Did anyone go and see this? I went last week, it was only $3. Anyways, I actually enjoyed the film. Ray Liota and Jason Patrick are excellent and the film looks good. It occasionally falls into the trap of repeating police drama motifs but it is still pulled off well.
I do think the 4 shots at once editing along with the fast motion filming was overused.
Really want to see it. Been hearing some good good things.
Saw it. Liked it. Went to sleep.
I think "Narc" has cult classic potential. Much bleaker than the typical film you'd go see at the cineplex, Jason Patric is one of the most under-utilized actors out there, and it's good to see Liotta in something that doesn't suck.
I loved the scene where his wife is leaving him, and you see her in the mirror, looking at him, but the reflection that we see is looking away from him. That struck me as a really nice bit of filmmaking.
yeah, not a bad film.
I saw it...two nights ago and it really blew me away. It really also struck me how small the scope of the film was, and I don't mean that in a bad way, and myabe I'm wrong anyway.
ehhhh. thought it was alright. wasn't as impressed as youz guyz. the performances were great, the style..yeah overused, and it lacked story.
y'know, this is the exact same way i fealt about 25th hour, but the performances in that film made me enjoy it way more for some reason.
???
I thought it was a good flick, I enjoyed it, and I think it's best work Ray Liotta has done since Goodfellas. But I have a question.
WARNING, SPOILERS (although I doubt you'd be reading thsi if you haven't seen the movie)
At the end, as Ray Liotta is bleeding to death, they talkabout the little girl who he found in the closet all those years ago. Except, they explained she was a teenageror something. I didn't get it. What the hell was up with the little girl. Could anyone explain it for me?
The little girl grew up to become the wife of Ray Liotta's partner. Since Liotta was like a father figure to her, he took it badly when the partner became a junkie, and that's one of the supposed motives he would have had for killing the guy, if he had killed the guy.
Blind bought this today and really liked it. It had bits of story cliches (the cop wife, the crack arguing couple, etc.), but I thought Carnahan brought some fresh energy to it with his style, despite also seeing a heavy "French Connection" influence. I'm not a big fan of 'shaky/handheld cam', but the opening scene was pretty 'in-your-face' and was used well there. The editing was excellent (I liked the quad screen split) and the performances were great.
Also, on the DVD, in the interview with William Friedkin, he gives praise to PTA:
"A lot of people now talk about the great renaissance in American film in the 70's which I think was true with people like Coppola and Scorsese and Spielberg and Bogdanovich and many others. One of the differences between those directors then and the younger group today is that the people in the 70's had great success with their films; the audience was on the same wavelength with them. Today I think these young filmmakers are every bit as talented as those guys, but they are not really connecting with the mainstream audience. The people like Paul Thomas Anderson and Wes Anderson and Spike Jonze and now Joe Carnahan. As far as I'm concerned, their films are the equivalent, and have taken American cinema further than we did, but the audience has not caught up to them. The critics have. You know, there's great critical affection for all these films, and I think they're brilliant, especially Carnahan."
i saw this in theatres when it was released (January i think?), and liked it. i really really loved the opening and got very excited for the rest of it, but then it did sort of fit into some of the cop film conventions. felt like a 70s kind of cop movie serpico, french connection kind of a gritty morality struggle. i would've liked it better had i not really been expecting something great (as all the pre-release hype had suggested). but i would like to see it again to give it another chance. great performances i thought by liotta and patrick. it felt a little "film-school-y" at times when the camera was panning around the car for their long conversation, not that theres anything wrong with that. but overall i wished the whole movie had lived up to the promise of that great adrenaline shot opening.
Joe Carnahan Helming Void at Universal
Source: Variety Friday, October 17, 2003
Universal Pictures has hired Joe Carnahan to direct Void, a gritty crime drama written by Guillermo Arriaga (21 Grams).
