October 25, 2004
I caught up on some of my movie-watching this weekend. I rented Monster
, and Mystic River
Here are some thoughts:
Monster--Charlize's acting was superb. The script could have been tighter. Additionally, I wish they would have shown a little bit more of the trial--specifically, the sentencing phase.
Saved--I seriously loved this. I really think Macaulay Culkin stole the show. The writing was great, and all of the casting fit well. It made me laugh, but it also made me think. I would highly recommend this movie. It's slightly mockumentary-like, a la Waiting for Guffman and Best in Show in how it accurately portrays people and their quirks.
Mystic River--It too deserved all of its praise. Tim Robbins outdid himself. However, I just wasn't shot in the ass with the movie, and I can't really put my finger on why.
Posted by: Lawrenkm at
| Comments (3)
| Add Comment
Post contains 144 words, total size 1 kb.
Monster: I agree with you assessment. The movie spent so much time filling in the back story that it would have been an unmanagable length if they didn't cut something. The DVD was sadly lacking in some great news features that would have really helped out.
Mystic River: That movie had one of the best ensemble casts ever assembled. Considering Eastwood's distaste for shooting more than one take, this is an even greater accomplishment. I have no idea what you disliked about it.
Posted by: chuck at October 25, 2004 05:13 PM (AbDok)
I liked Saved
alot. It wasn't too heavy-handed with its point, and all the characters had some sort of redeeming value.
Posted by: mike at October 25, 2004 07:01 PM (NK5Q7)
I enjoyed Mystic River quite a lot, until the last 10 minutes. I know what they were going for, but it seemed sort of gimmicky and cheap.
Posted by: Kevin at October 25, 2004 09:02 PM (EMaZW)
| Add Comment
Comments are disabled.
Post is locked.
12kb generated in CPU 0.03, elapsed 0.1542 seconds.
35 queries taking 0.1433 seconds, 122 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.