrounds or the people in them.

What to say about the physics angle? I have seen many complaints online from people who say the plot was not about physics and that the same story could be told with a different topic. I raised this to director Tony Krantz and he made a clear argument that physics is not just central to the plot, but the very plot itself. If you did not get this, I recommend giving the film a second view.

The Snoop Dogg claim was deeply philosophical, but I feel it was not properly explored. Is sex with men just one after another with no real difference? And whether yes or no, how does this fit into the film's overall message? I do not know, but for whatever reason -- perhaps my background in philosophy and women's studies -- this line jumped out at me.

The supporting cast is also impressive. I mean, Sam Elliott and James VanDerBeek? Incredible. Autumn Reeser truly a joy. Elliott was actually a bit weaker than usual (I think he works best when his role is minimized) but I can never say no to him or his mustache.

I do have to call out Banderas' accent. As one reviewer wrote, "Antonio Banderas's mumbling was mostly unintelligible." I would not be so harsh, but the fact remains that I missed many of his lines because he could no deliver them. I can understand Puss in Boots from "Shrek", so I know he is capable of speaking clearly... this is my only real complaint.

Pick this one up. Great film, very good twists and turns, with a blend of intrigue and sex that will grab your attention. The DVD and Blu-Ray has a few features on it, and if you are the type who loves audio commentaries (I do), director Krantz will provide you with more than a fair share of background...

I'm a casual movie buff, not a genera expert or closet critic. I can't speak to the films undertones or subtext. All I can tell you is what I thought.

The Big Bang showed up on Netflix streaming a few days ago and since it had Banderas in it I tossed it in my queue. I had no idea what it was about, no idea when it was released or how well it did in the box office. I just figured that it couldn't be worse than "Ecks vs. Sever".

Ten minutes in I was hooked. I know some people won't like the extreme visual style, hard juxtaposition and modern take on Nior style, but I found it interesting. As for the plot it kept me guessing (wrong) to the very end.

As far as the acting goes I thought it was good. Banderas I (almost) always like. Sienna Guillory I'd never heard of and Sam Elliot in a role I would have NEVER imagined him in. The movie is full of good supporting actors too. Thomas Kretschmann, Bill Duke, William Fichtner and move. Everyone does a good job.

The stand out for me was the quirky character of Fay Neman played by Autumn Reeser. She and Banderas share the chattiest love scene ever and redefine physics geeks.

I enjoyed this movie and I'll watch it again. It's strange but compelling and worth the hour and a half.

I watched this movie for two reasons, first, I like the TV Series "The Big Bang Theory", and second, I enjoy watching most Antonio Banderas movies. Aside from this I had no clue what to expect.

The movie starts out well enough and for about the first 40 minutes or so weaves a mildly interesting plot. After a certain point the movie takes a few confusing turns where the viewer is wondering how the new direction is going to align with the plot that was woven earlier. The climax, where the plot is revealed, is surprisingly good. Though, the ending, where the two separate paths the movie had taken are brought together is, in my opinion, quite lame.

The acting is good enough. Antonio Banderas and William Fichtner are good actors and they do a decent job. The rest of the cast doesn't fail either. In the end, it is the script which is a let down. Maybe it seemed great on paper and lost its charm when brought alive on the screen.

One more thing. The script somehow brings nuclear physics into play. Why or to what end is the question the viewer is likely to ask after the movie ends. When an element as strong as science, mathematics or religion has to be brought in, I believe, making it central to the plot would pay off better dividends. For example, "Pi" by Darren Aronofsky or "Back to the Future" movies.

Overall, it is an average thriller with bits of science thrown in. It is not exactly a waste of time, if you happen to catch it on TV. Otherwise, I wouldn't go out of my way to buy or rent a DVD. You aren't missing anything.