The contemporary drama centers on a female Chicago homicide cop who arrives at a prison to provide transfer for a dangerous criminal she helped put behind bars. Events get in the way of a clean transfer.
Carahan will look to do the film after Mission: Impossible 3, which is gearing up for a 2004 start with Tom Cruise starring and producing.
I saw this in January. I don't think I enjoyed it quite as much as some of you did. It had some very good points and Ray Liotta was so good it was scary. Sometimes, it played out like a very long Law and Order episode. I enjoyed the movie and tried to forgive its faults. My friends hated this movie and I have never been able to pick a movie for everyone to watch since.
So I bought the dvd today used and just gave it a re-watch. I had seen it a while ago, in workprint form, and thought it was decent, but not great. Good thing I gave this one a second chance. I saw a completely different movie-- this time it knocked my socks off. Just balls to the wall style and acting (Liotta... Holy God, could this guy be any more intense?). In the version I had seen, they were temping the score from the end of Full Metal Jacket over most of the flashback stuff, and the wife's subplot was severely cut down once things got rolling.
I really loathed Carnahan's first movie (Blood, Guts, Bullets, and Tarantino/Mamet wannabe whatever it's called), how he pulled this one off is beyond me. I did like his BMW short though. That guy can direct action.
Quote from: Weak2ndActSo I bought the dvd today used and just gave it a re-watch. I had seen it a while ago, in workprint form, and thought it was decent, but not great. Good thing I gave this one a second chance. I saw a completely different movie-- this time it knocked my socks off. Just balls to the wall style and acting (Liotta... Holy God, could this guy be any more intense?). In the version I had seen, they were temping the score from the end of Full Metal Jacket over most of the flashback stuff, and the wife's subplot was severely cut down once things got rolling.
i had the same experience. first time, thought it was okay. but i bought it used for 10 bucks after macguffin liked it so much, and gave it another viewing and really liked it a lot more that time.
I just saw this and I liked it. The performances were very good.
*** MAJOR SPOILER*****
For some reason as soon as the movie began I already knew that Liotta was involved in that shit. I think his face just says it all.
I first saw Narc in New York early 2003.
I watched it again yesterday and realized how good a film it is. What carries it is not the action nor the twists'n turns. The performances. Patric and Liotta are both doing great things here.
Liotta's grizzly bear-like presence is great but also a give-away. It is too obvious this main ain¨t clean and got something to do with the case.
The scene when Patric and Liotta "are talking wives" is the core if the film. It is why it all matters.
A subtle police story/character study.
i love how william fredkin doesn't give a fuck about anybody in his introduction on the dvd. he tells it the way it is. i love the bit how he goes on to explain how the audiences were more intellegent in the 70s and how they were up to speed with the filmmakers of that time. to bill, the audiences now are dumber than shit so the good directors can't be given the credit they deserve. fuckin' right on!
i appreciate that brutal honesty, a very few actors or directors will do that in interviews. people are so affraid of pissing other famous people off, you know, in that "inside the actors studio" kind of way. also, we all know about the cock sucking commentaries with the classic lines like "oh he was so great in that scene" or "what lens did you use in that shot. it looks so beautiful." I would just once like to hear a director say "man, i fucked that up didn't i? i'll know better for next time." they fucking talk like they just made citizen cane or some shit. fucking tossers, all of em'. just saw sin city and the film is great, but come on... rodriguez, stop jerking off all over the credits, be a little humble you rat bastard.
the charlie rose interviews with tarantino and stone are good for brutal honesty. anyone know any others that come to mind that arn't insecure assholes? i'd love to check out some more charlie rose interviews with no-bullshit directors (or actors for that matter).
-sl-
Just resaw this once again. This is a fantastic film, so breathtaking and honest. If you haven't seen this yet, go out and rent it.
i saw this movie with my dad, after watching The Italian Job (remake) and i really enjoyed it. this was in feb of 2004 and i hadn't seen it since, but i remember really liking it. the ending was cool.