Trailers:
Hi-Res (http://media.warnerbros.com/wbmovies/spartan/trailer_hi/trailer_a.mov)
Med-Res (http://media.warnerbros.com/wbmovies/spartan/trailer_med/trailer_a.mov)
Lo-Res (http://media.warnerbros.com/wbmovies/spartan/trailer_lo/trailer_a.mov)
Release Date: March 12th, 2004 (wide)
Cast: Val Kilmer (Scott), Derek Luke (Anton), William H. Macy (Stoddard), Kristen Bell, Alexandra Kerry, Johnny Messner (Agent Grace), Tia Texada.
Director: David Mamet (The Spanish Prisoner, State and Main, Heist, House of Games, The Winslow Boy)
Screenwriter: David Mamet (The Untouchables, Glengarry Glen Ross, The Spanish Prisoner, State and Main, Heist)
Premise: A "lone wolf" U.S. government secret agent, Scott (Kilmer), is assigned the task of rescuing the kidnapped daughter (Bell) of the president, only to discover along the way a larger, more sinister plot with origins within the White House itself... (Macy plays the right-hand man of Burch, the head of the Secret Service team investigating the disappearance of the daughter).
well, at least his no-talent fucking hack wife isn't in this one... maybe it will be okay...
Quote from: MacGuffinphilePremise: A "lone wolf" U.S. government secret agent, Scott (Kilmer), is assigned the task of rescuing the kidnapped daughter (Bell) of the president, only to discover along the way a larger, more sinister plot with origins within the White House itself... (Macy plays the right-hand man of Burch, the head of the Secret Service team investigating the disappearance of the daughter).
Sounds like a rip-off of the clearly-superior "24."
Quote from: SoNowThenwell, at least his no-talent fucking hack wife isn't in this one...
:shock: did she rape u or sumthin? :shock:
without watching the trailer/tool-of-the-devil, i just know this will continue to prove KILMER SUCKS THE BIG ONE.
I just find her to be the worst actress I think I've ever had the displeasure of seeing/hearing. She basically ruined Spanish Prisoner and State And Main for me (though, that's not completely true, because I thought the camerawork was so very limp, as well).
Quote from: SoNowThenwell, at least his no-talent fucking hack wife isn't in this one... maybe it will be okay...
who 's his "ball 'n chain"....???
Quote from: NEON MERCURYwho 's his "ball 'n chain"....???
Rebecca Pidgeon:
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.sonypictures.com%2Fclassics%2Fspanishprisoner%2Fstillsclipspics%2Frp1.jpg&hash=beb1c3f96c58cb8ddf9e289bf8ce39a67b55b75d)
ugh
I'd rather look at the upper left banner...
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ricmusic.de%2Fwrpidg1.jpg&hash=cd17c50c9b02a7e668132fd5267cc48bb45d4a1a)
aghh!!!! turning to stone...
mac, please stop!
Pidgeon, little-known as she is, is one of the most divisive forces in cinema today. :)
I like 'er. She seems to me an authentically Mametian actor, which is of course another divisive thing... but her performances, odd as they are, are nothing different from Lindsay Crouse's in House of Games or any other actor who does "right" by Mamet. She's unfairly singled out because she's married to him- that's the only possible explanation for the bloodlust surrounding her. Just like Sofia Coppola was so unfairly singled out for being the daughter of the director.
SoNowThen, I place a curse on you: You are doomed to be haunted, like Scrooge, by the world's truly ugliest women for the rest of your life as punishment for overreacting negatively to women who will never be in the Sports Illustrated swimsuit issue but are completely fine and even above average-looking. This ain't the first time...
Her extreme ugliness could be overlooked if she had a shred of talent.
Her supporters always say this: she's the quinessential Mamet actor. What the fuck does that mean? Does nobody notice that she's the only actor in any of his movies to always sound fake and retarded, as if she's reading off cue cards? She BUTCHERS his words. Golden words. Beautiful, perfect words. I place a curse on her. May she develop tongue cancer, and so have to get it lopped off...
this trailer isnt looking too hot.
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fw1.422.telia.com%2F%7Eu42243560%2F17.jpg&hash=b057e4e78c890f549c87e9f31371b32a332a2ae8)
edit: fixed link. mog.
Quote from: SoNowThenHer extreme ugliness .
