Just got back from OUATIM (what all the cool kids are calling it).
I've been looking forward to this for over 2 years and perhaps that is an unfair liability to the movie itself. Because you see, I was slightly disappointed. It's a good movie, but I know in my heart RR can do so much better. Bear in mind...the movie is very different from what you've seen in the previous two.
The look was pretty decent but not outstanding. Most of the interior scenes were well lit, but the HD was really lacking in the outdoor shots where they didn't have as much lighting control. I can't imagine how well those mexican sunsets would have looked on film. The CGI was also very distracting and really unnecessary. The cutting was also very fast. Too fast IMHO. A lot of the action looked as if they didn't have enough footage and was cutting too short. Bits were so short you couldn't even focus leaving you unable to recognize what just happened.
Story, very convaluted and disjoined. Too many characters to really set up any sympathy. I felt like I didn't even know the Mariachi. Blatent misuse of all that talent. I like it, just wish RR had gone the extra mile.
Once Upon A Time in The West is how the pure action film can be good, bad and ugly all in one movie. Since "ugly" and "bad" override "good" in total number, lets begin there.
The first half of the movie is quite simply a porno film, with action in place of sex. Ugly. Most scenes follow suit in this sense, it begins with new locale and quick talk between two. History and emotion are brought up in during the smallest of talk (even the music switches to melodramatic for these brief moments) where someone's entire sadness is conveyed in an ovely stylized cutting job that focuses way too much in the face of conveying "drama". Too much. Action film everyone. Then the scene jumps back to talk only to finish with a bad ending to the scene. An ending more or less just trying to convey cuteness in the story just for that. Example, Depp killing a cook because the meal was too good in sho he can "balance everything out". Depp originally saying he was going to do this was worth a smile. Depp doing it is almost ludicrous in bad filmmaking even for an action film. All this is common place in the porn, a film that has to show sex but feels itself to be important so comes off pretension in the most embarassing sense.
The bad is what comes between all these scenes in the first half and conveys the most thought out processes of the entire film: the action scenes. Little way of introduction to give them weight and they fly in and out of flurry like a bad B film (maybe intentional, actually, but still not effective). Some scenes are very fun to look at, example being Banderas and Hayek scaling a wall down in the only way they can. The rest are really quite mundane and predictable and made even worse cause nothing is built up and everything feels like a ploy for a way of filmmaking that Rodiruguez wants to convey without giving merit in having a decent story. Look at the opening credits, they interject words in place of other for the stlye of the film.
The good comes in the last hour when the film slows itself down to a narrative and starts to use its resources a little. The retired FBI agent does this likely because it unbelievable in even movie logic to see him swirling guns around, but the film starts to set up a situation for a good action purpose: a gun fight. We start to follow a story, see more people come in, see Banderas drop to the background finally and see enjoyable but cheap revelations come about and then some creative writing, particularily with Depp. He starts to use his comic abilities when going blind and his friendship with the kid and gun fights are fun to watch. Then as the big fight says, everyone comes into the picture and finally the film starts to have a little fun with an actual storyline of something behind it. Its not the best storyline, but given the first half, its enjoyable enough and attains some fun weirdness of action that is enjoyable Again, credit that mainly to Depp's storyline and his final stance.
~rougerum
"shot, chopped and scored by robert rodriguez?"
"a robert rodriguez flick?"
thats just trying too hard. no one will be able to top "a spike lee joint" and thats that
this movie is an abortion. i've never seen a more convulated and fucked up "plot". and it took itself SO seriously...
:::spoiler warning:::::i mean, johnny depp shot four people in the last 20 minutes with no eyes. no eyes. dafoe ran around w/ bandages over his entire face (except for, of course, his eyes and mouth, giving him a ridiculous mummy appearance) for the last half hour.
if the movie had a sense of humor about itself, this kind of shit could have been funny/amusing in an over the top/comic book way...a la desperado. unfortunately, rodriguez treats it like some kind of epic masterpiece with its political sub plots and pathetic patriotism.
hah well i'm glad i never pre-praised this, desperado wasn't that good anyway.
I'm glad I don't have the tools to review movies, because I enjoyed myself.
My review, before reading this thread, was --->
"The visuals and music were worth the price of admission, even tho the story and dialogue was thin."
It was definitely just an action flick and I enjoyed it as such.
the hd looked like shit most of the time (and by shit i mean video). the colo(ur)s were very nice though
Just think of what Brett Ratner could have done with it
Quote from: Cecil B. Dementedthe hd looked like shit most of the time (and by shit i mean video). the colo(ur)s were very nice though
I've been wondering if the prints have varied in quality around the country. I thought the one I saw looked fantastic -- the colors were gorgeous, like you said, and the only times I noticed any blatant giveaways were in fast moving exterior shots. But I've heard a lot of responses from people thinking it looked absolutely horrible, that the faces were too red, etc. Some people thought the trailer had a better transfer, but I thought the trailer looked completely like HD.
