Datasets:

DDDDZQ

/

imdb_reviews

like 0

Very nice addition to the series

tt0295297

Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets is a somewhat restrained film, as Christopher Columbus makes the darker book seem much more childish than it is. Granted, the main characters are 12 years old, but it was way too light hearted.It's Harry Potter's second year at Hogwarts, and trouble seems to be brewing again. Harry is hearing voices in the walls, voices that he thinks are connected to strange happenings around the school. Meanwhile, the teachers are equally puzzled.The second Potter boasts stronger acting than before, as the lead actor Daniel Radcliffe grows in talent (and in size). He once again portrays Harry well, and continues this trend in the later sequels. Rupert Grint is the best of the trio with his knack for comedy. He offers some of the best lines in the film, but this is short lived because he gets some of the worst in movie 3 and 4. The adult actors are always in fine form. Richard Harris gives a warm and fatherly performance as Albus Dumbledore, something his successor, Michael Gambon, lacks. Alan Rickman is mysterious again even though his character was proved to be good in the first film. The standouts are Ken Branaugh and Christian Coulson as Gilderoy Lockhart and Tom Riddle respectively. Branaugh captures the essence of the character very well, making it one of the most accurate performances in any of the movies, and given his past, it's no surprise. Definitely the best part of the movie. Coulson also gives a great performance, but unfortunately telling you would be spoiling the ending (although half the world has either seen this or read the book or knows the truth about Tom Riddle). The other actors (Maggie Smith, Robbie Coltrane, Jason Isaacs, and Julie Walters) all give fine performances as well.The film is very restrained in its writing and directing. The script is the most accurate translation of the books, but there are moments where it gets slow. The climax, however, comes out of nowhere and moves along fast, which is one good thing that Steve Kloves does. The film is also an action/adventure breed, and it fits the bill this time around. The quidditch scenes are back and better than ever, although one scene contains the most obvious example of how fast the kids are growing (Tom Felton's voice changes drastically throughout the film). All in all, CoS is a fine movie for the average moviegoer, but the book lovers will find that it is a rather restrained and toned down version of the book. Due to some violence, especially the potentially scary climax (giant snake, anyone?), HPCoS might scare a viewer under age 10.8/10 --spy

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0295297/reviews-680

ur4506876

title: Very nice addition to the series review: Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets is a somewhat restrained film, as Christopher Columbus makes the darker book seem much more childish than it is. Granted, the main characters are 12 years old, but it was way too light hearted.It's Harry Potter's second year at Hogwarts, and trouble seems to be brewing again. Harry is hearing voices in the walls, voices that he thinks are connected to strange happenings around the school. Meanwhile, the teachers are equally puzzled.The second Potter boasts stronger acting than before, as the lead actor Daniel Radcliffe grows in talent (and in size). He once again portrays Harry well, and continues this trend in the later sequels. Rupert Grint is the best of the trio with his knack for comedy. He offers some of the best lines in the film, but this is short lived because he gets some of the worst in movie 3 and 4. The adult actors are always in fine form. Richard Harris gives a warm and fatherly performance as Albus Dumbledore, something his successor, Michael Gambon, lacks. Alan Rickman is mysterious again even though his character was proved to be good in the first film. The standouts are Ken Branaugh and Christian Coulson as Gilderoy Lockhart and Tom Riddle respectively. Branaugh captures the essence of the character very well, making it one of the most accurate performances in any of the movies, and given his past, it's no surprise. Definitely the best part of the movie. Coulson also gives a great performance, but unfortunately telling you would be spoiling the ending (although half the world has either seen this or read the book or knows the truth about Tom Riddle). The other actors (Maggie Smith, Robbie Coltrane, Jason Isaacs, and Julie Walters) all give fine performances as well.The film is very restrained in its writing and directing. The script is the most accurate translation of the books, but there are moments where it gets slow. The climax, however, comes out of nowhere and moves along fast, which is one good thing that Steve Kloves does. The film is also an action/adventure breed, and it fits the bill this time around. The quidditch scenes are back and better than ever, although one scene contains the most obvious example of how fast the kids are growing (Tom Felton's voice changes drastically throughout the film). All in all, CoS is a fine movie for the average moviegoer, but the book lovers will find that it is a rather restrained and toned down version of the book. Due to some violence, especially the potentially scary climax (giant snake, anyone?), HPCoS might scare a viewer under age 10.8/10 --spy

Inherently Rich and Endearing, Harry's Second Romp Doesn't Really Go Anywhere New

tt0295297

Harry and friends return for a second term, where they're quickly caught up in a long-standing plot to rid the school of so-called "impure" students. Between the celebrated, absurdly deep cast, the charming, nuanced world at large and the constant manipulations of a shadow-clad foil, this picture had an awful lot going for it right out of the gates... so why does it feel like we're just treading water? A large swath of The Chamber of Secrets seems inessential and redundant, which isn't to say it's without merit, just that it could be using this time to fry much larger fish. Did we need to reinforce the idea that Harry's adoptive parents are cruel people? Didn't our hero avoid an attempt on his life on the Quidditch pitch last time around? For that matter, wasn't the entire endgame eerily similar in the preceding installment? Too much time smelling the roses when there's a fire down the block.Of course, it's not all bad news. The CGI, though still not without the occasional hiccup, has vastly improved since the last picture. That doesn't excuse the force-fed inclusion of an all-digital supporting character, but at least these appearances are kept mercifully short and to-the-point. Although it's the longest installment in the Harry Potter franchise, this chapter skims along at a strict pace and feels much shorter than it actually is. Though seemingly inconsequential as a whole, the plot does drop frequent hints at a darker side of the Hogwarts mythos before, ultimately, allowing such things to continue lurking in obscurity. It shows promise in spades, and will certainly capture the hearts and minds of the younger audiences it's primarily there for, but more demanding viewers will likely find it too thin and sugary for serious digestion.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0295297/reviews-930

ur26266323

title: Inherently Rich and Endearing, Harry's Second Romp Doesn't Really Go Anywhere New review: Harry and friends return for a second term, where they're quickly caught up in a long-standing plot to rid the school of so-called "impure" students. Between the celebrated, absurdly deep cast, the charming, nuanced world at large and the constant manipulations of a shadow-clad foil, this picture had an awful lot going for it right out of the gates... so why does it feel like we're just treading water? A large swath of The Chamber of Secrets seems inessential and redundant, which isn't to say it's without merit, just that it could be using this time to fry much larger fish. Did we need to reinforce the idea that Harry's adoptive parents are cruel people? Didn't our hero avoid an attempt on his life on the Quidditch pitch last time around? For that matter, wasn't the entire endgame eerily similar in the preceding installment? Too much time smelling the roses when there's a fire down the block.Of course, it's not all bad news. The CGI, though still not without the occasional hiccup, has vastly improved since the last picture. That doesn't excuse the force-fed inclusion of an all-digital supporting character, but at least these appearances are kept mercifully short and to-the-point. Although it's the longest installment in the Harry Potter franchise, this chapter skims along at a strict pace and feels much shorter than it actually is. Though seemingly inconsequential as a whole, the plot does drop frequent hints at a darker side of the Hogwarts mythos before, ultimately, allowing such things to continue lurking in obscurity. It shows promise in spades, and will certainly capture the hearts and minds of the younger audiences it's primarily there for, but more demanding viewers will likely find it too thin and sugary for serious digestion.

Magical faithful adaptation to the novel, much better than the previous movie in this franchise

tt0295297

This is actually a good adaptation from novel to movie. It has just about every part in the book although it lacks a bit of the satire, the execution of the movie seemed way more better this time. It seemed like a actual movie instead of a high budget live Saturday morning show for kids. It seemed like a actual movie instead of looking cheap and lame like the previous movie. Also was able to watch this from one sitting. The big budget is used well in this, especially when it comes to the special effects for 2002. Also all the good parts in the book is in this movie, in fact this stays flawlessly with the novel all the way too the end. Which is great, so overall it's a faithful adaptation. However the acting seemed to have gotten worse at times, especially the person that plays Harry Potter. If your a fan of the novel there is a high chance you will probably like this sequel.7.5/10

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0295297/reviews-890

ur22171966

title: Magical faithful adaptation to the novel, much better than the previous movie in this franchise review: This is actually a good adaptation from novel to movie. It has just about every part in the book although it lacks a bit of the satire, the execution of the movie seemed way more better this time. It seemed like a actual movie instead of a high budget live Saturday morning show for kids. It seemed like a actual movie instead of looking cheap and lame like the previous movie. Also was able to watch this from one sitting. The big budget is used well in this, especially when it comes to the special effects for 2002. Also all the good parts in the book is in this movie, in fact this stays flawlessly with the novel all the way too the end. Which is great, so overall it's a faithful adaptation. However the acting seemed to have gotten worse at times, especially the person that plays Harry Potter. If your a fan of the novel there is a high chance you will probably like this sequel.7.5/10

Okay

tt0295297

All those Harry Potter movies were just okay. The books were funny enough, and all the movie adaptations were decent and satisfying. I'm not a big fan of those book, but I liked them. Daniel Radcliffe was a very good choice as Harry Potter, he is very handsome and talented. The performances, the script and the special effects were good enough, not as good as better films as "Avatar" and "Watchmen", but were good. My only problem with all the Harry Potter films is that all of those movies are pretty long. Since those book and movies are aimed to children they should be shorter, I guess. All the Harry Potter films are good, but I still prefer "Avatar", because "Avatar" has aliens, and I love aliens.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0295297/reviews-864

ur23853088

title: Okay review: All those Harry Potter movies were just okay. The books were funny enough, and all the movie adaptations were decent and satisfying. I'm not a big fan of those book, but I liked them. Daniel Radcliffe was a very good choice as Harry Potter, he is very handsome and talented. The performances, the script and the special effects were good enough, not as good as better films as "Avatar" and "Watchmen", but were good. My only problem with all the Harry Potter films is that all of those movies are pretty long. Since those book and movies are aimed to children they should be shorter, I guess. All the Harry Potter films are good, but I still prefer "Avatar", because "Avatar" has aliens, and I love aliens.

