Quote:
|
A pity, if the reviews are to be believed.
|
I wouldn't buy into the reviews too much if you enjoy DePalma's work. A lot of the reviews I've read attacked all the style and I think the "more style than substance" could fit many DePalma movies so I'm not sure why the critics are attacking the style here so much.
My girlfriend and I just got back from seeing the film and we both enjoyed it. I left the theater somewhat disappointed because I had hoped this would return DePalma to his top-notch style, which it doesn't but this was still a good film. The visual style of the film was brilliant and it really captured the look and feel of the 1940's film noir. The tricky camera shots were really distracting at the start of the film but they weren't used too much after that. It does seem DePalma spends more time dealing with the tech stuff over the acting, which is another mild negative. I thought Eckhart and Hartnett should have switched roles. Hartnett was good but he just wasn't strong enough to carry the film and his narration wasn't that good either. I was also disappointed with Scarlett Johansson but she wasn't given too much to do. Hilary Swank was good as usual.
I know the detective stuff and the "ending" to the murder was all made up but I think they could have came up with something better. The final thirty minutes get quite confusing and the ending let me down because it was just so far fetched at times while at other times it seems the screenplay as rushing things to get the film over with. Being a fan of silent cinema, I enjoyed various Hollywood talk but I'm sure fans on one silent legend will be upset over how this guy is shown in the film. I haven't read the book this fake stuff is based on but
The Man Who Laughs segments were a nice touch (but pulled towards the 'yeah right').
Overall, I think most DePalma fans will enjoy this but don't expect one of his classics. I'd give it a
out of four.