Cool News
Matinees With Moriarty! Wrestles Naked With Cronenberg’s EASTERN PROMISES And Boards The 3:10 TO YUMA!
Hey, everyone. “Moriarty” here.
Pulp is like crack for some filmmakers.
The lure of the lurid is undeniable. And I’m always fascinated by what happens when people dabble in pulp, when “serious” filmmakers embrace that desire and try their hand at some “low art” for a change. There are some filmmakers who walk the line between art and pulp, and some who erase it altogether. Right now, there are a few films playing here in LA that represent varying degrees of success in playing with pulp.
Right now, it’s still in limited release. Meaning Arclight crowds. But I’m hoping they have enough faith in this as an audience movie to roll it out wide in the weeks ahead. This is a nakedly entertaining movie, pun fully intended. I’ve been a David Cronenberg fan for as long as I’ve been in love with movies, and one of the things that fascinates me about his work is the way he mixes chilly intellect with an almost primal fear of the physical. Even when he was just getting started in his career, he seemed determine to take what was thought of as a trashy genre and class it up. I’ve always thought of him as a world-class filmmaker, but it seems that it has only been in recent years that he has finally shrugged off whatever labels keep horror filmmakers in an artistic ghetto, and finally the mainstream seems to have made room for Cronenberg. Or maybe it’s that he’s starting to have fun playing to a broader audience, tweaking them with more gentle subversions.
Either way, he’s found a second wind that is truly impressive. A HISTORY OF VIOLENCE was a critical and commercial success for him, but more importantly, it brought him together with Viggo Mortensen. If these two decide to make working together a regular thing, I will be a very happy viewer indeed. Especially if they keep finding new ways to twist expectations. It’s impressive the way his last few films have been written by other people, yet they still manage to feel like natural parts of Cronenberg’s filmography. He once said “Civilization is repression,” and that’s an underlying idea in both A HISTORY OF VIOLENCE and EASTERN PROMISES, that notion that repression is part of our human identity.
Using Viggo as his proxy, Cronenberg has been able to examine the same idea from different angles, and part of what makes the films so interesting taken back-to-back is the way the new one almost seems like a response to the one before. In both films, Viggo plays a person who wears several faces, but to very different ends. Both films deal with criminal underworlds, entire subcultures that hide in plain view. In both films, characters lie to themselves and to everyone around them in order to survive. It’s sort of amazing that AHOV was written by Josh Olson and this film was written by Steven Knight, that they aren’t both from the same author originally. I think that’s a real tribute to Cronenberg as a reader of material... to be able to tease these things out of these totally disparate pieces of work... that’s what I think he’s always done well. With THE FLY or with THE DEAD ZONE or with NAKED LUNCH, he’s found a way to take a piece of source material and somehow bend it to his will.
A young girl staggers into a London pharmacy, speaking only Russian. She bleeds freely from between her legs and collapses. She’s rushed to a nearby hospital where she gives birth, and one of the people who attends to her is a midwife named Anna (Naomi Watts). The girl dies in childbirth, but the child is saved, and Anna takes it upon herself to see if she can track down any family for the little girl. She finds a diary in the girl’s belongings, a diary all in Russian. Getting it translated turns out to be the first step in Anna’s gradual immersion into the notorious vory v zakone gangland underworld, as she learns just how the parentage of that baby girl relates to the power struggles of one particular criminal family.
Basically, her dealings bring her into the orbit of three men. There’s Kirill, played by Vincent Cassel at his animal best. He’s a big dumb ape in this, a perfect foil for Nikolai (Viggo Mortensen), a quiet but laser-sharp driver who seems determined to work his way up the ladder of the organization. Sitting at the top of this particular shitheap is Semyon (Armi Mueller-Stahl), who stops just short of actual scenery-chewing as a not-terribly-mysterious patriarchal figurehead. He’s not bad, but it’s not really his film. I was far more interested in what happened between Nikolai and Kirill, or between Nikolai and Anna.