Great sequel!

tt0295297

Daniel Radcliffe stars once again as the Boy who Lived in this exciting and magical sequel to Chris Columbus's excellent fantasy based off the novels by J.K. Rowling. Still has plenty of great visuals and exciting scenes, and continues the wonderful music score by John Williams. Although doesn't have has much of a strong feeling as the first, it still holds out as a worthy sequel.After an incident with a house elf in his bedroom, causing Harry to get into trouble by his step parents, Harry escapes with Ron and his brothers in their flying car. He then lands into more trouble when the gateway to the Hogwarts express is blocked off, forcing them to take the flying car. As Harry continues his life in Hogwarts, attacks of people start happening, leading them to suspect that a hidden chamber in the castle may be the cause of it.Filled with different subplots, but after awhile, they'll conjoin into one. The casting is still great, with all the same actors still portraying their characters well. Once again, brilliantly covers the main topics of the book, and still manages to get its own material. The thing that made the first better is how clever the story begins. Regardless, this one greatly continues the series, with references to the first, as well as finding ways for things from last year to change.Also becomes a little more modern, and less fashionable with everything. Suspense is very clever, with one thing to another, leading you to curiosity beyond everything. It becomes well explained about everything. Once again, you will enjoy it even if you haven't read the book, but for those who did will pretty much know everything.An excellent sequel, though doesn't surpass the first, not by its flaws, but by the strength that the first gave. It has its ups and downs, but overall a worthy and exciting sequel.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0295297/reviews-871

ur22931600

title: Great sequel! review: Daniel Radcliffe stars once again as the Boy who Lived in this exciting and magical sequel to Chris Columbus's excellent fantasy based off the novels by J.K. Rowling. Still has plenty of great visuals and exciting scenes, and continues the wonderful music score by John Williams. Although doesn't have has much of a strong feeling as the first, it still holds out as a worthy sequel.After an incident with a house elf in his bedroom, causing Harry to get into trouble by his step parents, Harry escapes with Ron and his brothers in their flying car. He then lands into more trouble when the gateway to the Hogwarts express is blocked off, forcing them to take the flying car. As Harry continues his life in Hogwarts, attacks of people start happening, leading them to suspect that a hidden chamber in the castle may be the cause of it.Filled with different subplots, but after awhile, they'll conjoin into one. The casting is still great, with all the same actors still portraying their characters well. Once again, brilliantly covers the main topics of the book, and still manages to get its own material. The thing that made the first better is how clever the story begins. Regardless, this one greatly continues the series, with references to the first, as well as finding ways for things from last year to change.Also becomes a little more modern, and less fashionable with everything. Suspense is very clever, with one thing to another, leading you to curiosity beyond everything. It becomes well explained about everything. Once again, you will enjoy it even if you haven't read the book, but for those who did will pretty much know everything.An excellent sequel, though doesn't surpass the first, not by its flaws, but by the strength that the first gave. It has its ups and downs, but overall a worthy and exciting sequel.

there isn't secrets: it's Colombus + Williams + Harris

tt0295297

This is for me the best of the series and it goes as well for the book, the game and the movie. It's the quintessential Potter spirit because it has all the goof things I look for: the school year, the wizardry, the friendship and the mystery. I remember the first time I saw it: it was during a Wednesday baby-sitting of the son of a good friend: He was 6 then and we kept playing the scene when the Spider comes up at the car's window. It's true that the production is less baroque (cheaper?) than the later movies but at last, the young trio is still well coached and the visual stays very realistic even if it's about an imaginary universe. If Hermione takes a health leave, Ginny makes a brilliant substitute and it's funny to see that she has always been this same quiet, shy girl. But this movie counts for me because it's the last of the real Dumbledore. Richard Harris was the perfect choice: his weary voice (a bit like Pacino) and his aura makes him a very warm grandfather and a respected headmaster. Gambon never gets into the robe and it's a pity that Mr. Harris couldn't follow the adventure.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0295297/reviews-896

ur1803589

title: there isn't secrets: it's Colombus + Williams + Harris review: This is for me the best of the series and it goes as well for the book, the game and the movie. It's the quintessential Potter spirit because it has all the goof things I look for: the school year, the wizardry, the friendship and the mystery. I remember the first time I saw it: it was during a Wednesday baby-sitting of the son of a good friend: He was 6 then and we kept playing the scene when the Spider comes up at the car's window. It's true that the production is less baroque (cheaper?) than the later movies but at last, the young trio is still well coached and the visual stays very realistic even if it's about an imaginary universe. If Hermione takes a health leave, Ginny makes a brilliant substitute and it's funny to see that she has always been this same quiet, shy girl. But this movie counts for me because it's the last of the real Dumbledore. Richard Harris was the perfect choice: his weary voice (a bit like Pacino) and his aura makes him a very warm grandfather and a respected headmaster. Gambon never gets into the robe and it's a pity that Mr. Harris couldn't follow the adventure.

Harray! A step-up from the first!

tt0295297

'Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets' follows a similar tale of events to the 'Philosopher's Stone' movie however is superior in almost every aspect.Darker in ambiance, larger in scale, more daring, more interesting and an awesome climax. These are the ways in which the 'Chamber of Secrets' improves on its predecessor; this is largely due to the stimulus from Rowling although credit to Columbus for anchoring a darkened atmosphere and marking the whole package an intriguing piece.With Harry (Daniel Radcliffe) in preparation for his second year at Hogwarts, Aunt Petunia (Fiona Shaw) and Uncle Vernon (Richard Griffiths) refuse to allow him to go following Dobby the house elf's (Toby Jones) antics at a family meeting. Knowing magic was used, they believe Harry to be the culprit. When, Ron (Rupert Grint) and his family rescue him though, he and Ron are unable to make it to Gate 8 3/4 when someone has tampered with its wall portal. As they make it to Hogwarts later than expected, dark forces return to Hogwarts once more. Once more, Harry looks to save the day and believes using Tom Riddle's diary, he can get to the bottom of the sinister goings-on. The films ambiance is - like I've already stated - rather dark, in comparison to its predecessor and parent may want to consider whether any young children should be given the freedom to watch it.Other than the above, this film will suit the majority of audiences as Columbus once more succeeds in completing another successful installment of Rowling's Potter novels, before distributing it on film.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0295297/reviews-908

ur37651320

title: Harray! A step-up from the first! review: 'Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets' follows a similar tale of events to the 'Philosopher's Stone' movie however is superior in almost every aspect.Darker in ambiance, larger in scale, more daring, more interesting and an awesome climax. These are the ways in which the 'Chamber of Secrets' improves on its predecessor; this is largely due to the stimulus from Rowling although credit to Columbus for anchoring a darkened atmosphere and marking the whole package an intriguing piece.With Harry (Daniel Radcliffe) in preparation for his second year at Hogwarts, Aunt Petunia (Fiona Shaw) and Uncle Vernon (Richard Griffiths) refuse to allow him to go following Dobby the house elf's (Toby Jones) antics at a family meeting. Knowing magic was used, they believe Harry to be the culprit. When, Ron (Rupert Grint) and his family rescue him though, he and Ron are unable to make it to Gate 8 3/4 when someone has tampered with its wall portal. As they make it to Hogwarts later than expected, dark forces return to Hogwarts once more. Once more, Harry looks to save the day and believes using Tom Riddle's diary, he can get to the bottom of the sinister goings-on. The films ambiance is - like I've already stated - rather dark, in comparison to its predecessor and parent may want to consider whether any young children should be given the freedom to watch it.Other than the above, this film will suit the majority of audiences as Columbus once more succeeds in completing another successful installment of Rowling's Potter novels, before distributing it on film.

Both Much of What is Right and Much of What is Wrong with the First Movie is also Present Here

tt0295297

As luck would have it, Chamber of Secrets has more of a story sweep than its forerunner, though it lacks much determination or tension. But, most importantly, it does preserve the light-hearted sense of humor and childlike buoyancy that made the first film entertaining. The humor is slightly on the mawkish side this time, and Columbus hasn't decided against tacking on another winning-is-good wrap-up, this time even more peppered with honey-baked schmaltz than last time, but the light-hearted youthful nature of the material is still intact and keeps it engaging even for those of us who haven't seen it in nearly ten years.This second annual production design festival starts with Harry reuniting with Hermione and Ron, and his arch-rival, Tom Felton's Draco, as they prepare for sophomore year at Hogwarts. Many of the old faculty return, including Dumbledore, the stringent McGonagall, and the gloomy, hostile Snape. There's a new recruit, a totally engaging Kenneth Branagh as the charming, narcissistic Gilderoy Lockhart, who is more engrossed in fan mail than teaching defense against the dark arts. But all's not sound at Hogwarts. A sinister conspiracy is looming, with someone plotting to burglarize the renowned Chamber of Secrets and let loose a monster. It's up to Harry and his mates to expose the perpetrator before Hogwarts finishes.All real inspiration motivating this hat-in-hand outing is rooted in Rowling's original ideas. The Harry Potter stories don't break new ground, but they merge time-honored fantasy blueprints into a breezy, creative and contagious concoction, but Columbus isn't poised to make any real leaps with the material, and periodically this suit-following sequel seems more like processed merchandise than a live, three-dimensional film. It pleases, meets expectations, but doesn't blow one's mind.All of the unforgettable moments happen in the powerfully dynamic latter half of the movie, including an staggeringly accomplished gathering of giant, inhospitable spiders and a likewise arresting encounter with a massive snake. These scenes, with their perfect virtual worlds and graphic effects, minify even the most imposing sequence from the first movie. The film's other significant effect is Dobby the computer-generated House Elf, who at once manages to be little more compelling and a little less grating than Jar-Jar Binks, sans minstrelsy.Radcliffe, Watson and Grint are more self-possessed and practiced than in their previous excursion, especially Grint, who has settled impeccably into the role of the more hapless, more neurotic comic relief. Branagh had been below the radar in the past few years. It's refreshing to see him burst back into the public interest with something this pleasant. The other noteworthy add-on is Jason Isaacs, who admits emits unadulterated wickedness, as Draco's father, Lucius.Indeed, much of what made the first film so charming stays resolutely primed, from the strapping ensemble performances to Stuart Craig's impressive production design. The atmosphere of invention, that early interface with the stories' vibrant characters and quirky corresponding world, is absent. In its place comes frenetic commotion. As companion pieces, Sorcerer's Stone and Chamber of Secrets interlock perfectly. Not shocking, bearing in mind that many of the same people were responsible for both.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0295297/reviews-883

ur8625456

title: Both Much of What is Right and Much of What is Wrong with the First Movie is also Present Here review: As luck would have it, Chamber of Secrets has more of a story sweep than its forerunner, though it lacks much determination or tension. But, most importantly, it does preserve the light-hearted sense of humor and childlike buoyancy that made the first film entertaining. The humor is slightly on the mawkish side this time, and Columbus hasn't decided against tacking on another winning-is-good wrap-up, this time even more peppered with honey-baked schmaltz than last time, but the light-hearted youthful nature of the material is still intact and keeps it engaging even for those of us who haven't seen it in nearly ten years.This second annual production design festival starts with Harry reuniting with Hermione and Ron, and his arch-rival, Tom Felton's Draco, as they prepare for sophomore year at Hogwarts. Many of the old faculty return, including Dumbledore, the stringent McGonagall, and the gloomy, hostile Snape. There's a new recruit, a totally engaging Kenneth Branagh as the charming, narcissistic Gilderoy Lockhart, who is more engrossed in fan mail than teaching defense against the dark arts. But all's not sound at Hogwarts. A sinister conspiracy is looming, with someone plotting to burglarize the renowned Chamber of Secrets and let loose a monster. It's up to Harry and his mates to expose the perpetrator before Hogwarts finishes.All real inspiration motivating this hat-in-hand outing is rooted in Rowling's original ideas. The Harry Potter stories don't break new ground, but they merge time-honored fantasy blueprints into a breezy, creative and contagious concoction, but Columbus isn't poised to make any real leaps with the material, and periodically this suit-following sequel seems more like processed merchandise than a live, three-dimensional film. It pleases, meets expectations, but doesn't blow one's mind.All of the unforgettable moments happen in the powerfully dynamic latter half of the movie, including an staggeringly accomplished gathering of giant, inhospitable spiders and a likewise arresting encounter with a massive snake. These scenes, with their perfect virtual worlds and graphic effects, minify even the most imposing sequence from the first movie. The film's other significant effect is Dobby the computer-generated House Elf, who at once manages to be little more compelling and a little less grating than Jar-Jar Binks, sans minstrelsy.Radcliffe, Watson and Grint are more self-possessed and practiced than in their previous excursion, especially Grint, who has settled impeccably into the role of the more hapless, more neurotic comic relief. Branagh had been below the radar in the past few years. It's refreshing to see him burst back into the public interest with something this pleasant. The other noteworthy add-on is Jason Isaacs, who admits emits unadulterated wickedness, as Draco's father, Lucius.Indeed, much of what made the first film so charming stays resolutely primed, from the strapping ensemble performances to Stuart Craig's impressive production design. The atmosphere of invention, that early interface with the stories' vibrant characters and quirky corresponding world, is absent. In its place comes frenetic commotion. As companion pieces, Sorcerer's Stone and Chamber of Secrets interlock perfectly. Not shocking, bearing in mind that many of the same people were responsible for both.