Oh, pssshtt... when you display such a histrionic lack of perspective, nobody's going to trust your capacities for judgment... I submit that it's you and you alone finding her "extremely ugly."
Besides, who gives a shit? She's not playing beauty queens. I don't think she's a great actor, but I think her performances in his films are the ultimate, purest manifestation of Mamet's creative ideas. That's fairly overrated, too, though. I like Mamet, think he's interesting, but he's over-revered.
Mamet's words are hardly golden and beautiful... if you read his writing, you realize how very utilitarian he intends his words and his actors to be, very flat and artificial in a way that strikes people used to more dramatic readings as flat or strange or contrived. It doesn't strike me as a coincidence that he's calling a film
Spartan. I'm surprised he doesn't follow Bresson in refusing to refer to them as "actors," but rather as "models."
Just because his words alone aren't poetic, doesn't make his dialogue any less beautiful. I think it's harder to write so-called "regular joe" dialogue and make it great. Glengarry Glen Ross is the peak of dialogue. And every actor in that film does it complete justice. To me, it's golden and beautiful.
Also, I find that Mamet is the exact opposite of Bresson. Mamet could never work with non-actors. He's all about the theatrical performance.
Quote from: SoNowThenJust because his words alone aren't poetic, doesn't make his dialogue any less beautiful. I think it's harder to write so-called "regular joe" dialogue and make it great. Glengarry Glen Ross is the peak of dialogue. And every actor in that film does it complete justice. To me, it's golden and beautiful.
Also, I find that Mamet is the exact opposite of Bresson. Mamet could never work with non-actors. He's all about the theatrical performance.
Yes, but he's clearly trying to get the same thing out of actors - not a "performance" at all, but more of a reading, forcing the artificial tendencies in an actor out (the only way to get verisimilitude, "realistic" behavior out of an actor is to allow them to "peform") which contradictorily produces that very heightened artificiality in the characterizations we see on-screen (not exactly a Bressonian result, but a Bressonian method). It must have been easier for Bresson than for Mamet, as it's more difficult to get actors to not "act" than non-actors.
Mamet didn't direct
Glengarry- the more severe Mametian tendencies have been removed, particularly in the performances. You have to look at his own work to see how he really means it to be. I bet
Glengarry wouldn't be as highly regarded had it been directed by Mamet, but it would be more as he meant the piece to be.
Meaning it would have been boring.
James Foley is (to me anyway) like Curtis Hanson. A hack who managed to dig deep and create one masterpiece. He took Glengarry to Valhalla.
Quote from: SoNowThenMeaning it would have been boring.
James Foley is (to me anyway) like Curtis Hanson. A hack who managed to dig deep and create one masterpiece. He took Glengarry to Valhalla.
Well, that's a valid criticism of Mamet's style. Whatever it is, it's singular. And you even managed to avoid pointing out Mamet's ugliness! :)
I fell in love with Pidgeon in State and Main, I fucking love that movie. SoNowThen, you so crazy. She was adorable in State and Main, and so was PSH.
Quote from: Gambloren das ManhörenSoNowThen, you so crazy.
:)
I think what we really need is Alec Baldwin performing a one-man show of a Mamet play. Now there's your classic Mamet actor!
anyone else think its kinda funny that mamet wrote glengarry glenn ross, hoffa, house of games and.......the edge...?
I caught the first 15 minutes of The Edge, and was surprised how much I enjoyed it...
Oh, also, Mamet did a rewrite on Ronin, which is why it's so fucking great!!
Quote from: SoNowThenI caught the first 15 minutes of The Edge, and was surprised how much I enjoyed it..
Watch the rest of it. It gets better.
He also wrote "The Untouchables".
Yeah, I'm really excited to revisit this when it gets rereleased on dvd this year. Untouchables was my favorite movie for a good 5 years when I was younger. There's another great match: brilliant Mamet writing (minus shit directing) + amazing DePalma directing (minus any amount of his usual script thinness).
Okay, Mac, if you can vouch for it, I'll borrow Edge from my friend and finally finish it all....
I find that The Untouchables sits low in the de Palma filmography for me... I think any "period" thing would. His style doesn't work for me with that.
Looking over the cast of Spartan again, it'll be really interesting to see how Val Kilmer comes off. I don't like him, usually. There's no guarantee he'll be any more bearable in a Mamet film. I still like House of Games best, though I haven't yet seen Oleanna (I see the DVD every time I'm in Tower and think about it), and I still haven't seen Hoffa, which of course has the famous PTA film-school-prank story behind it, but I'm not huge on Danny DeVito as a director, so it's not a high priority.