If there’s one thing I am surprised by about this film, it’s the chaste nature of the relationship between the two of them. After the frank sexual material in A HISTORY OF VIOLENCE, which was impressive not only because of the adult nature in which Cronenberg shot the scenes but also because of how well they were used to communicate important character information, I think I expected more of the same in this film. Especially when you’ve got Viggo Mortensen and Naomi Watts, two fairly frank actors who have certainly not been shy in the past. It seems a natural reason to explain why Anna doesn’t just run for the cover of police protection right away in this film, and without a connection like this, it’s hard to believe how brazen she is about poking her nose into obviously criminal business. I think Watts is given a fairly thankless role here, and the script ultimately cheats her by marginalizing her as the film rolls on.
The good news about that is that as her part gets smaller, there’s more time spent with Nikolai, and Mortensen is fascinating in the second half. As you learn more about who he is and what he really wants, there’s this larger story that you suddenly realize is playing out. You look at Viggo’s body, covered in these tattoos that tell a story, and you realize that this character’s been living that story out up until now, and this is just one chess move of many, and when the film ends, Viggo’s story is really just turning a corner. Nothing’s over. Nothing’s resolved. There’s no ending here. This movie’s about the brief moment where his story intersects with Anna’s story. Why that happens. How that happens. And when that’s over, when that random connection is totally played out, the film is over. I like that feeling at the end of the film, that sensation that something larger is playing out at the edges of this movie.
Cronenberg’s become a master at shooting close-quarters combat with these last two movies, trying out some really visceral techniques for making these scenes memorable. The fight that takes place in the steam baths in this film is a classic, something that instantly gets added to a list of great violent cinematic set pieces. Much has been written about Viggo Mortensen’s nudity in the scene, to the extent that David Cronenberg actually discussed AICN in the FILM COMMENT interview, talking about the test screening review that ran here and how the reviewer was “obsessed” with Viggo’s balls in his review.
Sure enough, when Nikolai is surprised in the steam room, he’s wearing just a towel, and as soon as he starts to fight for his life, that towel goes missing. This is a primal fight that goes on longer than you think it possibly can, and there’s real impact to the violence. The audience I saw it with recoiled, but they also sat up and leaned in closer in case there was more. It’s exhilarating, but it also leaves you jittery, freaked out. The very first scene in the film features an act of such extreme violence that I wouldn’t be surprised if there were some walk-outs before the credits are even done, but I think that’s Cronenberg testing you. Because you know how far he’ll go, and because you know that he’s willing to really fuck a character up, there’s a sequence near the end involving a baby and a set of steps leading to water that carries more genuine suspense and fear than the entire running time of SHOOT ‘EM UP. And I liked SHOOT ‘EM UP... it’s just that you knew while watching it that nothing was ever going to happen to that baby. It was safe. Here, you’re pretty sure Cronenberg would be more than happy to kill the baby right in front of you, and that makes the entire film feel more dangerous.
It’s not a perfect film. I think it’s a little obvious in places, a little heavy-handed, a wee bit purple prosed, but overall, I think it’s one of the most compulsively watchable films that Cronenberg’s made. This is one I’ll definitely want to see again, and even when I respect Cronenberg’s work, I’m not always itching to experience it a second time, so that’s saying something.
When I went to see 3:10 TO YUMA, I did so on complete impulse. My wife and my son were taking an afternoon nap, and I checked the times at both the Winnetka All Stadium 21 and the Northridge Fashion Center All Stadium 10. They’re each about five minutes from my house. If that. Walking distance. The Fashion Center had a better start time, and I decided to check out Mangold’s western, figuring I could be back about the time everyone started to get out of bed. I was one of about seven people in the theater at 2:20 in the afternoon, and based on the lobby, I’m sure none of the other films playing were any more full. I’ve avoided reading much of anything about the film, but it seems like what little I have read has been generally enthusiastic. As a big fan of the genre, I walked in with fingers crossed.