A prodigious original creative imagination

tt0295297

The books by J. K. Rowling narrating Harry Potter's saga are indeed the product of a powerful creative imagination and an original one into the bargain. She creates an universe that lives entirely in her head around a school of wizards that is described in all its details, rules, habits and characters whatever odd or strange they may be making it to appear as real. The atmosphere of the school situates itself in an old mansion or castle or palace which lends it a Gothic atmosphere that adds mystery to the stories involved. This movie follows faithfully these features without losing its aesthetic autonomy as a movie (which is an art other than literature) translating the most thrilling moments of the book by effective visual effects. The fantastic scenes which we see, however, are not more thrilling than others shown on other fantastic movies. And of course we cannot forget this is a movie for children or teen-agers therefore we adults must forget our own values while watching it. Nevertheless, as usual, the general subject is the fight between Good and Evil which always ends with the latter's defeat though only temporary because in the following movie of the series that fight is resumed again. A good movie to entertain and amuse and nothing more.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0295297/reviews-813

ur1046460

title: A prodigious original creative imagination review: The books by J. K. Rowling narrating Harry Potter's saga are indeed the product of a powerful creative imagination and an original one into the bargain. She creates an universe that lives entirely in her head around a school of wizards that is described in all its details, rules, habits and characters whatever odd or strange they may be making it to appear as real. The atmosphere of the school situates itself in an old mansion or castle or palace which lends it a Gothic atmosphere that adds mystery to the stories involved. This movie follows faithfully these features without losing its aesthetic autonomy as a movie (which is an art other than literature) translating the most thrilling moments of the book by effective visual effects. The fantastic scenes which we see, however, are not more thrilling than others shown on other fantastic movies. And of course we cannot forget this is a movie for children or teen-agers therefore we adults must forget our own values while watching it. Nevertheless, as usual, the general subject is the fight between Good and Evil which always ends with the latter's defeat though only temporary because in the following movie of the series that fight is resumed again. A good movie to entertain and amuse and nothing more.

"It is not our abilities that show what we truly are. It is our choices."

tt0295297

'Chamber of Secrets' builds on the intrigue and excitement of the first film in the Harry Potter series - 'The Sorceror's Stone'. It's cool to see the main characters grow and develop in their roles, now in their second year at the Hogwarts School. If anything, this film has even more action and adventure than the first, though for youngsters it might require a bit of caution. There are some unusually harsh and brutal scenes here, like that aggressive tree the boys land in with the magical Weasley car, and the monstrous basilisk that Harry battles near the finale. At nearly three hours, the film doesn't seem to have many slow spots, although the repeat of a quidditch match from the first picture seemed unnecessary for me.New characters added to the mix include Lucius Malfoy (Jason Isaacs), father of Harry's student nemesis Draco (Tom Fenton), Kenneth Brannagh as the scurrilous Defender Against the Dark Arts, Bonnie Wright as Ron Weasley's sister Ginny, and the computer generated elf Dobby, reminding me somewhat of the Gollum character in the Lord of the Rings series. Principal players from the first picture seem to have been underused, like Maggie Smith and Alan Rickman, but not having read the books, I'm sure their characters have larger roles to play in the films I haven't seen yet.It probably seems odd that I'm reviewing the films in this series so late in the game, but I'm not really a fan of the Harry Potter books or their transition to film. However now that they've all been released to the big screen I can watch them in order without having to wait a year or two between pictures. I found the first two to be entertaining enough with the type of whimsy and magical elements I enjoy in a well done film, so I look forward to the rest in due course.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0295297/reviews-900

ur2707735

title: "It is not our abilities that show what we truly are. It is our choices." review: 'Chamber of Secrets' builds on the intrigue and excitement of the first film in the Harry Potter series - 'The Sorceror's Stone'. It's cool to see the main characters grow and develop in their roles, now in their second year at the Hogwarts School. If anything, this film has even more action and adventure than the first, though for youngsters it might require a bit of caution. There are some unusually harsh and brutal scenes here, like that aggressive tree the boys land in with the magical Weasley car, and the monstrous basilisk that Harry battles near the finale. At nearly three hours, the film doesn't seem to have many slow spots, although the repeat of a quidditch match from the first picture seemed unnecessary for me.New characters added to the mix include Lucius Malfoy (Jason Isaacs), father of Harry's student nemesis Draco (Tom Fenton), Kenneth Brannagh as the scurrilous Defender Against the Dark Arts, Bonnie Wright as Ron Weasley's sister Ginny, and the computer generated elf Dobby, reminding me somewhat of the Gollum character in the Lord of the Rings series. Principal players from the first picture seem to have been underused, like Maggie Smith and Alan Rickman, but not having read the books, I'm sure their characters have larger roles to play in the films I haven't seen yet.It probably seems odd that I'm reviewing the films in this series so late in the game, but I'm not really a fan of the Harry Potter books or their transition to film. However now that they've all been released to the big screen I can watch them in order without having to wait a year or two between pictures. I found the first two to be entertaining enough with the type of whimsy and magical elements I enjoy in a well done film, so I look forward to the rest in due course.

A well done fantasy film

tt0295297

Many people say that Chris Columbus's Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets (2002) is much better than it's predecessor due to the more, action, entertainment, and thrills, but not with me what I look for in a Harry Potter movie is good action, entertainment, humor,acting, effects (now I do because e I didn't expect these types of effects to be used in Sorcerer's Stone.), and many more. The movie tells the story of while Harry Potter (played by Daniel Radcliffe) is back in his Uncle Vernon's (played by Richard Griffiths) and his Aunt Petunia's (played by Fiona Shaw) home with Potter being tortured starved and neglected just like he was in the very first Harry Potter movie, meanwhile while Vernon has guests over and gets distracted talking a little house elf by the name of Dobby (voiced by Toby Jones) comes along to tell Harry not to return to Hogwarts because something very serious that he for some reason doesn't mention because maybe that is all he knows what happened, or whether none of the professors told him that the chamber of secrets had been opened. And of course Potter thinks that Dobby is bluffing because from what I believe he doesn't think that it was possible for someone to get it to open.After the short/rackety and over-dramatic visit that Dobby gave to Harry, then all of the sudden Harry gets rescued by his old friend Ron Weasley (played by Rupert Grint). One thing that I have noticed while watching the first two Harry Potter movies I noticed that they both reminded me of Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings trilogy of which I saw earlier this year. There is a lot of things I do love about this movie, of which I love the characters, casting choices, costumes, the magnificent score by John Williams, direction by Columbus, the screenplay, and the visual effects to this movie. This movie is one of the best fantasy movies that i have seen in a very long time, and I hope that I do enjoy the rest of the Harry Potter movies which includes Prisoner of Azkaban (2004), Goblet of Fire (2005), Order of the Phoenix (2007), Half Blood Prince (2009), and Deathly Hallows parts 1 and 2 (2010 and 2011).

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0295297/reviews-942

ur33697153

title: A well done fantasy film review: Many people say that Chris Columbus's Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets (2002) is much better than it's predecessor due to the more, action, entertainment, and thrills, but not with me what I look for in a Harry Potter movie is good action, entertainment, humor,acting, effects (now I do because e I didn't expect these types of effects to be used in Sorcerer's Stone.), and many more. The movie tells the story of while Harry Potter (played by Daniel Radcliffe) is back in his Uncle Vernon's (played by Richard Griffiths) and his Aunt Petunia's (played by Fiona Shaw) home with Potter being tortured starved and neglected just like he was in the very first Harry Potter movie, meanwhile while Vernon has guests over and gets distracted talking a little house elf by the name of Dobby (voiced by Toby Jones) comes along to tell Harry not to return to Hogwarts because something very serious that he for some reason doesn't mention because maybe that is all he knows what happened, or whether none of the professors told him that the chamber of secrets had been opened. And of course Potter thinks that Dobby is bluffing because from what I believe he doesn't think that it was possible for someone to get it to open.After the short/rackety and over-dramatic visit that Dobby gave to Harry, then all of the sudden Harry gets rescued by his old friend Ron Weasley (played by Rupert Grint). One thing that I have noticed while watching the first two Harry Potter movies I noticed that they both reminded me of Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings trilogy of which I saw earlier this year. There is a lot of things I do love about this movie, of which I love the characters, casting choices, costumes, the magnificent score by John Williams, direction by Columbus, the screenplay, and the visual effects to this movie. This movie is one of the best fantasy movies that i have seen in a very long time, and I hope that I do enjoy the rest of the Harry Potter movies which includes Prisoner of Azkaban (2004), Goblet of Fire (2005), Order of the Phoenix (2007), Half Blood Prince (2009), and Deathly Hallows parts 1 and 2 (2010 and 2011).

Not as good as the book.

tt0295297

This movie, like the first, was very well done. Also like the first one, there were some major and minor differences; however, not all of these seemed to work as well. Obviously it's impossible to include every aspect but there were some things that I think they could've/should've done differently. The most glaring example is how they butchered the ending of the movie. That didn't happen even remotely that way in the book. They made the Harry Potter character look kind of dumb with the way he reacted in the chamber whereas in the book, the things that happened weren't necessarily in his control and he had to react in certain ways in order to survive. Also, they cut out quite a bit of the process Harry, Ron, and Hermione took in discovering the secret. Still, they ultimately got the gist of the book and didn't really leave out anything too major. The acting of the students was drastically improved so the movie flowed smoother. I just thought they could've done a much better job with the book-to-movie adaptation.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0295297/reviews-903

ur23843983

title: Not as good as the book. review: This movie, like the first, was very well done. Also like the first one, there were some major and minor differences; however, not all of these seemed to work as well. Obviously it's impossible to include every aspect but there were some things that I think they could've/should've done differently. The most glaring example is how they butchered the ending of the movie. That didn't happen even remotely that way in the book. They made the Harry Potter character look kind of dumb with the way he reacted in the chamber whereas in the book, the things that happened weren't necessarily in his control and he had to react in certain ways in order to survive. Also, they cut out quite a bit of the process Harry, Ron, and Hermione took in discovering the secret. Still, they ultimately got the gist of the book and didn't really leave out anything too major. The acting of the students was drastically improved so the movie flowed smoother. I just thought they could've done a much better job with the book-to-movie adaptation.

