David Mamet's Spartan

[MacGuffin]

I sensed a few scattered Mametian lines, though... "additional dialogue," perhaps?

They might have kept some lines, but overall the script went back to the novel, since Mamet's script drifted from it.
http://members.fortunecity.com/rs8/script/hannibal09061999.html

[Gold Trumpet]

i dont know much about david mamet. i have only seen The Untouchables, which i LOVED and Hannibal. of course he only wrote those films, whereas Spartan he wrote and directed.

Technically, they threw out Mamet's script for Hannibal and the version onscreen is Steven Zaillian's, but because of WGA rules, Mamet's name is still attached to it.

That's a relief for me. I'm a big David Mamet fan (much more so than I let on to be) and Hannibal has always been a bad film for me because of poor writing.

[RegularKarate]

Spartan was good, but it's certainly not one of the better Mamets.

Pulled me in quickly... had immediate Mamet going... there's no question it's him when it's really him.  It dropped off after a while.  Some of the actors weren't riding the dialogue very well... Kilmer did a better job than I expected-- a good actor can do good Mamet and make it seem fairly natural without over-Mameting, he actually pulled this off quite well.  I can't say the same for some of the (non-standard) others.

The story wasn't as rich as they usually are... didn't carry me where I wanted to go and kept teasing me, making me think that it would.  It was kind of like when you're at an amusement park and you see a kick-ass looking rollercoaster (yes, a rollercoaster analogy) and you run and get in line and you ride it, only you find out that you were actually in line for the roller-coaster behind it, the one over-shadowed by the one you wanted to ride.  It's still a fun coaster... just kind of disapointing none-the-less.

[modage]

Warner have sent over details on the suspense thriller Spartan which stars Val Kilmer and William H. Macy. The disc will be available to own from the 15th June this year, and should set you back somewhere in the region of $24.98. I'm afraid we have no word on extra material at this time, although we can tell you that the film will receive a 2.40:1 anamorphic widescreen transfer and English Dolby Digital 5.1 surround track. We will of course bring you the full specs shortly.

[El Duderino]

okay, so i went to see this movie last night at the discount theatres and i have to say i was overall unimpressed. the acting by kilmer was horrendous (nothing out of the ordinary) but it seemed at some points that he forgot his lines, but then remembered them and spat them out extra fast. and what was up with william h. macy? he was in it for like 10 mins talking about "thinking caps". the story was weak. definetely Mamet's worst.

[meatball]

I just rented this one. I was surprised at how amateurish the filmmaking was. The quality was just as good/bad as fledgling film students work I've been watching for the past two years. Even down to the shaky dolly and a really bad dolly out/zoom in effect. The dialogue was horrendous. Maybe Mamet's words need to be spoken in a certain rhythm like poetry or whatever crap is said to validate it's existence, but there seems to be nobody on the face of this earth that can do that without it sounding ridiculous and wooden -- not even William H. Macy. Val Kilmer's commentary was fun to listen to.

[MacGuffin]

I agree with RK. Right from the opening you are thrown into the story, and I especially loved the no exposition route where you aren't told everything, but learn it as it goes along. The Mamet-ian mystery seemed to drop after the big 'twist' and then settled into more of an conventional action movie. But, unlike "Heist" (which I liked), except for a couple instances, I never really felt I was ahead of the movie and knew where the twists were going to happen. It's certainly not up to par with Mamet's best and it had only fleeting moments of his memorable dialogue.

[modage]

okay, so i went to see this movie last night and i have to say i was overall unimpressed. the acting by kilmer was horrendous. and what was up with william h. macy? he was in it for like 10 mins talking about "thinking caps". the story was weak. definetely Mamet's worst.

yeah.  this was bad.  i usually like kilmer but he wasnt very good here.  macy was in for 5 minutes and although i was intrigued at the beginning, it never really took off.  and most of all, seemed completely unbelievable even in the 'movies reality'.  i never believed this could be happening.

[Ghostboy]

] there were a few instances when i though 'you can write better than that' but those instances were over in a second cos the next scene is coming up and things just keep moving.

Very well said. That's what I loved about it too.

[Recce]

Ah, I remember when I first saw a Mamet film. I wasn't aware of his style of writing dialogue. I was like 'What the fuck, did all the actors have seizures and loose their acting abilities?'

[godardian]

I bought a cheapo used copy of Spartan as part of a 3-for-$25 deal at Hollywood video. I don't like it as much as Heist, but I do always appreciate Mamet's efforts to purify (or "Mametize") different genres... to get so far back to basics, to trim so much fat (or what he would consider fat) that you're left with something shiny and hardened. I always get the impression that he feels his work is like extrapolating the diamond from the coal. We're left with something cold but beautiful and, in its way, perfect. I wouldn't call Spartan perfect, exactly, but it is literally exemplary. I'm not sure Mametization works so well for something like this as it did for Heist or House of Games or even State and Main.

[Recce]

Yeah, I really liked that they never even say its the presidents daughter. You assume, but there's always this lingering doubt. I love it. And they always say 'the girl' is cool to, as you've pointed out. A little sexist, I guess you could say, but nonetheless cool.

[godardian]

Yeah, I really liked that they never even say its the presidents daughter. You assume, but there's always this lingering doubt. I love it. And they always say 'the girl' is cool to, as you've pointed out. A little sexist, I guess you could say, but nonetheless cool.

j

sexist.... OR... peculiarly feminist, depending on how postmodern/discerning/attuned the viewer is. I wouldn't call it sexist, though. There is a pre-deconstructed quality to Mamet's films- an approach that also leads  to what you point out, the often clever withholding of information- that would easily gel with several prominent aesthetic theories held by postfeminist theorists.

I know David Mamet is an idol of Neil Labute's (both of whom are sometimes considered misogynistic, which I completely disagree with- I find Labute much more humanistic and a slyly moralistic than Mamet, but they are both, in fact, rather too sexlessly cerebral to be truly misogynistic), who used a name for none of the characters in Your Friends and Neighbors... until the credits rolled.