And, for the most part, I’m pretty happy with what I got. I can definitely see the fingerprints of screenwriters Michael Brandt and Derek Haas on this one, and in its own way, this is just as popcorn slick as 2 FAST 2 FURIOUS. Mangold isn’t out to deconstruct or reinvent the western with this remake... he’s just enjoying the visceral pleasures of making one. This is a guy’s western, an action movie with a great set-up and ticking clock. It’s designed to entertain first. There are two great movie star parts here... but both of them end up being a little underwritten. They both go through some pretty seismic personal shifts in the film, but the shifts happen because they have to, not because they feel fairly motivated. It’s an entertaining film, but sometimes at the cost of logic. How much it bothers you will play a big part in how the film’s last 20 minutes work for you. I thought it all got a little silly, overearnest and unbelievable. But it’s well put-together, well-played. If you roll with it, I’m sure the film works like gangbusters. I didn’t mind the silliness, but it certainly kept me from completely enjoying myself.
I think the reason I wanted a little more from the film is because Crowe and Bale have real chemistry, and there’s an interesting macho dynamic between them, this game of one-upsmanship with Bale’s son (played by Logan Lerman, who bears a strikingly creepy resemblance to a young Christian Slater) in the middle, his sense of right and wrong at stake. At its best, 3:10 TO YUMA is sort of rough and sort of gritty and sort of fun and sort of serious. There are a few big stunt moments that are almost too big, almost too Hollywood, and a few touches like an exploding horse (laugh out loud funny, IMO) seem to skirt gratuitous excess. But then again... that’s what is fun about doing pulp material. You get to indulge that sort of excess. And if you do it right, it becomes a virtue. I think 3:10 TO YUMA makes the mistake of trying to be too important at the end, but just a little bit. It’s never obnoxious... it just tries a little too hard, and there are certainly worse sins a film can commit. Marco Beltrami’s score helps nail the tone down in several crucial places, and Phedon Papamichael’s photography is bright, clean, properly burnished. Mangold manages to effectively illustrate why he loves westerns, and it’s infectious. If westerns all worked at least as hard as 3:10 TO YUMA, the genre would probably be much more healthy than it is.
Speaking of which, I’ll have my review of JESSE JAMES up a little later today. I’m also going to write up Larry Fessenden’s new film, THE LAST WINTER, as well as Craig Zobel’s debut feature, GREAT WORLD OF SOUND. I’ve got interviews with two directors that you’ll see here this weekend, and then at least another six or seven reviews on deck for next week. Busy, busy, busy...
Drew McWeeny, Los Angeles
Drew McWeeny, Los Angeles
-
+ Expand All
-
to fuck your mother
-
I agree. I kinda wanted more in the end. Oh well..
-
and since I liked History of Violence, I'll have to check this one out at some point. I think Aragorn is good in these type of movies.
-
Crowe AND Bale. Fuckin reason to see it right there!
-
in the meantime, Cronenberg rules. One of the most under-appreciated filmmakers of the last thirty years.
-
agreed about Cronenberg. The man furkin rules.The Fly especially is my fave.
-
Yup, pretty amazing movie, endlessly rewatchable. Also Videodrome is a corker and The Dead Zone is very underrated. "The ice...is gonna break!!"
-
Hallelujah
-
is my equal fave King adaption with Shawshank.
-
Nightbreed..he knocked that shit right outta the park!! God I miss Craig Sheffer
-
Videodrome, The Fly, Crash with Arquette's boobies and Spader all cool as ice (Koteas and Hunter were the shit too), Scanners - gotta love the Cronen'man. Looking forward to the Fessenden review.
-
Mori is making a bit of an understatement calling the last twenty minutes "silly", as soon as they arrive in the town where the train to Yuma is the whole thing just starts getting purposterous and such a rapid rate you won't believe your eyes. The rest of the movie was fine, but hot damn, I don't know who thought up that final third.
-
I was expecting this terribly scary mind fuck and was kind of let down. Not saying it was bad or anything. The Brood, on the other had, is one of Cronenberg's older films that still gives me the willies. I rewatch it all the time.