Bloated and Americanised adaptation

tt0295297

Director Chris Columbus, responsible for popular cuddly, family-friendly movies such as Home Alone (1990) and Mrs. Doubtfire (1993), here makes his second, and thankfully last, entry into the Harry Potter franchise. The series needed to go way darker after Chamber of Secrets, and did, and this film marked the ending of the bright, and non-threatening, adventures for Harry and co. It's also the last time Potter the film so painstakingly stuck to Harry the book, and here everything that should have been cut in fact remains. Due to this, and the exhausting running time, Chamber of Secrets is the worst of all 8 films.Still stuck with his horrible adoptive parents (Richard Griffiths and Fiona Shaw) for the summer while he awaits another year at his beloved Hogwarts, Harry Potter (Daniel Radcliffe) is visited by house-elf Dobby (voiced by Toby Jones), who warns him that he must not return to the school of wizardry this year. He finds his efforts to catch the Hogwarts Express scuppered, and instead must travel by flying car with his daft friend Ron Weasley (Rupert Grint). When he does arrive, students begin to turn up petrified (literally), with whispers of the mythical Chamber of Secrets being re-opened and unleashing a terrifying monster into the school.While the first film needed to spend time on developing the world that J.K. Rowling so beautifully imagined and the colourful characters who inhabit it, Chamber of Secrets has no such baggage. Yet Columbus, along with screenwriter Steve Kloves, have done little other than simply film the images millions of fans already have imprinted in their mind. We seem to slog through every second of Harry's second year at Hogwarts, with little thought having been given to the humour and charm that seemed to spatter every paragraph in the engrossing novels.Instead, we get special-effects aplenty, with long periods dedicated to a flying car with a mind of it's own, some hungry spiders in the forest, and a Quidditch match that does little that the first film didn't do already. Rowling's books are so recognisably British, with old eccentrics who all seem to have Monty Python-silly senses of humour, and that feeling of the characters all sitting near a comforting roaring fire. Even though Columbus have upheld Rowling's demand for an all- British cast, everything in the film seems fat and Americanised, all CGI and no heart, so far removed from Britain that I almost expected Steve Martin or Robin Williams to walk in.There are a few saving graces, namely the stellar cast of adults, all returning from the first film. It also introduces Kenneth Branagh as celebrity wizard and new Defence Against the Dark Arts teacher Gilderoy Lockhart, and Jason Isaacs as the father of Harry's arch-nemesis Draco Malfoy (Tom Felton). They chew on their scenes, helping save the still- struggling Radcliffe and Emma Watson (who would get better as the films progressed). It also marked the sad passing of Richard Harris, here appearing for the final time as Dumbeldore, before being replaced by Michael Gambon in the role. But a few decent performances cannot save this bloated, sickly film from feeling stretched and an hour too long.www.the-wrath-of-blog.blogspot.com

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0295297/reviews-934

ur3741220

title: Bloated and Americanised adaptation review: Director Chris Columbus, responsible for popular cuddly, family-friendly movies such as Home Alone (1990) and Mrs. Doubtfire (1993), here makes his second, and thankfully last, entry into the Harry Potter franchise. The series needed to go way darker after Chamber of Secrets, and did, and this film marked the ending of the bright, and non-threatening, adventures for Harry and co. It's also the last time Potter the film so painstakingly stuck to Harry the book, and here everything that should have been cut in fact remains. Due to this, and the exhausting running time, Chamber of Secrets is the worst of all 8 films.Still stuck with his horrible adoptive parents (Richard Griffiths and Fiona Shaw) for the summer while he awaits another year at his beloved Hogwarts, Harry Potter (Daniel Radcliffe) is visited by house-elf Dobby (voiced by Toby Jones), who warns him that he must not return to the school of wizardry this year. He finds his efforts to catch the Hogwarts Express scuppered, and instead must travel by flying car with his daft friend Ron Weasley (Rupert Grint). When he does arrive, students begin to turn up petrified (literally), with whispers of the mythical Chamber of Secrets being re-opened and unleashing a terrifying monster into the school.While the first film needed to spend time on developing the world that J.K. Rowling so beautifully imagined and the colourful characters who inhabit it, Chamber of Secrets has no such baggage. Yet Columbus, along with screenwriter Steve Kloves, have done little other than simply film the images millions of fans already have imprinted in their mind. We seem to slog through every second of Harry's second year at Hogwarts, with little thought having been given to the humour and charm that seemed to spatter every paragraph in the engrossing novels.Instead, we get special-effects aplenty, with long periods dedicated to a flying car with a mind of it's own, some hungry spiders in the forest, and a Quidditch match that does little that the first film didn't do already. Rowling's books are so recognisably British, with old eccentrics who all seem to have Monty Python-silly senses of humour, and that feeling of the characters all sitting near a comforting roaring fire. Even though Columbus have upheld Rowling's demand for an all- British cast, everything in the film seems fat and Americanised, all CGI and no heart, so far removed from Britain that I almost expected Steve Martin or Robin Williams to walk in.There are a few saving graces, namely the stellar cast of adults, all returning from the first film. It also introduces Kenneth Branagh as celebrity wizard and new Defence Against the Dark Arts teacher Gilderoy Lockhart, and Jason Isaacs as the father of Harry's arch-nemesis Draco Malfoy (Tom Felton). They chew on their scenes, helping save the still- struggling Radcliffe and Emma Watson (who would get better as the films progressed). It also marked the sad passing of Richard Harris, here appearing for the final time as Dumbeldore, before being replaced by Michael Gambon in the role. But a few decent performances cannot save this bloated, sickly film from feeling stretched and an hour too long.www.the-wrath-of-blog.blogspot.com

Not Bad at All

tt0295297

Saw the movie last night. I like the three kids, they are maturing on stage and off. Lucius Malfoy is perfect. Not enough time spent in the class room and the Basilisk wasn't as well done as I had hoped. Dobby was good, as were all the CGIs. I knew that this would be a darker movie, and it was. I am worried that Azkaban will need to be 3.5 hours, so maybe an intermission will be in order. Anyway, I think the movie is worth it, and in some ways (acting, mostly), better than the first. Can't get enough of the Weasley family.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0295297/reviews-72

ur1591197

title: Not Bad at All review: Saw the movie last night. I like the three kids, they are maturing on stage and off. Lucius Malfoy is perfect. Not enough time spent in the class room and the Basilisk wasn't as well done as I had hoped. Dobby was good, as were all the CGIs. I knew that this would be a darker movie, and it was. I am worried that Azkaban will need to be 3.5 hours, so maybe an intermission will be in order. Anyway, I think the movie is worth it, and in some ways (acting, mostly), better than the first. Can't get enough of the Weasley family.

Better than the original... They grew up after a year.

tt0295297

I had one problem with the first film, The Sorcerer's stone. The three main characters, Harry, Ron, and Hermione, were irritating.Why would they care about all of this stuff? The kids were only supposed to be eleven in the movie. Why would they care if Snape was a bad guy or that stuff about the Sorcerer's stone? You don't see any other eleven year old playing real life chess. You know why? Because the Potter films are fictional. The sequel to the original, The Chamber of Secrets, is a lot better. Here are the reason why it's better: It's creepier, it's darker, it's funnier, and... the three stars grew up. Daniel Radcliffe definitely did. So did Rupert Grint and Emma Watson and they weren't as irritating. They really don't grow up until The Prisoner of Azkaban. The Chamber of Secrets is actually a disturbing film. There are large spiders, a basilisk, and blood. I won't go into the plot outline for The Chamber of secrets, but I thought I would let you know. This is an improvement on the original film. Like every Potter film, they keep getting better and better. They continue to get darker and darker. Here is my entire theory on the Potter films. The Darker, the better. That's what makes this film better than The Sorcerer's stone.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0295297/reviews-844

ur21821220

title: Better than the original... They grew up after a year. review: I had one problem with the first film, The Sorcerer's stone. The three main characters, Harry, Ron, and Hermione, were irritating.Why would they care about all of this stuff? The kids were only supposed to be eleven in the movie. Why would they care if Snape was a bad guy or that stuff about the Sorcerer's stone? You don't see any other eleven year old playing real life chess. You know why? Because the Potter films are fictional. The sequel to the original, The Chamber of Secrets, is a lot better. Here are the reason why it's better: It's creepier, it's darker, it's funnier, and... the three stars grew up. Daniel Radcliffe definitely did. So did Rupert Grint and Emma Watson and they weren't as irritating. They really don't grow up until The Prisoner of Azkaban. The Chamber of Secrets is actually a disturbing film. There are large spiders, a basilisk, and blood. I won't go into the plot outline for The Chamber of secrets, but I thought I would let you know. This is an improvement on the original film. Like every Potter film, they keep getting better and better. They continue to get darker and darker. Here is my entire theory on the Potter films. The Darker, the better. That's what makes this film better than The Sorcerer's stone.

Underwhelming

tt0295297

I was underwhelmed. I haven't read the books and I knew nothing going in, except the first movie.This movie is all plot. There isn't one iota of character development at all. we learn nothing new about any of these character's motivations beyond what we already knew from the first film. Characters come and go, and disappear for long stretches as the plot dictates.Many scenes are well done but ultimately pointless and should have been cut to bring the film down to a more bearable running time. In particular, the entire opening sequence of Harry at home. it's Harry Potter 1 reduxe.The spider scene was quite well done and creepy but also extreneous. It's a long scene with a deus ex machia resolution that really doesn't tell Harry anything.Of the 2 scenes of students in class, the one with winged gremlins also serves no function but it was in the book so they included it.The Quiddich match was very well done and exciting. Had the feel of the speeder bike chase from Return of the Jedi. Probably the best part of the film.Even more so than the first one, this film had the feel of plot gears grinding away, each scene happening because the book dictated it that way. As the first one, it lacked any magic or spontinaity. It feels "programmed" and ultimately lifeless, a visualization of the book, not a film on it's own.I wanted to be wow'ed. I wasn't.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0295297/reviews-186

ur0329754

title: Underwhelming review: I was underwhelmed. I haven't read the books and I knew nothing going in, except the first movie.This movie is all plot. There isn't one iota of character development at all. we learn nothing new about any of these character's motivations beyond what we already knew from the first film. Characters come and go, and disappear for long stretches as the plot dictates.Many scenes are well done but ultimately pointless and should have been cut to bring the film down to a more bearable running time. In particular, the entire opening sequence of Harry at home. it's Harry Potter 1 reduxe.The spider scene was quite well done and creepy but also extreneous. It's a long scene with a deus ex machia resolution that really doesn't tell Harry anything.Of the 2 scenes of students in class, the one with winged gremlins also serves no function but it was in the book so they included it.The Quiddich match was very well done and exciting. Had the feel of the speeder bike chase from Return of the Jedi. Probably the best part of the film.Even more so than the first one, this film had the feel of plot gears grinding away, each scene happening because the book dictated it that way. As the first one, it lacked any magic or spontinaity. It feels "programmed" and ultimately lifeless, a visualization of the book, not a film on it's own.I wanted to be wow'ed. I wasn't.

A great improvement by Columbus

tt0295297

Like I said in my review of the Sorcerer's Stone, this film is a definite improvement by director Christopher Columbus from the first one. I think Chris was more comfortable and took more chances with this one. One thing that I couldn't help, but notice was how the cinematography changed. In the first film the color of the film is golden and bright, while in this one is a darker color and the brightness has been considerably diluted. Columbus said in a documentary about the making of this movie that the cinematography here was darker, because it suited the feel and environment of the story much better. In the first one everything is bright because we are getting to see Hogwarts for the first time, and it helps the audience fall in love with the school just like Harry. While in the second one we are already comfortable with the surroundings so things get darker because we see a darker side of Hogwarts that we didn't see in the first one. Again great acting by Radcliffe, Grint and Watson. And some great performances by newcomers Kenneth Branagh, Jason Isaacs, Christian Coulson and Bonnie Wright. This is a great movie for kids and families, and a great addition to the HP franchise.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0295297/reviews-834

ur20945239

title: A great improvement by Columbus review: Like I said in my review of the Sorcerer's Stone, this film is a definite improvement by director Christopher Columbus from the first one. I think Chris was more comfortable and took more chances with this one. One thing that I couldn't help, but notice was how the cinematography changed. In the first film the color of the film is golden and bright, while in this one is a darker color and the brightness has been considerably diluted. Columbus said in a documentary about the making of this movie that the cinematography here was darker, because it suited the feel and environment of the story much better. In the first one everything is bright because we are getting to see Hogwarts for the first time, and it helps the audience fall in love with the school just like Harry. While in the second one we are already comfortable with the surroundings so things get darker because we see a darker side of Hogwarts that we didn't see in the first one. Again great acting by Radcliffe, Grint and Watson. And some great performances by newcomers Kenneth Branagh, Jason Isaacs, Christian Coulson and Bonnie Wright. This is a great movie for kids and families, and a great addition to the HP franchise.