Quote from: godardianI still haven't seen Hoffa, which of course has the famous PTA film-school-prank story behind it, but I'm not huge on Danny DeVito as a director, so it's not a high priority.
Actually, this was just announced:
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.thedigitalbits.com%2Farticles%2Fmiscgfx%2Fcovers3%2Fhoffadvd.jpg&hash=95e051f6cbc952244fc43e436340ffc20d987bd9)
The Hoffa DVD from Fox is a special edition streeting on 1/27 (SRP $19.98 ). Extras will include commentary by director Danny DeVito, deleted Scenes (with intro by Devito), several featurettes (including Historical News Coverage of Hoffa, Personal Anecdotes from Members of the Teamster's Union, Special Shots, DeVito's 11 1/4 and Discussion After First Script Read-Thru), hundreds of storyboard images, the original script, location and production stills, costume drawings, film reviews, Siskel & Ebert's review, poster artwork, a Hoffa reading list, and the theatrical trailer.
Any other opinions on that movie? I'd like to check it out...
Definitely a rental... I remember it being kind of medium-received. It's nice, though, to have no real way of knowing how good a movie is before seeing it, with the opinions being so mixed on it.
"you had to put on your thinking cap!"
I dunno. Sometimes Mamet's dialogue is brilliant, and sometimes... it's just stupid.
Heist has some real zingers.
There's only one actor in State and Main that rubs me the wrong way:
Clark Greg. What a cocksmoker.
I liked Hoffa just because I didn't know anything about him or the teamsters, and so I found it educational, and Nicholson was good in it.
Godardian, you've gotta see Oleanna! It's my favorite Mamet movie (that he directed). I need to see it again, since it's been a few years, but I remember being surprised at how worked up it made me.
I think Oleanna might be my least favorite of the Mamet directed Mamets.
It was a Halmark production and REAAAALLLY obvious that it was originally a play (something that just always upsets me). It doesn't work what it's trying to work.
I think I would have enjoyed it as a play, but I really disliked it as a film.
Quote from: Regolas
It was a Halmark production
Wow... that seems so odd. "Yes, we'll greenlight
Sarah, Plain and Tall, and oh yes, that David Mamet!"
What's your favorite Mamet-directed-Mamet, RK...eg?
I didn't mean that Literally... (though I really do have a picture in my head of "Hallmark being written somewhere on that box)
My favorite Mamet Directed Mamet is probably House of Games.
My favorite Mamet Directed Rattigan is The Winslow Boy
Quote from: RegolasI didn't mean that Literally... (though I really do have a picture in my head of "Hallmark being written somewhere on that box)
My favorite Mamet Directed Mamet is probably House of Games.
My favorite Mamet Directed Rattigan is The Winslow Boy
See how gullible I am? "Yes, godardian, Hallmark Channel produced Mamet. Coming up next: Neil Labute adapts the Marquis de Sade, starring Elizabeth Gilbert!"
Sheesh. I think I know what you meant now, though. You found it static and stage-y and overly muted...?
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.moviecitynews.com%2Farrays%2Fimages%2F2004%2FSPARTAN_OneSheet.jpg&hash=5190e9b00dcc3608a267df0561518bc23d94ce10)
She's missing.
What the fuck is that?
Political conpiracy thriller Spartan
David Mamet is one of the most legendary writers not only in Hollywood, but in the theater community as well. Though he’s written blockbusters like The Untouchables and Hannibal, Mamet’s usual work is the smaller film that never shatters the box office, but remains in movie buffs’ hearts forever. From the heartbreaking desperation of Glengarry Glen Ross to the industry satire of State and Main, Mamet proves himself a master at every genre he tries.
Spartan is not his first action movie. Heist played with the conventions of the subgenre it was named after and of course there was The Untouchables and all the for hire studio jobs. But Spartan does the political conspiracy thriller a bit differently. It’s all the stagey, crackling dialogue that screams Mamet, while it plays its plot twists at unexpected points.
Val Kilmer plays a military officer investigating the kidnapping of the president’s daughter. But as he follows the leads, he realizes some people don’t want him to succeed. Who can he trust? If that was an easy answer, there’d be no movie.
