Cinéma Succinct

Mission Impossible III

2006-12-22T13:35:00.000-05:00

The best Mission Impossible movie yet!

2.5/4 - Roger Ebert
3/4 - Rolling Stone

The Da Vinci Code

2006-12-22T13:22:00.000-05:00

Even top-notch talent like Tom Hanks and Ron Howard can't make me feel like I'm not watching a computer game such as Myst for over two hours. A bore-fest.

3/4 - Roger Ebert
2.5/4 - Rolling Stone

Munich

2006-12-22T11:06:00.000-05:00

A powerful, riveting film. I must warn you that one scene in particular is deeply disturbing, and I hate scenes like one near the end where sex and violence are juxtaposed.

4/4 - Roger Ebert
3.5/4 - Rolling Stone

The Butterfly Effect

2006-12-22T10:41:00.000-05:00

A watchable treatment of reality-altering time-travel, thanks to one my favorite newer actors, Amy Smart.

2.5/4 - Roger Ebert
1/4 - Rolling Stone

Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind

2006-12-22T10:23:00.000-05:00

A quirky, surreal, romantic winner.

3.5/4 - Roger Ebert
3.5/4 - Rolling Stone

Miami Vice

2006-12-22T09:52:00.000-05:00

All style and no substance. Gone are the bright pastels and engaging stories, traded for dark lighting and mumbling dialog from cardboard characters. Still fun for a 2-hour MTV video.

Loquacious Elaboration

I was a huge fan of the TV series when it first aired, and I excitedly waited for the movie. A disappointment for me. It had the Mann polish of course, and one incredibly intense action scene in particular, but I never became invested in the characters. Some actors are made for a specific role (William Shatner as Captain Kirk, David Carradine as Kwai Chang Caine), and Don Johnson was made to play Sonny Crockett. I like Colin Farrell, but it just didn't work for me (a cardboard script is to blame in my opinion, rather than Farrell's talent). It felt like they shifted the emphasis to Tubbs in the movie since Jamie Foxx is so popular right now, and I think I liked him better as Tubbs.

Not only was the movie filmed in dark lighting (unlike the bright pastels from the TV series), but why is it that actors are mumbling their lines now so they're unintelligible, and Mann allows it in the final edit? Is it difficult to follow because they script is complex, or because a typical scene goes like:

Tubbs: Sonny, where are you going?

Crockett: The <mumble mumble> is responsible for the <mumble mumble> so I'm gonna <mumble mumble>.

Or am I just getting old?

The characters and plot were flat and two-dimensional. Many of the one-hour TV episodes had much richer characters and plot. I first knew this movie was in trouble with the opener. Confusing, unrelated to the story (except as an excuse to introduce the plot at the end of the scene), and loose ends (once the main plot element is introduced, we don't know what happened inside the club -- not that it's important to the plot, but hey, you made us watch that whole opening scene and try to follow what was going on).

I really wanted this movie to be great, and I've typically been very pleased with Mann's work. But I can't help but think he was lazy on this one, trying to ride the gravy train with his big stars. He used to be substance and style, but this movie's only style. Fantastic style, yes. Some great moments of humor, action, suspence, breathtaking imagery, and pulsing music. If only it had interesting characters and a story. Ah well.

3.5/4 - Rolling Stone

The Bourne Supremacy

2006-12-22T09:07:00.000-05:00

Bad taste in my mouth from the opening and choppy, hard-to-follow editing for action sequences make this one a dud. A shame, since the first one was so good.

3/4 - Roger Ebert
3.5/4 - Rolling Stone

Movie Title Listing

2006-01-01T00:00:00.000-05:00

(The) Bourne Supremacy
(The) Butterfly Effect

(The) Da Vinci Code

Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind

Miami Vice
Mission Impossible III
Munich