Superb shocker...

tt0073705

There was a time when the drive-in was the place to be; it was at the drive-in that one could find gems like ISLAND OF THE DAMNED (an Italian fright film that began with a group of people coming ashore on an apparently deserted island, only to find that all of the adults on the island have been murdered by the children- a film that may very well have inspired the vastly inferior CHILDREN OF THE CORN). For some unknown reason, ISLAND OF THE DAMNED isn't even listed on the IMDb. David Cronenberg's first feature, THEY CAME FROM WITHIN (a.k.a., SHIVERS), is. Creepy in the extreme, THEY CAME FROM WITHIN is the type of grex that Cronenberg may have had in mind when he said this: "Art is the tree of Life, Science is the tree of Death." When Dan O'Bannon and Ridley Scott set about remaking Mario Bava's PLANET OF THE VAMPIRES (as ALIEN), they borrowed liberally from a number of sources- including the "chest-bursters" from THEY CAME FROM WITHIN. The final scene had great significance for us as we drove slowly out of the drive-in that night, into the waiting darkness...

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0073705/reviews-85

ur1530907

title: Superb shocker... review: There was a time when the drive-in was the place to be; it was at the drive-in that one could find gems like ISLAND OF THE DAMNED (an Italian fright film that began with a group of people coming ashore on an apparently deserted island, only to find that all of the adults on the island have been murdered by the children- a film that may very well have inspired the vastly inferior CHILDREN OF THE CORN). For some unknown reason, ISLAND OF THE DAMNED isn't even listed on the IMDb. David Cronenberg's first feature, THEY CAME FROM WITHIN (a.k.a., SHIVERS), is. Creepy in the extreme, THEY CAME FROM WITHIN is the type of grex that Cronenberg may have had in mind when he said this: "Art is the tree of Life, Science is the tree of Death." When Dan O'Bannon and Ridley Scott set about remaking Mario Bava's PLANET OF THE VAMPIRES (as ALIEN), they borrowed liberally from a number of sources- including the "chest-bursters" from THEY CAME FROM WITHIN. The final scene had great significance for us as we drove slowly out of the drive-in that night, into the waiting darkness...

Open WIDE...

tt0073705

Oh, YEAH!!! Now THIS is what I'm talking' about!If you want to know who established a new direction towards more originality in horror, you almost don't have to look much further than David Cronenberg. On limited budgets, with practically no-name casts (at least in his earlier work), he created some of the nastiest little gems a horror hound could ever hope to skid across! Where Stanley Kubrick's excursions into sci-fi/horror warned that man's faith in technology would eventually betray and destroy him, David said, "Uh-UNHN, baby! Your body will turn against you first, way before that happens!"He'd said it before quite effectively in his first full-length feature, RABID. Then he took it to the next level with SHIVERS, (released in this country as THEY CAME FROM WITHIN.)At a swanky (well, for the '70's, anyway) and relatively isolated apartment complex outside of Montreal, a young doctor is about to discover the horrifying price for his relentless ambition, (as all well-intended mad doctors must.)In an attempt to develop a living organism that would potentially replace failing human organs as a viable substitute, he has instead created a highly contagious parasite, which infects its victims by means of almost any physical or sexual contact and turns them into deranged, sex-crazed zombies! Once the doctor thought he was the master of his creation, but now he is the Host! And for his mistake, everyone else in the complex is about to pay the ultimate price.Though you could say that SHIVERS "borrows" its influence from movies like William Castle's THE TINGLER or the cult favorites THE FLESH EATERS or FIEND WITHOUT A FACE, Cronenberg has put more thought - and a lot more gore - behind his movie than any of those. Plus you just can't go wrong when a movie allows Scream Queen Legend Barbara Steele to strip down and get naked in a bathtub scene...which is only sexy for about a minute, and I won't say more than THAT.Well, whatever inspired him to make it, Cronenberg in turn 'infected' countless other filmmakers with his vision of parasitic terror, and many, many horror films since have duplicated the SHIVERS vibe, (NIGHT OF THE CREEPS, THE HIDDEN, SLUGS and most recently the excellent SLITHER, just to name a few.) Though the low-budget is pretty obvious and some things about it are dated, (this WAS over thirty years ago, after all), Cronenberg still stages some scenes of horror here that will have you open-mouthed with shock and surprise. (Considering the plot of SHIVERS, though, you may want to keep your mouth shut...as much as possible!)

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0073705/reviews-83

ur0541468

title: Open WIDE... review: Oh, YEAH!!! Now THIS is what I'm talking' about!If you want to know who established a new direction towards more originality in horror, you almost don't have to look much further than David Cronenberg. On limited budgets, with practically no-name casts (at least in his earlier work), he created some of the nastiest little gems a horror hound could ever hope to skid across! Where Stanley Kubrick's excursions into sci-fi/horror warned that man's faith in technology would eventually betray and destroy him, David said, "Uh-UNHN, baby! Your body will turn against you first, way before that happens!"He'd said it before quite effectively in his first full-length feature, RABID. Then he took it to the next level with SHIVERS, (released in this country as THEY CAME FROM WITHIN.)At a swanky (well, for the '70's, anyway) and relatively isolated apartment complex outside of Montreal, a young doctor is about to discover the horrifying price for his relentless ambition, (as all well-intended mad doctors must.)In an attempt to develop a living organism that would potentially replace failing human organs as a viable substitute, he has instead created a highly contagious parasite, which infects its victims by means of almost any physical or sexual contact and turns them into deranged, sex-crazed zombies! Once the doctor thought he was the master of his creation, but now he is the Host! And for his mistake, everyone else in the complex is about to pay the ultimate price.Though you could say that SHIVERS "borrows" its influence from movies like William Castle's THE TINGLER or the cult favorites THE FLESH EATERS or FIEND WITHOUT A FACE, Cronenberg has put more thought - and a lot more gore - behind his movie than any of those. Plus you just can't go wrong when a movie allows Scream Queen Legend Barbara Steele to strip down and get naked in a bathtub scene...which is only sexy for about a minute, and I won't say more than THAT.Well, whatever inspired him to make it, Cronenberg in turn 'infected' countless other filmmakers with his vision of parasitic terror, and many, many horror films since have duplicated the SHIVERS vibe, (NIGHT OF THE CREEPS, THE HIDDEN, SLUGS and most recently the excellent SLITHER, just to name a few.) Though the low-budget is pretty obvious and some things about it are dated, (this WAS over thirty years ago, after all), Cronenberg still stages some scenes of horror here that will have you open-mouthed with shock and surprise. (Considering the plot of SHIVERS, though, you may want to keep your mouth shut...as much as possible!)

Ludicrously daft

tt0073705

Hard to believe that I once thought this ludicrously daft horror-comedy, (although I'm not sure the laughs are intentional), was about the sickest movie I'd ever seen. It is fairly nasty in a visceral sort of way but it's also derivative, (it's "Invasion of the Body Snatchers" in all but name), and appallingly acted, (look out, in particular, for the elderly European couple with the walking frame), so that any serious point it may be making is lost. It's really another mad scientist movie, in this case the creation is a parasite, part aphrodisiac, part venereal disease, let loose in a self-contained Montreal apartment block. It could be seen as an AIDS metaphor and it's full of Cronenberg's usual queasy motifs but it's also pretty terrible.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0073705/reviews-61

ur1683855

title: Ludicrously daft review: Hard to believe that I once thought this ludicrously daft horror-comedy, (although I'm not sure the laughs are intentional), was about the sickest movie I'd ever seen. It is fairly nasty in a visceral sort of way but it's also derivative, (it's "Invasion of the Body Snatchers" in all but name), and appallingly acted, (look out, in particular, for the elderly European couple with the walking frame), so that any serious point it may be making is lost. It's really another mad scientist movie, in this case the creation is a parasite, part aphrodisiac, part venereal disease, let loose in a self-contained Montreal apartment block. It could be seen as an AIDS metaphor and it's full of Cronenberg's usual queasy motifs but it's also pretty terrible.

good potential for 70s B-horror

tt0073705

It's an apartment complex with all the amenities on an island in Monteal. Dr. Emil Hobbes is doing deadly experiments to substitute organ transplants with parasites. He kills young Annabelle Brown and then himself. He had infected Annabelle with the parasites which causes uncontrollable sex drive. She had infected others in the apartment which continues to spread. Roger St. Luc is a doctor at the complex who investigates the work of Dr. Hobbes.David Cronenberg has an idea with good potential. It allows for creepy parasites and some sexuality. There are good horror set pieces from Cronenberg. The movie lacks good acting and that seriously holds it back. The directions and camera work are still amateurish. It probably should have concentrated solely on the Dr. Hobbes and Annabelle for the first act. It could have been more bloody and grotesque. It should explain the parasites more at the beginning. The exposition to St. Luc is clunky. It becomes a series of attacks which has some good moments. It's a nice step up for the young Cronenberg.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0073705/reviews-113

ur2898520

title: good potential for 70s B-horror review: It's an apartment complex with all the amenities on an island in Monteal. Dr. Emil Hobbes is doing deadly experiments to substitute organ transplants with parasites. He kills young Annabelle Brown and then himself. He had infected Annabelle with the parasites which causes uncontrollable sex drive. She had infected others in the apartment which continues to spread. Roger St. Luc is a doctor at the complex who investigates the work of Dr. Hobbes.David Cronenberg has an idea with good potential. It allows for creepy parasites and some sexuality. There are good horror set pieces from Cronenberg. The movie lacks good acting and that seriously holds it back. The directions and camera work are still amateurish. It probably should have concentrated solely on the Dr. Hobbes and Annabelle for the first act. It could have been more bloody and grotesque. It should explain the parasites more at the beginning. The exposition to St. Luc is clunky. It becomes a series of attacks which has some good moments. It's a nice step up for the young Cronenberg.

Everything is erotic

tt0073705

This low-budget thing works. That is in spite of the silly business with parasites and now obvious satire. The basic idea is Night of the Living Dead for animal instincts run amok but shift the social context from Vietnam to post-Vietnam consumerism, and together with that shift the cravings to anarchic sex and pleasure. We still get pretty much the same zombie movie, and on purely a b-horror level that is fine.Something else appeals to me, that is a pretty strong evocation of cinematic space: the Starliners apartment complex.It's possible that interiors were filmed on a soundstage, but that doesn't detract from the feel. The same feel I have elsewhere encountered in a similarly drab and quasi-futuristic Jean Rollin flick set entirely in an apartment complex, called The Night of the Hunted.I'd like to describe the place here in a few words. The outside is glass and steel and concrete beams, surrounded by gardens. The entrance is to a moderate lobby with a solemn greyblack marble floor and outside views of greenery on all sides. Narrow halls of each floor are painted in sterile off-white, and a lush carpet muffles the footsteps. The rooms give off the same cramped vibe. Others look curiously empty. At the time, the place must have radiated a bit of the near-future that was expected to soon include voice-activated lights and home computers in every room. The place is advertised on the radio as a utopian resort that provides everything slick and modern.It strikes me now as the most uninspired architecture. It's not coldly futuristic by design like interiors of THX or 2001. It's just drab. Natural light is depressing at all times. The ocean view is bland. The gardens are a passionless stretch of just grass, possibly fake. The pool on ground level is enclosed by unadorned concrete on three sides. There is no personality anywhere. A cool architectural insight: you can know a building's character by what space has been tucked out of sight in the basement, and that basement is an ugly derelict.It works in context, because the place gives the impression of a future that is already here, has been lived-in and decays the soul. Its charm is that of ordinary function. Its peculiar beauty is mediocrity. It numbs, this overrational world of mediocre comforts. In tandem with this, is everyone leading aimless , mediocre lives. Nothing is erotic here, which precisely ignites the need. The mind attempts balance in the opposite direction: even more senseless and violent cravings in pursuit of some passion. The place, the low-budget filmmaking, the non-actors, the uninspired camera (Cronenberg was apparently learning on the job), the sporadic presence of atonal synths in the score, it all comes together to form a coherent world that has palpable , sickly vibe, and that vibe slowly pollutes being and the night.Cronenberg would try to recapture that vibe in Crash, channeling there a lot more Rollin and erotic flow.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0073705/reviews-102

