Cool News
Massawyrm Is Unimpressed By SLEUTH!!
Hola all. Massawyrm here.
One look at Sleuth and one might find his interest quite piqued. Michael Caine. Jude Law. In a play adapted for the screen by Kenneth Branagh. What could possibly go wrong? Well, a lot actually. Sadly Sleuth proves to be a fun exercise that starts off great but slowly fades into disappointment. And there's really not much to say about it.
From the get go it is clear that they are making no attempt to disguise the fact that this is adapted from the stage. It has the banter and rhythm of the stage and the blocking and performances scream a night at the theatre. But at first it is a delightful night at the theatre. Caine, who starred in the original opposite Sir Laurence Olivier, now plays the Olivier role, with Jude Law once again stepping into Caine's shoes. And the dynamic is very different than the original right from the get go. Caine is no Olivier and Law is no Caine. Not to say these two aren't incredible actors – they are just very different actors than those they are replacing. Young Michael Caine didn't have the pretty boy fragility that Law demonstrates – he was a MAN. Capital M, Capital A Capital N. MAN. There was a time that his sweat alone could cure sterility. And Olivier had this almost otherworldly sense of distinction, as if no matter how much money you had, no matter your station in life, he was so much higher in the pecking order than you could ever be. Caine just doesn't emanate that. The result is a film that is walking through many of the same footsteps but with a different bounce to it.
The first act is incredible. It is Jude Law and Michael Caine alone in front of the camera doing what they do best – acting the living hell out of this script. It's a tense, taut 30 or so minutes that hits every beat just right. The dialog is telling, razor sharp and seems to be setting up to something really incredible. Then there is a clear delineation between the first and second acts – which is where a certain segment of the audience begins to wane. There is an illusion that you either buy hook, line and sinker, or you don't. And from everyone I talked to afterwards, the enjoyment of the second act hinged entirely on how much you bought into that illusion. Personally, I was snowed. I bought into it and really had a ball with the second act. And then there was another line of demarcation. And thus came Act Three.
And nobody seemed to like Act 3. The film, having built up to a climax of two characters butting heads actually openly discusses the promise of the third act – but there is nothing that even remotely comes close to acts One or Two. And once the final scenes play out and the final line has been uttered the audience is left to cock their head, furrow their brow and mutter "That's it? Really?" The conclusion never comes close to achieving a lick of potential that the film has, nor does the ending do justice to the original. It ends abruptly, rather unsatisfyingly, and despite its rather brisk 85 minute running time, the film drags all the way through its final portion. There isn't any one thing that goes wrong at this point. It just all seems to unravel right in front of you.
Ultimately it's a disappointment, but not a huge disappointment. If you're a diehard fan of either Caine or Law it's worth seeing for their performances. Neither is sleepwalking here, and they both are in top form. In fact Law is really given more of a chance to stretch his chops than he's been given in years. But unless you're a performance-hound, this film really has little to offer. And if the closest you ever come to a stage is the main stage at your local strip club, this film is going to torment you from minute one. This really is a play put on film. Sadly, it's just not a very good one.
Until next time friends, smoke ‘em if ya got ‘em.
Massawyrm
Got something for the Wyrm? Mail it here.
-
+ Expand All
-
So there.
-
I'll give it a rent.
-
The man obviously has talent, but it seems to take a lot to bring it out. Minghella and Nichols managed to achieve something. I think he'll probably get better with age.
-
A pity, really, as this had a lot of potential.
-
A pity, really, as this had a lot of potential.
-
He's rich and is getting laid right now as we speak.
What's to feel bad about? -
All things being equal, some of the lukewarm reviews aside, I still want to see this film. I LOVED the original, and missed a restaging a few years back at my local theatre in the U.K (to my eternal annoyance).
So the hell with it - gotta be worth a shot. -
won't this show up on DVD by January....? Didn't exactly open wide.
-
Nov 01, 2007 10:09:00 AM CDT
"no attempt to disguise the fact that this is adapted from the s
by polyh3dron
Did you feel the same way about Hard Candy since it all took place inside a house too even though it was made for film?
-
Having never seen the play I was thoroughly entertained by this movie.
