Article Ratings & Comments
(1-11 of 11 posts) | Reply
on Dec 27 2007 09:36 PM Just as any idiot can attempt to reduce a strong film with an irrelevant stab at "wit". (Reply to this) |
on Aug 17 2008 09:09 AM Any idiot can also deconstruct a film's entire message and focus soley on the violent aspects of said film. (Reply to this) |
|
on Sep 07 2008 10:31 PM Wow, what an ignorant remark. It's that same elitist attitude that's portrayed in the movie as the source of all the violence and hatred. (Reply to this) |
on Oct 20 2008 01:05 PM Did this guy even watch the movie? This movie is about truly understanding what kind of corruption racism bring to people . Any Idiot can write a ****ty movie review too. Who made lots of money in the process...? (Reply to this) |
|
on Jan 24 2009 12:49 AM Did you happen to understand the movie? Or even watch it? You're such and ignoramus (Reply to this) |
|
on Feb 17 2009 08:09 AM Idiot like you, sir? (Reply to this) |
|
on Mar 03 2009 07:07 PM i hate when critics like this think there so damn clever and waste an entire review on something that ****ing stupid. (Reply to this) |
|
on Aug 08 2009 06:43 AM Any idiot can write a bad movie review. I can't believe anyone found anything wrong with this movie. (Reply to this) |
on Aug 09 2009 01:37 AM You're a dick-wad, Rob. (Reply to this) |
|
on Nov 23 2009 08:14 PM In reply to this comment (#2534453) "Any idiot can write a bad movie review. I can't believe anyone found anything wrong with this movie." - Mario R. Dude, there is SOOOOO much wrong with this movie. Did any of you dumbasses even read the review? He makes very convincing points. Look past Norton's performance and focus on the story and direction (the 2 most flawed aspects of the film). Let's start, shall we? The Story/Screenplay: Many key scenes are often contrived and function as bandaids to hold the plot together. Example, the dinner scene with Mr. Vinyard, from which Derek's bigotry supposedly stems, seems to read like it was written just because the writers needed to give a quick explanation to shape the protagonist's motivations. It appears that this was the first instance where the father openly expresses his hatred of Black people to Derek. Derek doesn't know his father's perspective on affirmative action until that very scene. And, apparently, this moment comes only a few days/weeks before his father's death. And, THIS single event fuels Derek's rage against EVERY person who is not White Protestant? Wow, what a sap! It wasn't as if Derek was raised for 17 years under his father's narrow minded perspective. It comes off as brainwashing, and Derek's character was too smart to be duped that easily. The scene feels like tacked-on motivation, and the movie never convincingly charts Derek's path to race hatred. Another question that sticks with me is why does Derek repent in the first place? Derek upheld his rhetoric throughout his prison sentence. He was immersed with other skinheads but becomes disillusioned when he finds that all the major groups in prison (black, Hispanics, white) have a working agreement. The other skinheads don't uphold their supremest beliefs and even warn Derek to "cool it with the preaching bullsh-t." Derek then leaves his white faction and turns into a loner. Was it too much cooperation for him? He is subsequently raped by his fellow gang members, is lectured by his former high school teacher and befriends a Black man in the laundry. Which one of these occurrences forces him to see the errors of his ways and repents? He didn't learn that his beliefs were skewed. He lost faith in white extremism after he discovered his fellow "brothers" disregarded their former views and was subsequently raped by them. He wasn't converted when he learned that the ethnic groups worked together. It made him angrier. So, is it the rape that convinces him? It'd be like a Catholic who loses faith in Christ because he learns other Catholic church goers aren't as pious as he and is raped by these same Catholics. Derek didn't make amends with his "enemies", who BTW were gunning to shank him in prison curbed only by Lamont's plea (which brings up another point). His reboot just seems very underdeveloped and illogical. Also, the Black gang members didn't kill Derek in prison because Lamont plead to not have him killed? Seriously?? What did Lamont say? "Don't hurt him, guys. Yes, he did spearhead the White Supremest movement in Venice Beach. Yes, he kicked us off our turf and brutally murdered 2 of our brothers. But, don't hurt him because he's my laundry buddy." Derek gets busted for manslaughter for his second victim? Oh, please! I