ur17699578

title: Everything is erotic review: This low-budget thing works. That is in spite of the silly business with parasites and now obvious satire. The basic idea is Night of the Living Dead for animal instincts run amok but shift the social context from Vietnam to post-Vietnam consumerism, and together with that shift the cravings to anarchic sex and pleasure. We still get pretty much the same zombie movie, and on purely a b-horror level that is fine.Something else appeals to me, that is a pretty strong evocation of cinematic space: the Starliners apartment complex.It's possible that interiors were filmed on a soundstage, but that doesn't detract from the feel. The same feel I have elsewhere encountered in a similarly drab and quasi-futuristic Jean Rollin flick set entirely in an apartment complex, called The Night of the Hunted.I'd like to describe the place here in a few words. The outside is glass and steel and concrete beams, surrounded by gardens. The entrance is to a moderate lobby with a solemn greyblack marble floor and outside views of greenery on all sides. Narrow halls of each floor are painted in sterile off-white, and a lush carpet muffles the footsteps. The rooms give off the same cramped vibe. Others look curiously empty. At the time, the place must have radiated a bit of the near-future that was expected to soon include voice-activated lights and home computers in every room. The place is advertised on the radio as a utopian resort that provides everything slick and modern.It strikes me now as the most uninspired architecture. It's not coldly futuristic by design like interiors of THX or 2001. It's just drab. Natural light is depressing at all times. The ocean view is bland. The gardens are a passionless stretch of just grass, possibly fake. The pool on ground level is enclosed by unadorned concrete on three sides. There is no personality anywhere. A cool architectural insight: you can know a building's character by what space has been tucked out of sight in the basement, and that basement is an ugly derelict.It works in context, because the place gives the impression of a future that is already here, has been lived-in and decays the soul. Its charm is that of ordinary function. Its peculiar beauty is mediocrity. It numbs, this overrational world of mediocre comforts. In tandem with this, is everyone leading aimless , mediocre lives. Nothing is erotic here, which precisely ignites the need. The mind attempts balance in the opposite direction: even more senseless and violent cravings in pursuit of some passion. The place, the low-budget filmmaking, the non-actors, the uninspired camera (Cronenberg was apparently learning on the job), the sporadic presence of atonal synths in the score, it all comes together to form a coherent world that has palpable , sickly vibe, and that vibe slowly pollutes being and the night.Cronenberg would try to recapture that vibe in Crash, channeling there a lot more Rollin and erotic flow.

You'd better make your own mind up on this

tt0073705

Residents of an apartment block are afflicted with parasites which turn them into sex-mad zombies.His record shows that David Cronenberg is a director of considerable talent. It also shows that he has a number of bees in his bonnet, in that certain themes and motifs recur throughout his output, and it is interesting to look at Shivers in terms of it being the first place where a number of such matters are put on show.There is no other reason for seeing it because, as a film, it is perfectly dreadful. The horror film attractions are not enough to save it from the non-stop torrent of awful acting from the entire cast,and the inexperienced Cronenberg is unable to do anything to rescue it from this: indeed, if anything, his direction adds to the mess.This is one for Cronenberg completists only.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0073705/reviews-105

ur7813355

title: You'd better make your own mind up on this review: Residents of an apartment block are afflicted with parasites which turn them into sex-mad zombies.His record shows that David Cronenberg is a director of considerable talent. It also shows that he has a number of bees in his bonnet, in that certain themes and motifs recur throughout his output, and it is interesting to look at Shivers in terms of it being the first place where a number of such matters are put on show.There is no other reason for seeing it because, as a film, it is perfectly dreadful. The horror film attractions are not enough to save it from the non-stop torrent of awful acting from the entire cast,and the inexperienced Cronenberg is unable to do anything to rescue it from this: indeed, if anything, his direction adds to the mess.This is one for Cronenberg completists only.

Just When You Think You Have Seen It All...

tt0073705

David Cronenberg's first film is one eye-popping, disgustingly interesting, bizarre hodge podge of cinematic originality, amateurism, good special effects, and some of the most sick and twisted things I've seen in a film in a long time. The film is not overly bloody - it is gory - yet, it is so exploitative in what it wants to accomplish. The story deals with a pair of doctors wanting to create a parasite in the body that will take over the function of an organ. One doctor tries his ideas unbeknown-st to the other with a promiscuous 19 year old girl he basically blackmailed into having sex for grades earlier. The film opens with a commercial about this property called the Starlight - an island with a huge apartment complex dressed with its own private doctor, dentist, stores, pool, etc... Just after this a couple go to investigate the Starlight and we cut to the renegade doctor(looking very much like a James Lipton look-a-like) chasing, catching, and scapeling open the tramp-like 19 year old. We then see one of the tenants water-picking his mouth until his side hurts. From there on the film details how these parasites live in the bodies of individuals and are passed on through sexual intercourse. The creatures are weird-looking things that are not unlike giant leeches. After having been a host for these creatures, victims only want to infect others by having sex. It was kind of like a Night of the Living Dead with zombies that wanted to jump on bones rather than gnaw on them. I must praise Cronenberg for his obvious talents as both a writer and a director. His inexperience behind the camera is clearly evident in this film, but you can see that this film allowed him to get much better with his craft. His abilities to create suspense, make the viewer jump, and keep thematic continuity throughout all are here to lesser or greater degrees. And the Cronenberg thread of man's environment or his biological condition being his most frightening reality(a theme which pervades most of his work: Rabid, The Brood, Dead Ringers, etc...)is obvious here as well. BUT...even though the story is pretty good, the direction executed fairly competently, and the acting - by no means good but acceptable, the film gets a bit out of hand for me in several places - almost into chaos in one or two scenes. My jaw dropped from shock, not horrifying shock but rather shock of something being so tasteless, a few times: the young girl in the elevator and the security guard, Barbara Steele and Sue Petrie in a lesbian scene(still trying to get over that one), and the pool scene in particular stand out. It seems like Cronenberg tried way too hard to shock. He learned in his next feature Rabid to use a lot more subtlety. Even though the film is gross on many levels, Cronenberg has some humorous moments too. The old woman walking with a clear parasol when a guy vomits reeked with tongue firmly planted in cheek. The film also boasts a bevy of beauties including the aforementioned stately Steele, a bouncy Sue Petrie, and luscious Lynn Lowry as Nurse Forsythe. Though not as good as his subsequent films like Rabid and The Brood, Shivers definitely deserves a look at a Cronenberg and his craft as a work in progress.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0073705/reviews-48

ur0166205

title: Just When You Think You Have Seen It All... review: David Cronenberg's first film is one eye-popping, disgustingly interesting, bizarre hodge podge of cinematic originality, amateurism, good special effects, and some of the most sick and twisted things I've seen in a film in a long time. The film is not overly bloody - it is gory - yet, it is so exploitative in what it wants to accomplish. The story deals with a pair of doctors wanting to create a parasite in the body that will take over the function of an organ. One doctor tries his ideas unbeknown-st to the other with a promiscuous 19 year old girl he basically blackmailed into having sex for grades earlier. The film opens with a commercial about this property called the Starlight - an island with a huge apartment complex dressed with its own private doctor, dentist, stores, pool, etc... Just after this a couple go to investigate the Starlight and we cut to the renegade doctor(looking very much like a James Lipton look-a-like) chasing, catching, and scapeling open the tramp-like 19 year old. We then see one of the tenants water-picking his mouth until his side hurts. From there on the film details how these parasites live in the bodies of individuals and are passed on through sexual intercourse. The creatures are weird-looking things that are not unlike giant leeches. After having been a host for these creatures, victims only want to infect others by having sex. It was kind of like a Night of the Living Dead with zombies that wanted to jump on bones rather than gnaw on them. I must praise Cronenberg for his obvious talents as both a writer and a director. His inexperience behind the camera is clearly evident in this film, but you can see that this film allowed him to get much better with his craft. His abilities to create suspense, make the viewer jump, and keep thematic continuity throughout all are here to lesser or greater degrees. And the Cronenberg thread of man's environment or his biological condition being his most frightening reality(a theme which pervades most of his work: Rabid, The Brood, Dead Ringers, etc...)is obvious here as well. BUT...even though the story is pretty good, the direction executed fairly competently, and the acting - by no means good but acceptable, the film gets a bit out of hand for me in several places - almost into chaos in one or two scenes. My jaw dropped from shock, not horrifying shock but rather shock of something being so tasteless, a few times: the young girl in the elevator and the security guard, Barbara Steele and Sue Petrie in a lesbian scene(still trying to get over that one), and the pool scene in particular stand out. It seems like Cronenberg tried way too hard to shock. He learned in his next feature Rabid to use a lot more subtlety. Even though the film is gross on many levels, Cronenberg has some humorous moments too. The old woman walking with a clear parasol when a guy vomits reeked with tongue firmly planted in cheek. The film also boasts a bevy of beauties including the aforementioned stately Steele, a bouncy Sue Petrie, and luscious Lynn Lowry as Nurse Forsythe. Though not as good as his subsequent films like Rabid and The Brood, Shivers definitely deserves a look at a Cronenberg and his craft as a work in progress.

Superior zombie horror

tt0073705

In a posh apartment building there seems to be more to a bizarre murder/suicide than first apparent. When this proves to be the case a scheme by an eccentric biology researcher to fund his project come to light and we see what led to the initial grisly murder. The resulting aftermath is even more horrifying.David Cronenberg's first feature film has all the visceral themes of his early works and they are executed with a vengeance. Venturing far into dark and unsettling horror territory Cronenberg crafts a spiraling nightmare of zombie outbreak and promiscuous sex. The film is almost a prelude to the much revered "Dawn of the Dead" by George Romero as it shows the beginning of a zombie outbreak. It is also better and much richer in its story and horror metaphor though the characterizations are slightly more shallow than in "Dawn of the Dead." But the presentation of the irrational horror and unsettling gore is at least on par with "Dawn," despite this film's many obvious limitations.That makes for a must see for horror fans and this is a great first film from a great director. 9/10Rated R for graphic violence and gore

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0073705/reviews-60

ur2214855

title: Superior zombie horror review: In a posh apartment building there seems to be more to a bizarre murder/suicide than first apparent. When this proves to be the case a scheme by an eccentric biology researcher to fund his project come to light and we see what led to the initial grisly murder. The resulting aftermath is even more horrifying.David Cronenberg's first feature film has all the visceral themes of his early works and they are executed with a vengeance. Venturing far into dark and unsettling horror territory Cronenberg crafts a spiraling nightmare of zombie outbreak and promiscuous sex. The film is almost a prelude to the much revered "Dawn of the Dead" by George Romero as it shows the beginning of a zombie outbreak. It is also better and much richer in its story and horror metaphor though the characterizations are slightly more shallow than in "Dawn of the Dead." But the presentation of the irrational horror and unsettling gore is at least on par with "Dawn," despite this film's many obvious limitations.That makes for a must see for horror fans and this is a great first film from a great director. 9/10Rated R for graphic violence and gore