It was ok, not all that good, Depp was the only reason to see this one, just like Pirates, he makes the film, otherwise it would have been pretty much crap.
Most people probably already knew about the Johnny Depp eyes thing, since the pictures and clips of him with sunglasses dripping with blood are everywhere.
I'm not sure whether to see it now. Desperado was only okay, and a third film seems superfluous. Coupled with the mediocre reviews here, that makes for a deadly combination. But Salma Hayek is in it...
in two sentences: it's entertaining, and Depp is cool as always, but you can't sidestep the fact that in the end it's just a dumb movie. it's dumbo.
Quote from: RaviBut Salma Hayek is in it...
*swipe-to-read spoilers*
she's only there for, like, fifteen minutes. only in flashbacks.
FRIENDLY ADMIN WARNING: THIS IS THE SAME SPOILER THAT PIC JUST GAVE IN THE MESSAGE ABOVE. IF YOU DIDN'T HIGHLIGHT THERE, DON'T READ HERE.Quote from: RaviBut Salma Hayek is in it...
She kinda is......but not really. She only appears in flashbacks (which show up often during the first half)
~rougerum
thanks PIC
F U G T
J K
U R A Q T
K I T
W B
Johnny Depp is on a roll. Like "Pirates", he is the best thing about this film. As metroshane pointed out, the action scenes were cut too quick, and they become too routine by the end (except those with Depp). The story got too convoluted, with many twists and side stories with the cookie cutter characters, that you just didn't end up caring anymore.
As for the HD, I think Ghostboy is right and that some prints must be bad, because my print looked awesome; so sharp and clean, vibrant colors. I can imagine what it looks like on digital projection. There were some telling video looking moments (usually with quick pans and hand-held in the finale); the most noticable being when Depp goes into the kitchen to balance the chef.
Overall, "Mexico" was alright, but the ending will blow you away!
Quote from: MacGuffinOverall, "Mexico" was alright, but the ending will blow you away!
haha catchphrase of the week.
Quote from: Ghostboy
I've been wondering if the prints have varied in quality around the country. But I've heard a lot of responses from people thinking it looked absolutely horrible, that the faces were too red
They all looked like they had fake & bake tans.
My theater must have been one of the ones with the shitty prints cause that's what the one I saw looked like.
It works for this kinda movie though.
I completely agree with Mcguffs (and everyone else on the band wagon I guess) about Depp being the best thing about the movie. what is it about the guy that just brings a smile to your face whenever he's on screen?
I don't think I've ever been so excited about an actor's success.
SPOILERI think I was the only one in my theater who got the Brando impression.
I've been a Depp fan since 21 JS and to witness the path he chose is just completely fascinating to me.
I mean, even my Steven Seagal loving Dad has become a big fan wanting to watch all his other movies now that never appealed to him before. It's so funny, he called me the other night from the video store asking if he should rent The 9th Gate or Nick Of Time.
I said Nick Of Time cause hey, he's a Steven Seagal fan.
Gotta start a brotha off slow
it was all shot DV
Quote from: Bankyit was all shot DV
HD, to be precise.
yeah this movie was a mess. i liked it, but it could have been so much better. too choppy, too quickly done. in a way you have to admire him for making movies in his own way. but on the other hand, desperado is actually good. so, i cant forgive him for this. i felt the same way about this as i did watching spy kids 2. the previous one was good?! what the hell happened. its like the characters ceased to be themselves, the movies were rushed. they didnt feel like they should be anywhere but straight to dvd. REALLY GOOD straight to dvd! but, hold that up to a desperado and it just doesnt really live up to a satisfying theatrical experience. and johnny depp, weird as he was, seemed to be the center of the film. which, was weird that banderas was more of a side character. if its HIS trilogy, it shouldve been a little more time with him. and if anyone can explain to me what the hell the movie was about, i still dont have a clue. i felt like the best parts were the flashbacks. maybe he should have told that story.
everybody keeps praising depp for pirates, but i think he's getting too much praise for it.
i think he had his moments, but most of the time i felt it wasn't as spectacular, dazzling, and inspired as many people seem to think it was.
now.. to say.. watch a movie "for depp" is ridiculous. since when has everybody been brainwashed by this depp frenzy? is this the next fad, like pokemon?
:-D
yeah, but c'mon meatball. If you had to, I mean HAD to fuck a guy, would it not be him?
Quote from: meatballnow.. to say.. watch a movie "for depp" is ridiculous. since when has everybody been brainwashed by this depp frenzy? is this the next fad, like pokemon?