How do you make a genre film unique? Well, you can’t help but make a distinct movie. If you give yourself up to the form, it’s going to be distinctively your own. Because the form’s going to tell you what’s needed. That’s one of the great things I find about working in drama is you’re always learning from the form. You’re always getting humbled by it. It’s exactly like analyzing a dream. You’re trying to analyze your dreams. I know what that means, I know exactly why that means, why am I still unsettled? Let me look a little harder at this little thing over here. But that’s not important, that’s not important, that’s not important. The part where I kill the monster, that’s the important part and I know that that means my father this and da da da da da. But what about this little part over here about the bunny rabbit? Why is the bunny rabbit hopping across the thing? Oh, that’s not important, that’s not important. Making up a drama is almost exactly analogous to analyzing your dreams. That understanding that you cleanse, just like the heroes cleanse, not from your ability to manipulate the material but from your ability to understand the material. It's really humbling, just like when you finally have to look at what that little bunny means. There’s a reason why your mind didn’t want to see that. There’s a reason why you say oh, that’s just interstitial material, f*ck that, that’s nothing, right? Because that’s always where the truth lies, it’s going to tell you how to reformulate the puzzle.
What’s the bunny rabbit in Spartan? Part of the bunny rabbit in Spartan is what does he do in the second act? He finds out that everything is screwed up and it’s not a question of manipulation, I better get on my white horse and ride off in all directions, but the question is what am I going to do? So the first thing he does is he says I’m going to get everything to the first lady, because she’s the mommy. She’ll solve the problem. He finds out that he’s failed. He was so intent on trying to get to the mother of the victim that he overlooks the fact that he’s just gotten trapped. The mother says, “There’s nobody there but you, there’s nobody there but you. Everything you wanted to avail yourself of isn’t there. There is no government. The government’s trying to kill you. There isn’t any unit cohesion. The unit’s trying to kill you. There isn’t any sense of patriotism. Your country’s trying to kill you. Everybody wants you dead. You have to save her.” The woman says, “You have to save her because there’s nobody but you. It’s just your responsibility.” And then he goes to his friend and says what am I going to do? She tells him the same thing, “There’s nobody there but you.” So he says I’d better go do it. Let me go back and avail myself of one of my other allies. And the other ally says, “I’m not even going to help you.” She offers him an out as we find that friends often do when we’re in the midst of a moral dilemma. We go talk to our friends, right? One of our friends always says listen, I understand that you want to do what you think is the right thing, but that’s really not the right thing here and let me tell you why. It does you a credit that you said you want to do the right thing, but the really righter thing would be to do the wrong thing. And the question is, having had the problem restated to him, having understood what the problem is and having had the problem restated to him, he’s now given an out, what’s he going to do? That’s when he has to make a decision that starts to get into the third act. As in any dramatic structure, the third act is really just a reiteration of the first act where the terms are clarified.
So personal responsibility is the bunny rabbit? Yeah, maybe that’s the bunny rabbit.
How did you keep the exposition to a minimum? That’s the fun of it. Anybody can write a script that has “Jim, how were things since you were elected governor of Minnesota? How’s your albino daughter?” “As of course you know, Mr. Smith, your son has myopia. It’s amazing that having that myopia that he was winning the national spelling bee.” That’s easy, that’s not challenging. The trick is to take a story that might be complex and make it simple enough that people will want to catch up with it rather than stopping them and explaining to them why they should be interested. Because then they might understand, but they won’t care. What makes them interested is to make them catch up. What's happening here? Who is this guy? What crime was committed? Who was taken? Why is she important? Why are all these government people running around? And how is he going to get her back? They want to see what's he going to do next? That's all that moviemaking comes down to, what happens next?
How was your experience with Val Kilmer, because we hear he can be difficult? Well, I always loved Val. I’ve always loved his work. We’ve been talking about working together for years and Art Linson who produced the movie, and I were having lunch one day. I said, “You know, man, we just couldn’t get the money for this movie.” And there was Val literally at the next table. Val came over, we talked about oh, we’re going to do something together. Art and I looked at each other. Just like Lana Turner.