-
I remember thinking Cronenberg was a badass on screen as well as off. He popped up in Jason X all too briefly (best thing about it of course apart from the holographic teen-girl campers) and he has a brilliant guest role on the Canadian series The Newsroom (first season) where he takes the piss out of himself (chat's up a girl by telling her how they did the exploding heads in Scanners - really funny, well worth checking out). I still rewatch the end of Videodrome, love Debbie Harry's soothing voice and James Woods putting the gun to his temple - it's encoded in my childhood brain. Long live the new flesh.
-
no... okay. Eastern Promises trailer looks wrong on so many egos and the backdrop. Granted the History of Violence actor can act but I don't see the proper casting. As for Jesse James, limited release. (blast it all.) my associates and I are waiting for the 3:10 to Yuma to hit dvd release.
-
I somehow missed that one.
-
total miss
-
..Ow.....Ooof.......ouch
right up there with 3-d eye-on-a-stick and Savini head-sliding-down-a-machete for best moments in the series. -
Not an easy watch, I'll give you that, but far from a total miss.
-
He's always been way ahead of his time. His concepts and movies have been too far out there for FX technology to propperly do em justice Like trying to put LoveCraft and the creatures of the ID on film or sort of like the ambition of George Lucas space obsession although thank fuck he's managed to refrain from 'touching up' his old films with CG!Kids watching stuff like VideoDrome today are too clued up on Photorealistic CG so they probably won't be able to get past the rubbery effects. I love all that practical in camera effects because im of that era when the Thing and Alien looked real to me and I much prefer when an actor is emoting to a real situation rather than a blue screen. Imagine how horrifying though Cronenbergs back catologue would be if done today by say ILM or Weta! that would be some fucked up, probably unwatchably horrific shit! Come to think of it does he or has he ever used CG!?Anyway I've no point to make I guess other than I'm old and like stuff like this because when I were a skid that wasnt a melon getting blasted wid a shotgun! It was a Guy gettin his noggin mashed by a Scanner!!!
-
Spider has a great central performance by Ralph Fiennes, he totally lives the life of a man who is schizophrenic, his actions and emotions on screen are the most captivating part of the film (IMHO) - it's in the way Cronenberg presents it to us (all very intimate) - his camera lovingly records all the detail - the way Spider secretly scribbles notes only he can understand in his journal/notebook, his nicotine tarred fingers - right down to the layer after layer of clothes he wears when he shuffles about aimlessley (or does it just appear to be aimless? Yee'll have to watch to find out). For me if Spider had been a twenty minute character study it'd have been awesome (and here's where I'll piss off many Cronen-fans, who I know love this film) but I felt that the dramatic story surrounding this mans condition wasn't as compelling as just watching him, observing him (as if you were sitting back and looking in through someones window seeing how they live their lives out). I know Cannes loved it in 2002(?) critics loved it and fans did too but it didn't do too much for me. Cronen-fans, of course should check it out even if only because you can probably rent it cheap nowadays. How can I have forgotten Existenz??? Got my copy on DVD, kind of reaffirmed faith I'd lost in Jennifer Jason Leigh (she's a supple lass t'be sure) - there's some great stuff in there, William Dafoe is great in his little bit part. Some "straight for laughs" Cronenmoments too (eating that shit in the chinese restaurant for example). Yeah ButtfuckZydeco I remember the eye all too well lol - I use to own a VHS copy of 3 (great disco-themed Friday intro music) gotta love the way the old man jiggles the eye all meaty in front of the camera lens (look at this y'er fuckers!) - but haven't seen the machette slide in a while - both great Friday moments. And just to round out a very long post I'm an oldie too Filmfunk, I'll never forget being a little kid sitting on a swing after having seen Scanners (a film my brother let me watch when I wasn't supposed to see it) and being frightened to fuck of I didn't know what - all I knew was I'd just seen something that took me to a place I'd never been before and nothing, not anything was ever going to erase the fucked-up memory of that experience from my mind for the rest of my life - ahhhh (says with pleasure) now that's what I call a beautiful childhood memory.