Wanted to see this film for the longest, but mildly disappointed upon finally seeing it

tt0073705

I have seen David Cronenberg's The Brood, Videodrome and The Fly. I enjoyed all three and I thought I would enjoy this one. I enjoyed it a bit, but at the same time I just thought it could have been so much better. The plot was very interesting, but at times it just played out a bit too inconsistently. The acting was at times very weak as the characters seemed to react to certain things completely wrong for what was going on. However, the film did also have some very disturbing scenes, some erotic ones and some nasty gore scenes too. The movie had it all and if it had a bit more focus it would have been as good as the other Cronenberg films I have seen. As it is, I found it to be the weakest.The story starts out by having a voice over and slide show that touts the benefits of living at this apartment complex that is on an island in Canada. Kind of makes this building seem like it is going to be more important than it actually turns out to be. It really is not all that important to the plot. No, what is important is the strange scene where an elderly man attacks a young woman dressed provocatively. He strangles her and makes an incision and pours acid into her. This is just the start as many men in the complex have apparently had a fling with her and she seems to have infected them with some kind of parasite that increases ones sexual appetite and also makes them more sexually violent! It is up to a doctor to try and stop this epidemic before it gets out of hand, but it may already be too late! The movie had a lot of problems, but the main one I had is that if the film was meant to show sexual violence in a disturbing manner, then it was too erotic. If it was trying to be erotic, then it was too disturbing and violent. The parasites in the film looked pretty good and were icky, but at the same time very inconsistent. They make nearly everyone in the movie very amorous. However, the husband has little to do with his wife and does not really show an inclination to want to have sex till halfway into the movie. The parasites also really mess him up, but do not really infect others in the film the same way. Not even the girl initially infected. These things and the rather mundane acting just take this film down a notch when it could have been completely awesome.So this film was okay at times, but overall not all that good or bad. It had some good things such as the scene at the end with all the people as it was better than a lot of zombie films, but a lot of bad too as I have documented already. It has that early Cronenberg flair as it is a science horror film and I rather wish he would go back to making these type of films. I have not seen anything by him in years though, so for all I know perhaps he has and I just do not know what they are. I am glad I have finally seen this one, now I just need to be on the lookout for Rabid.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0073705/reviews-110

ur1111192

title: Wanted to see this film for the longest, but mildly disappointed upon finally seeing it review: I have seen David Cronenberg's The Brood, Videodrome and The Fly. I enjoyed all three and I thought I would enjoy this one. I enjoyed it a bit, but at the same time I just thought it could have been so much better. The plot was very interesting, but at times it just played out a bit too inconsistently. The acting was at times very weak as the characters seemed to react to certain things completely wrong for what was going on. However, the film did also have some very disturbing scenes, some erotic ones and some nasty gore scenes too. The movie had it all and if it had a bit more focus it would have been as good as the other Cronenberg films I have seen. As it is, I found it to be the weakest.The story starts out by having a voice over and slide show that touts the benefits of living at this apartment complex that is on an island in Canada. Kind of makes this building seem like it is going to be more important than it actually turns out to be. It really is not all that important to the plot. No, what is important is the strange scene where an elderly man attacks a young woman dressed provocatively. He strangles her and makes an incision and pours acid into her. This is just the start as many men in the complex have apparently had a fling with her and she seems to have infected them with some kind of parasite that increases ones sexual appetite and also makes them more sexually violent! It is up to a doctor to try and stop this epidemic before it gets out of hand, but it may already be too late! The movie had a lot of problems, but the main one I had is that if the film was meant to show sexual violence in a disturbing manner, then it was too erotic. If it was trying to be erotic, then it was too disturbing and violent. The parasites in the film looked pretty good and were icky, but at the same time very inconsistent. They make nearly everyone in the movie very amorous. However, the husband has little to do with his wife and does not really show an inclination to want to have sex till halfway into the movie. The parasites also really mess him up, but do not really infect others in the film the same way. Not even the girl initially infected. These things and the rather mundane acting just take this film down a notch when it could have been completely awesome.So this film was okay at times, but overall not all that good or bad. It had some good things such as the scene at the end with all the people as it was better than a lot of zombie films, but a lot of bad too as I have documented already. It has that early Cronenberg flair as it is a science horror film and I rather wish he would go back to making these type of films. I have not seen anything by him in years though, so for all I know perhaps he has and I just do not know what they are. I am glad I have finally seen this one, now I just need to be on the lookout for Rabid.

Dreadfully Awful

tt0073705

Being Canadian I have seen many made in Canada film development tax ride off films. This is one of them with 1 a low budget 2 Questionable acting 3 choppy sound etc 4 replace story with shock. Well, I rented 3 films for 5.95 and the price make me feel not to be bad about this wate of time, I would avoid this one if I had to wacth it again. This is a twisted film but with todays special effects nudity etc and sick stories every where there is no shock value at all, I see more watching HBO on cable. Sad comentary for how low we have sunk down too. 3/10

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0073705/reviews-34

ur0453228

title: Dreadfully Awful review: Being Canadian I have seen many made in Canada film development tax ride off films. This is one of them with 1 a low budget 2 Questionable acting 3 choppy sound etc 4 replace story with shock. Well, I rented 3 films for 5.95 and the price make me feel not to be bad about this wate of time, I would avoid this one if I had to wacth it again. This is a twisted film but with todays special effects nudity etc and sick stories every where there is no shock value at all, I see more watching HBO on cable. Sad comentary for how low we have sunk down too. 3/10

An early insight into the genius of Cronenberg

tt0073705

Dr. Hobbes (Fred Doederlin) has been using unorthodox methods upon his transplant patients, placing large, penis-shaped worms in their bodies to act in place of the missing organ. He has placed one in his under-age patient, whom he strangles at the beginning of the film, only to slit his own throat with a razor blade. Nicholas Tudor (Allan Kolman) is a former patient and, after a violent episode, coughs up a worm off his balcony, and it sets about infecting others. Soon enough, the community (a sort of isolated holiday tower block) is overrun with sex-crazed zombies, and it's up to the resident doctor Roger St. Luc (Paul Hampton) to get to the bottom of it.Shivers is David Cronenberg's first full-length feature film, and he offers an insight into a subject that would remain prominent throughout his career. That is the human psyche mixed with the sexual; whether it be sexual promiscuity or inner perversions, it is here wrapped up as a schlock horror. The bland inhabitants of the tower block appear bored and resigned to their positions in the social order. That is, until the parasite quickly spreads and their suppressed sexual desires come to the fore and they are soon f*****g everything in sight and slavering at the mouth. The distinction between sex and horror are blurred to the point where it's difficult to ascertain who is being killed and who is being raped. Cronenberg took huge risks with the censors, exploring and mixing themes such as paedophilia, rape, medical experimentation and sexual disease. With the explosion of AIDS just round the corner, Shivers becomes almost prophetic.This being Cronenberg's first 'proper' film, it is rough around the edges. The horror is manic to the point of ridiculous, as we are treated to an orgy of flesh and blood that is almost non-stop in the last 30 minutes. Cronenberg would soon learn that such gratuitousness is not needed to compliment his social and sexual commentary, and would refine it rather quickly, leading to such great films such as The Brood (1979) and Videodrome (1983). Not to say this ruins the film, after all, it is a Grindhouse favourite, so a bit of over-the-top exploitation is expected. Far from his best work, but a fascinating insight into the mind of one of the greatest horror directors of all time (although lately he has moved away from the genre).

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0073705/reviews-99

ur3741220

title: An early insight into the genius of Cronenberg review: Dr. Hobbes (Fred Doederlin) has been using unorthodox methods upon his transplant patients, placing large, penis-shaped worms in their bodies to act in place of the missing organ. He has placed one in his under-age patient, whom he strangles at the beginning of the film, only to slit his own throat with a razor blade. Nicholas Tudor (Allan Kolman) is a former patient and, after a violent episode, coughs up a worm off his balcony, and it sets about infecting others. Soon enough, the community (a sort of isolated holiday tower block) is overrun with sex-crazed zombies, and it's up to the resident doctor Roger St. Luc (Paul Hampton) to get to the bottom of it.Shivers is David Cronenberg's first full-length feature film, and he offers an insight into a subject that would remain prominent throughout his career. That is the human psyche mixed with the sexual; whether it be sexual promiscuity or inner perversions, it is here wrapped up as a schlock horror. The bland inhabitants of the tower block appear bored and resigned to their positions in the social order. That is, until the parasite quickly spreads and their suppressed sexual desires come to the fore and they are soon f*****g everything in sight and slavering at the mouth. The distinction between sex and horror are blurred to the point where it's difficult to ascertain who is being killed and who is being raped. Cronenberg took huge risks with the censors, exploring and mixing themes such as paedophilia, rape, medical experimentation and sexual disease. With the explosion of AIDS just round the corner, Shivers becomes almost prophetic.This being Cronenberg's first 'proper' film, it is rough around the edges. The horror is manic to the point of ridiculous, as we are treated to an orgy of flesh and blood that is almost non-stop in the last 30 minutes. Cronenberg would soon learn that such gratuitousness is not needed to compliment his social and sexual commentary, and would refine it rather quickly, leading to such great films such as The Brood (1979) and Videodrome (1983). Not to say this ruins the film, after all, it is a Grindhouse favourite, so a bit of over-the-top exploitation is expected. Far from his best work, but a fascinating insight into the mind of one of the greatest horror directors of all time (although lately he has moved away from the genre).

Oozes with style and class.

tt1506999

Having just gotten back from seeing "Haywire", I say that it's one of the best spy films I've ever seen. Starring Gina Carano, along with an A-list cast and one of the most innovative and exciting action scenes ever put to film with plot twists, and eye-popping stunts.What I like best about this film is how character driven it is. Though I like action, I'm mostly into character development and plot and "Haywire" has this in bucket loads. Some of the plot is a bit rough and sketchy, but it is coherent and easy to follow. I was a little confused at some aspects of the plot and certain character motivations, but I was on the edge of my seat when things kick into high gear as the race to clear her name gives way to some hog-wild antics.But the best thing about it all is that it's not just a spy thriller, it's also a noir thriller. That's something seldom seen in the genre and rarely does it get pulled off successfully but Steven Sodeberg manages to do just that. This could be the start of a new genre of spy movies mixed with hard-boiled detective like action. But as dark as this film may be, it's got moments of humor that really work well within the film's dark atmosphere.The acting is great but it is Gina Carano that makes this film. With unflinching charm with her lioness-like eyes, this is one woman you don't really wanna mess with. But she's also vulnerable too, physically and emotionally. In terms of physical prowess with a voluptuous figure to boot, she's FAR more convincing and believable than Zoe Saldana's "Columbiana"(how anyone believes a 90 lbs woman can kick enemies twice her size I would never understand) My only gripe is that she didn't have more emotional depth. True this is her first feature film role and an impressive one at that, but I would've liked to have seen her emote more so that the audience can better emphasize with her. Maybe there's a director's cut of the film that adds more than the theatrical release but that would have to wait. Until then audiences should be thrilled with this film nonetheless.For a first time effort, I was really impressed with this film. It's got action, but character development and plot is much more prominent. The lack of more action may turn off some, but I liked this film more because it actually has a plot and characters you really care about. That's something today's action films need. Haywire fits the bill perfectly in my book and it's much more convincing then Underworld: Awakening. A film that's more about flash than substance.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1506999/reviews-122

ur12680645

title: Oozes with style and class. review: Having just gotten back from seeing "Haywire", I say that it's one of the best spy films I've ever seen. Starring Gina Carano, along with an A-list cast and one of the most innovative and exciting action scenes ever put to film with plot twists, and eye-popping stunts.What I like best about this film is how character driven it is. Though I like action, I'm mostly into character development and plot and "Haywire" has this in bucket loads. Some of the plot is a bit rough and sketchy, but it is coherent and easy to follow. I was a little confused at some aspects of the plot and certain character motivations, but I was on the edge of my seat when things kick into high gear as the race to clear her name gives way to some hog-wild antics.But the best thing about it all is that it's not just a spy thriller, it's also a noir thriller. That's something seldom seen in the genre and rarely does it get pulled off successfully but Steven Sodeberg manages to do just that. This could be the start of a new genre of spy movies mixed with hard-boiled detective like action. But as dark as this film may be, it's got moments of humor that really work well within the film's dark atmosphere.The acting is great but it is Gina Carano that makes this film. With unflinching charm with her lioness-like eyes, this is one woman you don't really wanna mess with. But she's also vulnerable too, physically and emotionally. In terms of physical prowess with a voluptuous figure to boot, she's FAR more convincing and believable than Zoe Saldana's "Columbiana"(how anyone believes a 90 lbs woman can kick enemies twice her size I would never understand) My only gripe is that she didn't have more emotional depth. True this is her first feature film role and an impressive one at that, but I would've liked to have seen her emote more so that the audience can better emphasize with her. Maybe there's a director's cut of the film that adds more than the theatrical release but that would have to wait. Until then audiences should be thrilled with this film nonetheless.For a first time effort, I was really impressed with this film. It's got action, but character development and plot is much more prominent. The lack of more action may turn off some, but I liked this film more because it actually has a plot and characters you really care about. That's something today's action films need. Haywire fits the bill perfectly in my book and it's much more convincing then Underworld: Awakening. A film that's more about flash than substance.