Does this movie represent any anger about what’s going on today in politics? Well, everything’s about what’s going on today because everybody is affected by the environment in which they live. But I don't know if the environment in which we live is worse than the environment in which we lived five years ago or better. I think it’s by human nature. This is a movie about a guy who’s faced with the choice of giving up absolutely everything in order to maintain the one thing which he said is the most important thing in the world. Basically, he has to die, in this case spiritually. See, here’s a guy who’s willing to risk death. The question is yes, we knew that. Are you also willing to risk sorrow? Are you willing to change your belief system? What’s more important to you? To hold onto your feeling of purpose, or to hold onto a sense of honor which transcends that? And so of course he’s gonna go kicking and screaming. Who wouldn’t?
Do you remember when The Simpsons made a joke about your plays? No.
Quote from: Pedro the WombatShe's missing.
What the fuck is that?
A tagline.
ebert and roeper were jerking off to mamet and Spartan on sundays show.
Quote from: filmboy70ebert and roeper were jerking off to mamet and Spartan on sundays show.
I'll tell you why: it's good.
The many faces of Mamet
Playwright, screenwriter, author, director and actor takes on a political thriller with 'Spartan'
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia.mnginteractive.com%2Fmedia%2Fpaper210%2F031104_mamet.jpg&hash=fba2b25a39531b2d0664db7bfe82f8037535ed54)
Is there a project involving Joan of Arc's dog in David Mamet's future?
William H. Macy, a longtime friend and former student of Mamet's, says there is, that he and the screenwriter/director/playwright have had a meeting about it. Mamet has mentioned a "Joan of Bark" project during publicity for his new film, "Spartan."
Then again, given that this is Mamet we're talking about, something that oddball-sounding could be a con.
"He is generous and expressive and really wonderfully mischievous," says Chris Smith, artistic director at San Francisco's Magic Theatre, where the world premiere of Mamet's latest play, "Dr. Faustus," recently opened. "It wouldn't surprise me."
Mamet, an often reclusive interview subject, is at a Century City hotel to talk about "Spartan," a political thriller starring Val Kilmer, Derek Luke, Ed O'Neill and Macy. The film, about a secret operative's attempt to rescue the kidnapped president's daughter, opens this weekend.
In person, the bearded and crew-cut-wearing Mamet, 56, is polite, never coy or evasive. He doesn't laugh easily and seems genuinely surprised that he carries a reputation for being not the easiest celebrity to cozy up to.
But he is David Mamet, two-time Oscar nominee, Pulitzer Prize winner and the much imitated creator of such contemporary classics as "Glengarry Glen Ross" and "American Buffalo." So on a Tuesday afternoon, we threw some questions at him and let him get to work.
Q: Where did the idea for "Spartan" come from?
A: I just made it up.
Q: That's it?
A: I just was thinking about it one day and made it up. I always think it's like going to a restaurant. People say, "What are you doing in a Mexican restaurant tonight?" I say, "Well, I just thought I'd do it." They say, "Why didn't you want to go to a Ukrainian restaurant?" I don't know. One would start to feel a responsibility to have a good rationale for every decision which is basically impetuous or impulsive.
Q: Could the scenario presented in "Spartan" actually happen?
A: I hope it could happen. Not in real life, but I hope it's sufficiently consistent and plausible that people say, "Oh my God, that could happen," if only for the purposes of being entertained.
Q: How'd you happen on Val Kilmer to play the agent?
A: I wrote the thing and Art Linson produced the movie. He and I were having lunch in Hollywood and there was Val literally at the next table. Art and I looked at each other and (later) we sent him the script and that was it.
Q: What do you like about his work?
A: He's very intelligent and very honest. It's just you looking at him playing the part rather than looking at him bringing his ideas to the part.
Q: You wrote a chapter on "Acting" in your "Writing in Restaurants" collection that says, "It's not a very good time for the arts. And it is an especially !ital!bad!off! time for the art of acting." That was 1986. Is this still the case today?
A: There's always terrific actors. There are terrific actors in our day and age. I believe what I was referring to was the disappearance of theater where, like any art, you've got to do it a lot to get better at it. If you have a lot of people doing it a lot, it's going to produce some remarkable talent.
It's like someone said, one of the reasons why you have more and more foreign talent playing baseball in the United States is that sandlot games have disappeared. There used to be a lot of kids playing baseball and if you got 20 million kids playing baseball for 20 hours a week, you'll have a bigger pool of talent, and superstars are going to emerge, than if you've got 200,000 kids playing baseball two hours a year.