can see the first gangbanger killed in self defense. But, the other victim curb stomped by a renowned skinhead warrants as manslaughter?? The autopsy would reveal the victim had two gunshot wounds, indicating he was wounded and under the duress of Derek Vinyard, so anything additional would have been in malice. How would curb stomping a severely wounded intruder NOT warrant either a life or death sentence for the perpetrator who is infamously known as the leader of their area's White Supremest movement?? Derek is paroled after a MERE 3 years?? I don't think I need to address the ludicrous nature of these circumstances. It's there merely to get Derek back on the streets despite the illogical conditionality of Derek ever getting a parole. Danny is murdered, IN SCHOOL nonetheless, for blowing smoke in the Black guy's face? Those gang members risked their asses by snuffing Danny IN school. Why not a drive-by in his neighborhood like any other "sensible" gangbanger (not saying that gangbanger's lifestyle is sensible, but their places of execution should be)? And, he's killed for blowing smoke? Moving on... The Black gang attempt to jack Derek's truck for essentially "kicking them off the playground"? The basketball sequence was RIDICULOUS. It was like an AND 1 commercial. Was there really a need for the scene where Sweeney asks for Derek's help in taking down White power clan? It led nowhere, and added nothing to the story. The Direction: While Tony Kaye is very capable of directing actors and crafting many singular compelling scenes, his visual style and music selection feel a little too melodramatic. There wasn't really any need for the footage of the kids on the beach or Derek's slow-mo shower scenes. We understand that children are innocent before they're introduced to hatred and bigotry. We saw that in Mr. Vinyard's "N---er bullsh-t" scene. Yes, Danny's death was filmed extremely well, but I don't feel it actually added much to the overall message of the film. I also felt the slow motion shots were overdone in the second half of the film, which diluted the effectiveness of this technique. Many scenes would have worked better without the overbearing, melodramatic music (Danny's death, curb stomp and Derek's arrest, anyone?). Plus, the story is not well strung together because it tries to resolve the events of four years in one day. And, this results in the film leaving its shortcuts showing. Inconsistent editing, perhaps? There is also a MAJOR imbalance in the film between the flashbacks and the present day events. The scenes after Derek's conversion are simply NOT anywhere near as effective as the rhetoric scenes. The non-rhetoric points of view seem a little soft, or nerdy, or ineffectual or just not made very well. The rhetoric scenes are first rate. But, it seemed Tony Kaye was not as interested in Derek's new perspective post-prison. In the end, the racist stuff prevails more strongly. And again, the basketball sequence was RIDICULOUS. The Acting: The performances for the most part were outstanding, most notably the principal characters (Norton, Furlong, Beverly D'Angelo, Avery Brooks as Sweeney, and Guy Torry as Lamont). The Dialogue: The dialogue was compelling in several individual scenes (the dinner scene with the Jewish teacher, the pep talk before the grocery raid but NOT the raid itself). But the dialogue in the present day scenes, particularly the dialogue at Derek's new home, is not very compelling or interesting. The discussions between Derek and his mother post-prison, and Cameron's monologue about "Caesar Commie Chavez" seem like filler and add little if anything to the story. The Characters: As stated above, Derek's path to racial hatred is not charted well, plus his reconciliation is not well developed given the above circumstances. And Norton, effective as he is, comes across more as a bright kid with bad ideas than as a racist burning with hate. Maybe that was the point. Stacey is one-dimensional. Davina seems useless. Most importantly, Danny is a little inconsistent. At the beginning, he seems pretty headstrong about his racial superiority with Seth. But, in his discussion with Cameron at the party, Danny seems to be humoring him with his rhetoric, as if it's all a joke to him. Then he's headstrong again, when Derek flips out at the party. The Message: The message at the end is preachy and is beaten into our heads with a sledge hammer as if we couldn't figure it out until that point. It should have been implied and not spelled out in Danny's Con (Reply to this) |
on Dec 11 2009 08:17 PM the comments here are so stupid. (Reply to this) |
RSS Feeds