-
...and I've seen them all. Okay, maybe Fast Company was little more than a curiosity in the man's career, and I wasn't quite as blown away by History Of Violence as many were (despite some superb performances), but even so I don't think there's another director working who manages to ride the fine line between being both an interesting and unique directorial voice, and making endlessly watchable and original takes on both familiar and unconventional themes. As long as Cronenberg makes films I'll be watching them. Now if they'd finally release M. Butterfly on dvd my Cronenberg dvd collection would be complete...
-
way too long to read that.
-
There's nothing all that interesting about it and you won't remember anything but the stray Russell Crowe one-liner a few minutes after having seen it, but it's O.K... except for the gaping plot holes and 180 degree character turns. On second thought, fuck this movie.
-
...I got kicked out of a local film school for being a Cronenberg fan, because the tutor hates his work and I dared argue the opposite by citing Cronenberg when we were all asked about directors we admired. True story. It was a shit school anyway, run by an ex-pat Canadian fuck whose ego far eclipsed his talent or anything he had to teach anyone.
-
It could have been a great film with a slightly better script. Crowe and Bale are excellent, but the plot holes and character motivitations (or lack thereof) are pretty glaring. But it was fun to watch for the most part, so it is good, but far from graet.
-
... So far. After another viewing, the quiet Crowe character comes off as someone who doesn't enjoy being around his men at all. The character turn could be seen coming miles away in this light.
-
Charlie Prince was what impressed me most about 3:10 to Yuma, though like Mori, I wasn't as blown away as some people have been. Good film, not great.
-
My Cronenberg education is sadly lacking (liked The Fly when I was younger), but I tried buying A History of Violence on a whim and really liked it. Viggo rocks, and I really like the sound of Eastern Promises.
-
and if you've got diarrhea, all the better. Thanks for the review, Mori - gonna go see this ASAP.
-
I wish I could jump on the Eastern Promises bandwagon/circle jerk, but if you take away the opening scene and the fight scene, you're basically left with a bunch of mob cliches and an unnecessary twist that raises more questions than it answers.
-
feed off each others creativity so much that they have to do multiple films together. I think Dicaprio, who before Scorsese had one decent role as a kid, has really improved as an actor thanks to his work with the seminal director. I really enjoyed A History of Violence so I'll catch this when I can.
-
how mean! they come to save him and they die for their trouble
-
I'm just sayin'.
-
Good review, Moriarty. I agree with most of what you say, though I think I liked the movie even more than you did, mostly because I didn't find Mueller-Stahl to be too hammy. In fact, I found him to be quietly menacing. I also enjoyed 3:10, though for the life of me I couldn't figure out why they didn't tie the Crowe character's hands BEHIND his back.
-
I've seen it a few times now and I consistently struggle with just how funny Cronenberg intended it to be. Which is why I've seen it multiple times. I keep going back hoping that Maria Bello vomiting, Mortensen running home on his bum leg, the son incurring the wrath of the dude at school by catching his pop up and proceeding to WB-teen-talk him to frustration, the end dinner scene and pretty much the entire movie not dealing directly with Viggo being a closet badass is done with tongue firmly in cheek. Because if that movie was attempting to be a serious, provocative drama it failed miserably. It works much better as a satire of arch, self-important how-violence-can-blah-blah-blah-the-family-unit movies than anything else. I have no doubt that's how it was written, but if Cronenberg did it with a straight face I'd seriously question his current state of mind.
-
Are you people EVER happy with a movie??
-
Man, you really do love movies.
-
I don't think AHOV was pitched on any straight level.
-
That was a damn good movie. It comes out on video on Tuesday, if you haven't seen it you should rent it.But you've got to admit that 3:10 went horribly wrong for the entire last third. I liked the stuff until they got to Convection or whatever the name of the town was where the train to Yuma was, but come on? There's no way you consider that a story that made sense. I'm not even one the talkbackers here who constantly bitch about every movie, plus I'm a sucker for a Western. But 3:10 was just overwhelmingly stupid.Maybe you're a guy that really likes the small genre of Absurdist Westerns, in which case I feel El Topo was much better than 3:10.
-
It was friggin spoof. It wasn't trying to generate real fear or suspence. It was there to be cool and funny and bad ass and it succeeded.
