TIFF thus far with galas: dreamer, history violence, revolv

Started by socketlevel, September 12, 2005, 02:15:05 AM

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

socketlevel

ok i wanted to see a couple before i posted this so here we go, i'll try not to talk any spoilers but if it happens on a marginal level i apologize.

as it happens i got my hands on a bunch of priority gala tickets this year for the toronto international film festival.  two years now i've been fortunate to check out the "big" films of the festival.  so far i've seen three films:  Dreamer; a history of violence; and Revolver.

Dreamer: inspired by a true story, is your typical little engine that could movie with kurt russell and a horse.  all the standard things you expect to see in this kind of film are there.  i don't want to spend any time talking about this film because it's a bore to think of that task.  while i don't recommend anyone seeing it, it's not because the movie isn't well executed, but rather, it's nothing remotely new to the genre and therefore a waste of my time to go into it.

david cronnenberg introduced a history of violence by stating that contrary to the reviews calling it a masterpiece, it was actually only a good film.  he recommended the audience only see it as such.  even though his delivery was modestly tongue and cheek, he is correct in his warning.  though i did thoroughly enjoy the film, i was expecting something to happen throughout the second half...  i don't know what exactly... something to put the film in context or give some commentary on the subject matter...  this never happens.  it's a good story that had the potential to be great.  without giving anything away, there is an incident that happens on the protagonist's front lawn of his house that should have sent the story in a different direction.  

the way the film ends, even though is a great sequence, isn't original enough to live up to the tension that had been building throughout the film.    even though this film was based on a graphic novel, i would have made the story more about the family in the second half and the issues that could have played out would have been very interesting.  there is evidence it will go this way in the first half, but alas it doesn't and i can't help but be let down.  my girlfriend really liked the movie and i'm sure a bunch of you will as well, so i highly recommend it... just not as much as i thought i would.

revolver...  what the fuck can i say about revolver...  i just got back from the film and i'm still digesting it...  there weren't any credits at the end of the film so that might indicate that the film is not in its completed stage so it might be altered when it is released.  first off you should know that i fucking hate guy Ritchie, every single movie the guy has made.  i loathed lock stock when i saw it in the theaters, hated snatch even though i liked some of the actors, and laughed my ass off at swept away.

that said, i started really liking the first 45 mins of the film.  and i was surprised how much i was into it.  then it went bad, not really bad, but bad in that guy Ritchie kind of way.  everyone knows how much credit he has to give tarantino.  if it weren't for reservoir dogs and pulp fiction this guy would be nothing.  well guess what guys, Ritchie has put a japanese animated bit into revolver.  that's right, it's blatant now.  he loved kill bill so much that he included an animated sequence in his new film.  how he looks himself in the mirror in the morning and calls himself an artist amazes me.  it's not like tarantino doesn't owe a lot from other film makers.  it's just that ritchie would like you to think he was the first one doing it.  you know those assholes that talk like it's the first time something has been thought of, with everything they say.  ritchie is like that asshole who started making films.

from that point in the film the plot and story really spiral off into nothingness.  Ritchie has managed to mimic tarantino, and fincher (fight club), and bits of o'russells huckabees and a couple others while not having any heart or soul in the project.  so after the next 45 or so mins i was hating the film.

then a funny thing happened, i really started liking the film again.  for the remainder of the film i was once again having a great time.  until the ending...  when the screen went black and i was walking out of the theater with a friend of mine, and i looked over to Ritchie and madonna, i thought.  naw, i hate this fucking guy and his bullshit films.  he tricked me into thinking there was depth to this film.  there isn't.  it is very well made, and the acting is great, but it is essentially a film about nothing that puts on a front that it's deep.

to let you know how pretentious this guy is, before the screening he starts off by saying how intelligent the toronto audience is.  and how they have to pay close attention because his film is like a game of chess, and you have to keep up with it.  self-righteous patronizing prick.  "i'm a genius and you have to try to understand me.  it's hard kids, but you can do it.  i have faith in you." (he didn't actually say this)

btw the chess refference you'll understand once you see the film.  funny side story is that i saw an interview with ritchie and his cinematographer a while back and they were talking and playing chess while the interviewer was off to the side (while never looking up from the board because they were intellectual or something...).  they were talking about snatch like it was citizen kane or something.  it was pathetic and hilarious.

anyway, judge revolver for yourselves but it gets a thumbs down from me.  there are some great sequences and great acting but it doesn't amount to anything.

-sl-

on a side note, the person that was going with me to the 6:30 screening of north country tomorrow (the 12th) backed out and it's kind of last minute for me to find someone.  so if anyone wants a free ticket to the film just message me by 3 o'clock tomorrow it's yours.  i'm going to bed, peace...
the one last hit that spent you...