It's the same about acting. If you've got 50 shows on Broadway, and they're going to change five or 10 times a year, plus regional theaters all over the country, you're going to have a much wider talent pool than if you have three theaters on Broadway.
Q: Does that mean acting is a profession you can get good at if you work at it long enough?
A: No. If you do something long enough, you'll probably get better at it, but if you've got enough people doing something long enough, more talent's going to emerge. You have to have a fairly wide base and you have to have real kinds of apprenticeship.
Q: You're renowned for working with the same actors over and over again.
A: I like 'em. Why would I want to work with someone else?
Q: Have we seen William H. Macy's best work?
A: Macy's great. Look at the stuff he's done. Look at what he did in "Door to Door" and "Oleanna." Look at the turn he did in "Seabiscuit" He's just a great actor. I think he can do anything.
Q: Have you seen "The Cooler"?
A: I've got to see it. Everyone says it's great.
Q: It's been compared to your style of writing.
A: Oh yeah? Oh good. I'm looking forward to seeing it.
Q: What do you make of phrases like "Mamet-esque" or "Mamet-speak" when people compare other people's work to yours?
A: Well, it's a compliment that people like my work enough to either endeavor to emulate it or endeavor to surpass it. Both are a compliment.
Q: Theater or film: Which one is the bigger rush?
A: I love doing both. Filmmaking is great fun. You ever been on a movie set? Do people look like they're having fun? Because they are.
I always wanted to do everything. I was in New York writing a lot of plays, and Bob Rafelson gave me a job writing a movie. It was such fun. I always liked the communal aspect of the entertainment, whether Macy and I were forming a theater company together as we did when we were kids or in New York when we were a little bit older or making a movie together. I just directed an episode of "The Shield," and I had the best time.
Q: Back to "Spartan." Given the twists and turns of your previous movies, I expected more double-crosses and cons.
A: I'd say it's a political thriller, right down the middle. There's a secret operative and there's the government. There you go.
Q: Where does your interest in con games and intrigue come from?
A: I lived in that world for many, many years. I was a poker player, a habitue of gambling dens, and I also spent much time among criminals. I spent a lot of time on the edges of society trying to make a living, and I was fascinated with what was going on there.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
While doing an interview for U-Daily News, Spartan writer/director David Mamet revealed that he had just directed the 11th episode of the third season's "THE SHIELD."
"I love doing both. Filmmaking is great fun. You ever been on a movie set? Do people look like they're having fun? Because they are. I always wanted to do everything. I was in New York writing a lot of plays, and Bob Rafelson gave me a job writing a movie. It was such fun. I always liked the communal aspect of the entertainment, whether Macy and I were forming a theater company together as we did when we were kids or in New York when we were a little bit older or making a movie together. I just directed an episode of "The Shield," and I had the best time."
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. i hadnt heard of the film until ebert and roeper reviewed it on their show. i have been a fan of val kilmer for a long time (Willow, Tombstone...yes, even as iceman in Top Gun :oops: ) i had nothing else to do, had seen all the movies that are out that i wanted to see..so i decided to take a chance on Spartan. now i have heard good things about mamet, and i have heard bad things. i am also a big believer and fan of films that are written and directed by the same person. only in these such films is the vision of the writer truly done justice, i think. and as i said i like val kilmer. i really, really enjoyed this film. ebert mentioned that two minutes into the film he recognized it was a mamet film without even knowing it was done by him. i didnt know such things, but i did think that the dialogue in the film was very original and never faltered for a second. it just kept an up-tempo the whole time. it was a lot of military dialogue, but not like i had heard before. from the opening shot of the film i was hooked. it didnt bother with opening credits, just the title Spartan as the action was unfolding. the whole film i was on the edge of my seat wondering what was going to happen next. val kilmer has not had a role like this since Tombstone i.e. bad mother fucker. i was very surprised that i liked this film so much, seeing as how i had no expectations whatsoever. wow. i give it :yabbse-thumbup: :yabbse-thumbup:
Quote from: filmboy70i 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.
Quote from: MacGuffinQuote from: filmboy70i 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.
I sensed a few scattered Mametian lines, though... "additional dialogue," perhaps?
Quote from: godardianI 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
Quote from: MacGuffinQuote from: filmboy70i 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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Quote from: El Duderinookay, 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.
Quote from: flagpolespecial] 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.
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?'
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.
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.
Quote from: RecceYeah, 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.