Seth Paxton
Senior HTF Member
- Joined
- Nov 5, 1998
- Messages
- 7,585
The Truth about Charlie
7.5 of 10 SPOILER FREE
What does that score mean overall this year on my list? It puts it with Reign of Fire or Mothman Prophecies, just above stuff like Super Troopers or Count of Monte Cristo on my list. Serviceable, perhaps at times entertaining and engaging, but this is matinee level stuff at best.
It's been too long since I saw Charade to get into those comparisons (but it doesn't seem to compare well). Suffice to say that this film's biggest problem is that it shifts it's angle way too much. Is it thriller, is it quirky, is it Euro-moody? Well, it just can't make up it's mind, and so it's badly damaged on all fronts.
Acting is pretty good, at times excellent, and I can't fault any casting. I do think Wahlberg has a tough time pulling off his character, though who he is by the end of the film DOES seem to fit his personality. It's just tough to believe him in earlier situations at times.
Thandie Newton is very solid here (easily up to Hepburn comparisons), quite improved over M:I2, though that probably wasn't her fault anyway. Robbins is solid as always, but several of his scenes are just awkwardly handled. Joong-Hoon Park was very good on screen, as is Lisa Gay Hamilton (despite some of the stuff she has to work with). Unfortunately for the film, Ted Levine's character in this film might just lead you to yell out "It puts the lotion in the basket" which is exactly what my buddy turned to me and said after one scene.
No fault on Ted, it's just how someone involved wanted to go with his character.
Then there is that quirky angle. That is some of the most enjoyable stuff, yet at the same time it's also some of the most annoying. Mainly because it doesn't commit to those rules fully, so you are left shifting in and out of "quirky" mode. There was one scene that I was certain was not real at one point (this sort of thing is established early on), but it turns out it was. So I had to scratch my head on the really goofy actions in that scene after all. Sudden shifts in allegiances are far from satisfactorily explained, for example.
As a spy thriller there are just way too many times that cops and spies don't do the things that they should be, thus the film feels dishonest and plays like its focused on style over substance.
The cinematography is mostly done hand-held and that can been a bit annoying at times with so many tight shots (prepare for shaky moments). Still, I suspect at least some of that motivation is to get so many great Parisian locations on film when tracks probably would have inhibited the use of these locations.
I will add that because of some of the quirkiness this film MIGHT be a film that grows on me. But I again stress that this is MIGHT. There was a chase on foot that ends up on some stairs that I thought was terrific and fresh as one example.
7.5 of 10 SPOILER FREE
What does that score mean overall this year on my list? It puts it with Reign of Fire or Mothman Prophecies, just above stuff like Super Troopers or Count of Monte Cristo on my list. Serviceable, perhaps at times entertaining and engaging, but this is matinee level stuff at best.
It's been too long since I saw Charade to get into those comparisons (but it doesn't seem to compare well). Suffice to say that this film's biggest problem is that it shifts it's angle way too much. Is it thriller, is it quirky, is it Euro-moody? Well, it just can't make up it's mind, and so it's badly damaged on all fronts.
Acting is pretty good, at times excellent, and I can't fault any casting. I do think Wahlberg has a tough time pulling off his character, though who he is by the end of the film DOES seem to fit his personality. It's just tough to believe him in earlier situations at times.
Thandie Newton is very solid here (easily up to Hepburn comparisons), quite improved over M:I2, though that probably wasn't her fault anyway. Robbins is solid as always, but several of his scenes are just awkwardly handled. Joong-Hoon Park was very good on screen, as is Lisa Gay Hamilton (despite some of the stuff she has to work with). Unfortunately for the film, Ted Levine's character in this film might just lead you to yell out "It puts the lotion in the basket" which is exactly what my buddy turned to me and said after one scene.
No fault on Ted, it's just how someone involved wanted to go with his character.Then there is that quirky angle. That is some of the most enjoyable stuff, yet at the same time it's also some of the most annoying. Mainly because it doesn't commit to those rules fully, so you are left shifting in and out of "quirky" mode. There was one scene that I was certain was not real at one point (this sort of thing is established early on), but it turns out it was. So I had to scratch my head on the really goofy actions in that scene after all. Sudden shifts in allegiances are far from satisfactorily explained, for example.
As a spy thriller there are just way too many times that cops and spies don't do the things that they should be, thus the film feels dishonest and plays like its focused on style over substance.
The cinematography is mostly done hand-held and that can been a bit annoying at times with so many tight shots (prepare for shaky moments). Still, I suspect at least some of that motivation is to get so many great Parisian locations on film when tracks probably would have inhibited the use of these locations.
I will add that because of some of the quirkiness this film MIGHT be a film that grows on me. But I again stress that this is MIGHT. There was a chase on foot that ends up on some stairs that I thought was terrific and fresh as one example.