:-D
No, not just watch a movie for depp, we mean watch THIS movie for him.
Quote from: meatballeverybody keeps praising depp for pirates, but i think he's getting too much praise for it.
i think he had his moments, but most of the time i felt it wasn't as spectacular, dazzling, and inspired as many people seem to think it was.
now.. to say.. watch a movie "for depp" is ridiculous. since when has everybody been brainwashed by this depp frenzy? is this the next fad, like pokemon?
:-D
How about this new fad of not paying attention to proper capitalization... a little too
P, if you ask me. :?
P.S. Depp movies: gotta catch 'em all.
I dunno what rodriguez is trying to prove here by doing everything himself and shooting it on HD, it's not like the studio won't give him that money for an editor or a scorer, it's not like things are better now because he did everything himself, and it's not like HD really saves you that much--blowing up to 35mm ends up costing a bunch doesn't it?
the digital projection I saw was crap, you could see the pixels.
the action scenes were pretty cool but the story was kinda pointless, I can accept pointless action scenes and pointless fun, but pointless plot? rodriguez still has to much to prove it feels, people don't call him poorman's QT anymore, so why is he sweating?
man I wish he got himself a better DP and better composer.
Quote from: markums2kQuote from: meatballeverybody keeps praising depp for pirates, but i think he's getting too much praise for it.
i think he had his moments, but most of the time i felt it wasn't as spectacular, dazzling, and inspired as many people seem to think it was.
now.. to say.. watch a movie "for depp" is ridiculous. since when has everybody been brainwashed by this depp frenzy? is this the next fad, like pokemon?
:-D
How about this new fad of not paying attention to proper capitalization... a little too P, if you ask me. :?
P.S. Depp movies: gotta catch 'em all.
my favorite part is the p.s.
so cute! :P
Did anyone else think the clip of Salma and Antonio (chained together) running down the hallway looked right out of a home camcorder? Or perhaps extra footage from mariachi?
It was terrible.
Quote from: metroshaneDid anyone else think the clip of Salma and Antonio (chained together) running down the hallway looked right out of a home camcorder? Or perhaps extra footage from mariachi?
Neither were in El Mariachi
QuoteNeither were in El Mariachi
REally? :roll: I was referring to the production value...not the characters silly.
Just saw this tonight. Dialogue was very funny when it was intended "See you later" "Fuck you." Depp was the best part.. at this rate, he's worth the price of admission just like Christopher Walken. Action was fuckin' delicious. Story I didn't care for whatsoever. When Fideo said "They're fighting for YOU, Mr. President. Understand?" I was thinking, "Fuck, I guess." I don't know if it was some slight influence/reference but I thought of Gloucester from King Lear with the Depp stuff. Anyone else? Doubt RR had that one in mind but I was reminded of that. Good Flick.
Someone tell me to see this movie.
See this movie.
Quote from: Walrus, KooKookajoobSomeone tell me to see this movie.
See this movie, dammit.
yes, see it see it see it, if u wanna have some fun.
See this movie or I'll take your left nut.
see this movie or the terrorists win.
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmembers.fortunecity.com%2Fthemodernage%2Fonceuponatime1.jpg&hash=c2727d83c1662c5419244c99d01703c502bf7b77)
Title: Once Upon a Time in Mexico
Starring: Antonio Banderas
Released: 20th January 2004
SRP: $28.95
Further Details
Columbia Tristar Home Entertainment have today officially announced the up and coming region one release of Once Upon a Time in Mexico which stars the likes of Antonio Banderas, Salma Hayek, Johnny Depp and Mickey Rourke. The disc will be available to own from the 20th January next year and should set you back somewhere in the region of $28.95. The full disc specs for this one are attached below along with an exclusive first look at the artwork and another look at the menu system:
-1.78:1 Anamorphic Widescreen Transfer
-English Dolby Digital 5.1 Track
-French Dolby Surround Track
-Audio Commentary with Director Robert Rodriguez
-Ten-Minute Cooking School Feature
-Ten-Minute Flick School Feature
-Various Deleted Scenes
-The Anti-Heroes Journey Feature
-The Good the Bad and the Bloody (Effects) Featurette
-Film is Dead: An Evening with Robert Rodriguez Feature
-Inside Troublemaker Studios Feature
-DVD-ROM Features (Shooting Gallery)
-English, French Subtitles
ohhhhh disappointing. I was really looking forward to this. I thought El Mariachi, Desperado & From Dusk Til Dawn were so much fun. This film's plot is way too complicated than it should be. I want to see Antonio Banderas (Tony Flags) and Salma Hayek look cool as they kill a bunch of people in crazy ways. Depp was a gem, as usual. This movie kind of reminded me of Hannibal, great above the line people...but horrible movie.