LUCKY NUMBER SLEVIN

I began watching this movie not knowing what to expect. I heard that it was a mafia/gangster movie and i have rarely watched a mafia movie that i haven't liked. Lucky Number Slevin came in the mail through our netflix account, i didn't order the movie but i had just seen the departed and i was in the mood to watch more criminals do what they do best. One thing that caught my eye was the great actors listed on the cover: Morgan Friedman, Bruce Willis, and Josh Hartnet (I almost didn't watch the movie because his performance in pearl harbor wasn't stellar). Although he was very good in this film, convincing, Lucy Lui starred as Hartnet's "girl". The one thing that disappointed me, the plot wasn't that believable: Two "Dons" or "Godfathers" if you will, live right across the street from one another in the penthouse's of their buildings. There penthouses face eachother yet they never attempt assassinating each other from their compounds. Both leaders stay hidden in their penthouses in fear of being killed out in the "real world". The idea of two mafia leaders living across from each other seems ridiculous but it did allow for interesting twists and turns along the way. I will not go on any longer in fear of ruining the movie, but I will recommend this film to anyone who has seen the departed and thought it was good.

JOURNAL #1: CRITIQUE THE CRITIC

Roger Ebert of the Chicago Sun-Times actually turned out to know what he was talking about, his review of “The Bourne Ultimatum” almost parallels my very own of the action packed film. Ebert critiques the film but does not bash it like many other critics; he is the kind of critic that can point out a movies’ weaknesses as well as its strong points. I felt that Ebert did a good job of portraying his feelings towards the film, he pointed out his likes, and dislikes and never really chose a side. This leaves it open for the reader to choose whether or not the film is worth seeing. Ebert seems to review every aspect of a film that a good critic should. He begins the review by praising the skillful exercises in high-tech effects, and stunt work that takes place throughout the film, he goes on to say he watches the films because he likes the fast paced action.

“Of course there are sensational car chases, improbable leaps over high places, clever double reverses and lightning decisions.”

Ebert Shares a little about the background of the film and it’s prequels (“The Bourne Identity,” “The Bourne Supremacy”), to give the readers some more information on this Jason Bourne they are about to spend two hours with. He shares the storyline of “The Bourne Ultimatum” without giving anything away, and then he gives his opinion on the acting throughout the film. Ebert speaks very highly about Matt Damon’s performance and comments that he has a unique talent as an actor.

“That Matt Damon can make this character more convincing than the Road Runner is a tribute to his talent and dedication. It's not often you find a character you care about even if you don't believe he could exist.”

Ebert speaks highly of the director, Paul Greengrass, director of such films, (“United 93”, “Bourne Supremacy”) he comments on Greengrass’ filming style and his amazingly long takes that are hard to even notice:

“He not only creates (or seems to create) amazingly long takes but does it without calling attention to them. Whether they actually are unbroken stretches of film or are spliced together by invisible wipes, what counts is that they present such mind-blowing action that I forgot to keep track. Greengrass wants to show the action without interruption to reinforce the illusion it is all actually happening.”

Ebert really promotes this movie well without making it feel as though you have to see it, that is why I like Roger Ebert as a critic he doesn’t really choose sides (at least in this review), and he covers almost everything that people want to hear. The actors, the setting, the director, the storyline, and the plot…everything the reader would want to know before seeing the movie. He then ends the review with a pretty thoughtful statement:

“But why, if I liked the movie so much, am I going on like this? Because the movie is complete as itself. You sit there, and the action assaults you, and using words to re-create it would be futile. What actually happens to Jason Bourne is essentially immaterial. What matters is that something must happen, so he can run away from it or toward it.”

Overall I agreed with Ebert on most of his viewpoints, and I am definitely going to read one of his critiques again. But until then, “Good Night and Good Luck”.

This review by Roger Ebert can be found at:
http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070802/REVIEWS/70710008

Blogging

I'm blogging...
blog blog blog blog