-
While the third act has its problem (and the ending can be seen as a tad unsatisfying), this remake is a real beauty. Flawless production design (why isn't the interior of the house mentioned?), impeccable acting, brilliant dialog, and the courage to take really unexpected turns. Blaming the adaptation of a stage play for looking like an adaptation of a stage play seems odd. In addition - the framing, composition, and editing are as cinematic as it gets. But the thing that impressed me most about this new version is the fact that it never tries to compete with the original - it looks for (and finds) new angles, a new approach to the same basic setup. It's not better than the Olivier/Cane version, but also not worse - it's entirely different. Both movies can be watched back to back. I also love the fact that Pinter is not above putting in the odd in-joke or two ("So, what's it all about?").
-
This movie was a mess. I saw it at a Museum of the Moving image screening in NYC a few weeks back. Caine and Branagh spoke afterwards. It was far too stagey. I can see what they were trying to accomplish, but it just didn't translate to the screen. It felt more like actor masturbation than anything else. I'm sure it felt good for them but no one should really be expected to watch. As for the set, it was a bit on the ludicrous side, a stark version of Willy Wonka's factory designed by Caine's character's wife. There was way to much overacting for a fight over a post-modern Oompa Loompa. Avoid this one if you can.
-
Was when I staged my own death to get rid of those loan sharks.
-
...he got the writer wrong. Harold Pinter wrote the screenplay, not Branagh. And it is for that reason alone that I will see the movie; Pinter's great. Even if it's a misstep, it's worth seeing if it's Pinter, in my opinion.
-
I completely agree with Massa. I thought this one had some serious potential but it was very predictable and disappointing and downright strange at times, especially the homoerotic overtones of the last 20 minutes
the upside of seeing this one was bumping into joe pantoliano outside the theater, begging people to go see his movie Canvas -
SPOILERS
Now Tindle turns in Inspector Black (no Doppler), and the make-up is all prostetics, no CGI at all - maybe something to change Law´s voice, only. Kind off distracting, ´cause I thought it was pretty obvious is was Milo disguised. A real nice change would be if the Inspector were real, with a actor looking like Jude Law - that would be a nice twist.
But I though the remake is OK, it updates the original, I think that´s best than just copying it. Punter´s text is great (amazing lines), I thought the third act was very effective (and totally different form the original), the actors were great (Caine, obviously, and Law is fine too), but the main problem is Branagh´s direction (totally over-the-top), the horrible production design (the lights reminded me of Schumacher´s Batman).
As a fan from the original, I was able to enjoy this remake, but is leagues from the original. -
movies such as Hitchcock's Rope and the (also starring Jude Law) Closer, then I would not enjoy it at all. Plays are cramped and talky by necessity. Why would you reduce a movie to such restrictions? Not interested.
-
Someone does! and they'd be bonkers! What next? Judey Girl Face Law in the Ipcress files or Jude the woman in Zulu? I think not!
-
Its a great switch on the 1972 version. Getting the chance to see Caine play the other side and the camera work from the first act was great.
Readers Talkback
User Login
Top Talkbacks
- Whitney Houston 1963 - 2012 -- 273 total posts 271 posts
- New JUDGE DREDD post production footage pops up -- 92 total posts 92 posts
- AVENGERS enemy revealed as pink boardgame pieces... You might suffer some form of elation... SPOILERS!!! -- 160 total posts 69 posts
- There's a STAR TREK video game that is going to lead into JJ's STAR TREK 2 apparently... -- 151 total posts 63 posts
- Does ‘SNL’ Rhyme With ‘Deschanel’?? Learn Which SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE Vet Hosts After Sexy Zooey!! -- 67 total posts 59 posts
- HANNA's Saoirse Ronan to boss around seven little people -- 60 total posts 57 posts
- To Commemorate The 3D Release Of STAR WARS EPISODE I: THE PHANTOM MENACE, George Lucas Wants You To Know...Greedo Shoots First!! -- 484 total posts 49 posts
- Here's The Red Band Trailer For Drafthouse Films' THE FP! -- 69 total posts 42 posts
- Friday Brings SWEEPS DAY NINE!! Gab Here About Tonight’s FRINGE!! Plus Einstein on TIM, Wiig On PORTLANDIA, MAHER, CLONE, GIFTED, GRIMM, SPARTACUS, SUPERNATURAL, GOLD RUSH And More!! -- 120 total posts 32 posts
- SPACE 2099!! -- 183 total posts 24 posts