Of course we know nothing will happn to the baby. That's like saying I did feel genuine suspence watching Superbad.
Now the lack of genuine fear and suspence in 28 Weeks Later, knowing which characers wouldn't die, that bugged me. -
Cronenberg specifically mentions that most of his movies have elements of satire and comedy in them, and laments he's not given much credit for it.
-
I really liked that film. Some really great performances by all involved, believable characters, great writing and dialogue and some cool action and shoot-em-ups! I was surprised by how sad and touching the ending of the film was, too. Russell Crowe and Christian Bale were both great, and had a really good "bro-mance" going on in the film. I definitely recommend it, especially if you like the western genre. I'm seeing Eastern Promises this weekend; I can't wait! I loves me some Cronenberg! (and Viggo and Naomi aren't bad, either!) Oh, and Shoot-Em-Up was a kick-ass ride, too! One big live-action Bugs Bunny cartoon with lots of action and violence and humor and sex. Good stuff! Go see it, Doc!
-
Thanks for the write up, Dr. Boll. I still don't know how I managed to skip that one this long.
-
That it's popular to spear-head westerns as gay? I don't get it, people seem to find subtext in this genre that simply isn't there. Case in point: a critic (I think he was in the Village Voice, don't hold me to it) remarked on how homo-erotic the relationship between Crowe and Bale was by noting the scene where Bale cut's his meat for him. That's reaching since Crowe was just mocking him. Then of course the writer remarks on Ben Foster's feminine nature and obvious man-crush on Crowe in the film. Both observations are true but I fail to see any hurtful context in one tried and true fact: on sub-conscious level most straight men are spooked by this sort of thing. It's how we are and it adds to Foster's menace. The whole subtext debate just pisses me off because it's nothing more than the musings of pudgy little men who seem to have a problem with a genre that portrays unapologetic (and often hamfisted) machismo. P.S. For those of you that think I'm being homophobic keep in mind one of my roommates is gay and is a very interesting and courteous person who I talk to at great lengths. But if he said or even hinted that he wanted to fuck me, it would freak me out.
-
Catching the 3:10 to Yuma or Mori actually posting any of the shit he said he was going to post today?
-
1. eXistenZ (1999), 2. Videodrome (1983), 3. The Dead Zone (1983), 4. The Fly (1986), 5. Scanners (1981), 6. Dead Ringers (1988), 7. The Brood (1979), 8. Rabid (1977), 9. Shivers (1975), 10. A History of Violence (2005). Didn’t like Naked Lunch so much, but it was an interesting failure. Haven’t seen Spider (2002), Crash (1996/I), M. Butterfly (1993), or Fast Company (1979).
-
... damn straight it wasn't DEADWOOD... but what is?
-
Sep 20, 2007 5:48:21 PM CDT
A primal fight that goes on longer than you think it...
by iowa snot client
possibly can? Like in "They Live?" Cool.
-
Spider was... OK. Like Dr. Boll said. It's like watching your acting teacher leading an exercise. "OK, class, this is me being schizophrenic." Crash was... OK. And Casey Jones from TMNT 1 was in it.
-
Thanks to Cronenberg, he's really become one of the premiere actors of his generation. Great idea to cast him in THE ROAD. Let's hope the Weinstein Bros. don't fuck with it and let John Hilcoat make a quality pic. It could be overwhelming.
-
The trailer took my interest level for that movie from 0 to a garillion. That movie has the potential to be super fucking amazing, I hope it pulled through.
-
and even then, who knows, with family around, I have to watch them late at night. But always appreciate the reviews, Mori - keep the matinee stuff coming. I like hearing about the California movie-going experience.
-
I will watch anything he is in.
-
plain and simple
-
In "3:10 to Eastern Yuma! Promise!"
-
Had to get that out of the way. My problem with the movie is that Bale's character was too weak, and Crowe's much too powerful. The result was that there was no tension during the end. Crowe was always in control and pretty much pulling all the strings. It was ridiculous because (spoilers)Crowe deliberately enters the crossfire from his own men just out of pity for Bale's attempt at heroism, and this lasted for the entire last twenty minutes.
-
I was blown away by AHOV. My man-love for Viggo now knows no bounds. The guy is rapidly becoming my favourite actor. And I cant think of a sinlge thing I dont like the sound of about Yuma. Cant wait to get my teeth into that, as I have a long standing man-love relationship was Russell already. :)
-
History of Violence RULED. Plain and simple. Eastern Promises ruled. Plain and simple. Cronenberg rules. Plain and simple. I do not review blindly. I use penis as gauge for whether movie good or bad. I was erect during entire steam room fight scene. This was strange for me, but what the hell. Viggo Mortensen is atttractive fellow, no? Especially with lots of blood? Yes. I have no issues. You are all nice people. Thank you for your time.
-
I think it was totally over-hyped, had an unecessarily gratuitous sex scene and a lot of loose ends that were never resolved. I was thoroughly dissapointed with that movie and I also think that sex scene was "thrown" in there (the first time the 69 position was fully filmed in a mainstream movie) just like this "fight" we keep hearing about just to bring some controversy to the film.
-
I highly disagree that Cronenberg "threw" that sex scene in their. He's not so glib, and deserves far more credit than that. The sex scenes in Violence are deliberate and the most important scenes in that movie, very telling of the change in the relationship between those characters and necessarily gratuitous. I'd also argue he's not stirring up controversy, he's just controversial, due mainly to the predominantly puritanical culture that still dominates American society. He is brave and frank in how he films sex and violence, but it's nothing flippant or frivolous.
-
I totally mostly agree. I liked it a lot but of course I was confused when I left the theater. But I worked it out eventually. I really loved that scene in the basement between Viggo and Vincent. I think Vincent needs to use that as an awards clip. And I've always had a thing for Armin Mueller Stahl. He's so cool. And yeah somewhere in the middle of that fight scene you just immediately know that it's a classic.
3:10 Yuma I liked better than you did. I didn't think that it got silly. I thought everything that happened at the end was necessary. The cast was perfect and I thought that Russell Crowe wasn't really "acting" at all. I got the feeling that that was his true personality. -
The steam bath fight scene was not just "thrown in there". It served a purpose of furthering the plot and unveiling Viggo's real agenda. It enabled Viggo to "move up the ladder" and then had another effect: Krill trying to protect his papa by getting rid of the evidence against his papa. I think I prefer History of Violence, but I'm not sure.
Readers Talkback
User Login
Top Talkbacks
- Whitney Houston 1963 - 2012 -- 383 total posts 380 posts
- New JUDGE DREDD post production footage pops up -- 111 total posts 111 posts
- WTF HOLLYWOOD: SOLARBABIES -- 75 total posts 73 posts
- HANNA's Saoirse Ronan to boss around seven little people -- 71 total posts 68 posts
- Does ‘SNL’ Rhyme With ‘Deschanel’?? Learn Which SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE Vet Hosts After Sexy Zooey!! -- 77 total posts 55 posts
- If the Behind the Scenes Pics of the Day drops her pen, pick it up, but don’t look at her legs or else it will be on your record. -- 54 total posts 48 posts
- There's a STAR TREK video game that is going to lead into JJ's STAR TREK 2 apparently... -- 165 total posts 41 posts
- Herc’s Seen Tonight’s Return Of THE WALKING DEAD!! Discuss Also DOWNTON ABBEY, FEAR FACTOR, PAN AM, ONCE, SIMPSONS, DYNAMITE, LUCK, SHAMELESS, BAIT CAR, THE GRAMMYS And More!! Sunday Is Sweeps Day 11!! -- 41 total posts 41 posts
- To Commemorate The 3D Release Of STAR WARS EPISODE I: THE PHANTOM MENACE, George Lucas Wants You To Know...Greedo Shoots First!! -- 500 total posts 35 posts
- Avid Comic Reader Hercules Does Battle With Tedium During Kevin Smith’s COMIC BOOK MEN! -- 28 total posts 28 posts