Does this movie have a story?

tt1506999

Something went haywire with Haywire. The lead actress was good, and very athletic, and the cinematography was good too, but the problem was with the story. There was at most a rudimentary facsimile of a story. The movie had the look of a potboiler, right off the assembly-line. For stunt doubles, this movie must have been a bonanza. But alas, a movie is more than just a collection of stunts. It has to have a viable story or the movie becomes stale and this movie proves that point. When a movie loads up the celluloid with action, it's usually a sign that the movie is lacking in other departments. If you like watching a lovely lad running around, getting into skirmishes and occasionally speaking, then this is the movie for you. Otherwise, wait for the movie to go to DVD land.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1506999/reviews-142

ur6458242

title: Does this movie have a story? review: Something went haywire with Haywire. The lead actress was good, and very athletic, and the cinematography was good too, but the problem was with the story. There was at most a rudimentary facsimile of a story. The movie had the look of a potboiler, right off the assembly-line. For stunt doubles, this movie must have been a bonanza. But alas, a movie is more than just a collection of stunts. It has to have a viable story or the movie becomes stale and this movie proves that point. When a movie loads up the celluloid with action, it's usually a sign that the movie is lacking in other departments. If you like watching a lovely lad running around, getting into skirmishes and occasionally speaking, then this is the movie for you. Otherwise, wait for the movie to go to DVD land.

Schizopolis

tt1506999

"My motivation is not financial gain, but a firm belief that the very fabric which holds all of us together will be ripped apart unless every man, woman and child sees this film and pays full ticket price, not some bargain matinée cut-rate deal." - Steven Soderbergh ("Schizopolis") "It's an unbeatable market force, man." - Seth ("Traffic") How seriously are we supposed to take Steven Soderbergh's "Haywire"? Is it an earnest action movie, a parody, or, as snooty French critics are claiming, a "mediation upon" and "deconstruction of genre"? "Haywire's" opening and closing words are "sh*t", possibly articulating exactly what's in-between. The film's title itself suggests something that has gone completely wrong. If you want to get really pretentious you can also read Soderbergh's casting of stunt woman Gina Carana as some kind of comment; several of the director's previous films have explicitly likened acting/performance/plot to vulgar transactions, most notably 2009's "The Gilfriend Experience", which started porn-star Sasha Grey. Here Carana's equally rote and lifeless, suggesting a kind of quasi-pornographic reductionism.The film's plot is your standard Jason Bourne fare, this time with a female US agent being betrayed and hunted down by her government. The film's action set pieces occur on cue and almost perfectly mirror those found in "The Bourne Identity", though Soderbergh directs with a kind of aloof distance. He makes some interesting choices here and there – retro music, shockingly sudden violence, a tone which resembles a collision between Godard and Hong Kong cinema etc – but it's not enough. Paradoxically this also seems to be point: the film wants to be banal and knows its totally ordinary.Since "Schizopolis", Soderbergh's films have been overtly about money and covertly about capitalism and its discontents. So we have films like "Traffic", "King of the Hill", "Contagion", "Side Effects", "The Informant", "The Girlfriend Experience", "Che", "Schizopolis", "Erin Brokovich" etc, all about recessions, financial depressions, whistle-blowers, shady mega-corporations, exploitation, money, price fixing, self-exploitation, Marxist radicals etc. Even Soderbergh's big budget blockbusters (the "Ocean" movies, "Out of Sight" etc) are explicitly about cash, or rather theft. Before he started juggling art-house and mainstream pictures, Soderbergh also directed and starred in the autobiographical "Schizopolis", which featured a war between two characters, one who chased money (and had symbolic affairs with Hollywood) and one who sought to be "free", but whose independence and desire for "content" and "substance", like a certain Preston Sturges hero, leads inevitably to his downfall."Haywire" itself has the schizoid quality of "Schizopolis", at once pleased to be a conventional action movie and supremely ashamed of itself. This contradiction runs throughout all of Soderbergh's pictures. Beyond all this the film presents the "female flip-side" of Soderbergh's "Magic Mike", in much the same way that Soderbergh's "whistleblower" movies ("Informant" and "Erin Brokovich") mirror each another. And so on this level both "Mike" (a film about male strippers) and "Haywire" are about a kind of equal opportunity objectification under capitalism: men and women are marketed to be looked at and old cinematic divides between the sexes ("passive" women objectified by "active" men) have now been thoroughly eradicated. "Haywire" is itself self-consciously a product marketed for male consumers, whilst "Mike's" tailored for the ladies, complete with fetishized male bodies and swinging crotch luggage. But it's not only that capitalism reconfigures sex and bodies into exchangeable commodities ("life's a strip club", "everyone's a whore" etc, old radical slogans which attempted to question what we think of as a benign provision of services), but that the very totems of genre (violence in "Haywire's" case, sex in "Mike") are being likened to pornography.Unsurprisingly, "Mike", "Haywire" and "Girlfriend" are swathed in conversations about money and commerce. "The motive is always money," characters in "Haywire" repeatedly state, in between dialogue about fee structures and insurance payments. The trio of films also feature similar narrative arcs, our leads all confronting their own self exploitation and disposability. "Haywire's" lead fights back, but "Magic Mike's" hero is beaten. He lives in happy self-denial, thinks of himself as a self-made man, an artist who "works with his hands", until he traumatically confronts his bondage. The film's tag-line is itself "Work all day, work it all night", epitomising a kind of all encompassing, blue-collar harlotry.While designed as critique, the films' messages are somewhat compromised by their medium: they're also about the beauty of bodies in motion, the allure of sex, the rush of violence, the cinematic joys of watching good-looking people perform extraordinary physical feats etc. Soderbergh doesn't fight these contractions. This is a stark contrast to his more Kubrickian "The Girlfriend Experience", which was so unsexy it made your nauseous (Soderbergh's a vocal fan of Antonioni, Pasolini and Kubrick; he worked with Antonioni on one anthology and named his production company after "Barry Lyndon").At least two of "Haywire's" action sequences are unique, the first a simple fist fight in a café, the other a cool foot chase over and within buildings. Elsewhere the film's violence toward women is unusually frank. Casting a martial artist also allows Soderbergh to mimic Hong Kong action cinema, using wide shots and long takes rather that rapid-fire editing to impart the illusion of physicality. "Haywire" also has a certain cultivated "flatness" about it (machine-like, emotionless), again reminiscent of "Schizopolis", in which characters said stuff like "generic greeting" or "generic greeting returned", thereby calling attention to the triviality of much (movie) dialogue. If "Haywire" intends to use a similar "flatness" for similar reasons, it's largely pointless. Affectlessness and cool-distance have themselves become the style of most conventional action movies.7.9/10 – Worth one viewing.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1506999/reviews-335

ur4130201

title: Schizopolis review: "My motivation is not financial gain, but a firm belief that the very fabric which holds all of us together will be ripped apart unless every man, woman and child sees this film and pays full ticket price, not some bargain matinée cut-rate deal." - Steven Soderbergh ("Schizopolis") "It's an unbeatable market force, man." - Seth ("Traffic") How seriously are we supposed to take Steven Soderbergh's "Haywire"? Is it an earnest action movie, a parody, or, as snooty French critics are claiming, a "mediation upon" and "deconstruction of genre"? "Haywire's" opening and closing words are "sh*t", possibly articulating exactly what's in-between. The film's title itself suggests something that has gone completely wrong. If you want to get really pretentious you can also read Soderbergh's casting of stunt woman Gina Carana as some kind of comment; several of the director's previous films have explicitly likened acting/performance/plot to vulgar transactions, most notably 2009's "The Gilfriend Experience", which started porn-star Sasha Grey. Here Carana's equally rote and lifeless, suggesting a kind of quasi-pornographic reductionism.The film's plot is your standard Jason Bourne fare, this time with a female US agent being betrayed and hunted down by her government. The film's action set pieces occur on cue and almost perfectly mirror those found in "The Bourne Identity", though Soderbergh directs with a kind of aloof distance. He makes some interesting choices here and there – retro music, shockingly sudden violence, a tone which resembles a collision between Godard and Hong Kong cinema etc – but it's not enough. Paradoxically this also seems to be point: the film wants to be banal and knows its totally ordinary.Since "Schizopolis", Soderbergh's films have been overtly about money and covertly about capitalism and its discontents. So we have films like "Traffic", "King of the Hill", "Contagion", "Side Effects", "The Informant", "The Girlfriend Experience", "Che", "Schizopolis", "Erin Brokovich" etc, all about recessions, financial depressions, whistle-blowers, shady mega-corporations, exploitation, money, price fixing, self-exploitation, Marxist radicals etc. Even Soderbergh's big budget blockbusters (the "Ocean" movies, "Out of Sight" etc) are explicitly about cash, or rather theft. Before he started juggling art-house and mainstream pictures, Soderbergh also directed and starred in the autobiographical "Schizopolis", which featured a war between two characters, one who chased money (and had symbolic affairs with Hollywood) and one who sought to be "free", but whose independence and desire for "content" and "substance", like a certain Preston Sturges hero, leads inevitably to his downfall."Haywire" itself has the schizoid quality of "Schizopolis", at once pleased to be a conventional action movie and supremely ashamed of itself. This contradiction runs throughout all of Soderbergh's pictures. Beyond all this the film presents the "female flip-side" of Soderbergh's "Magic Mike", in much the same way that Soderbergh's "whistleblower" movies ("Informant" and "Erin Brokovich") mirror each another. And so on this level both "Mike" (a film about male strippers) and "Haywire" are about a kind of equal opportunity objectification under capitalism: men and women are marketed to be looked at and old cinematic divides between the sexes ("passive" women objectified by "active" men) have now been thoroughly eradicated. "Haywire" is itself self-consciously a product marketed for male consumers, whilst "Mike's" tailored for the ladies, complete with fetishized male bodies and swinging crotch luggage. But it's not only that capitalism reconfigures sex and bodies into exchangeable commodities ("life's a strip club", "everyone's a whore" etc, old radical slogans which attempted to question what we think of as a benign provision of services), but that the very totems of genre (violence in "Haywire's" case, sex in "Mike") are being likened to pornography.Unsurprisingly, "Mike", "Haywire" and "Girlfriend" are swathed in conversations about money and commerce. "The motive is always money," characters in "Haywire" repeatedly state, in between dialogue about fee structures and insurance payments. The trio of films also feature similar narrative arcs, our leads all confronting their own self exploitation and disposability. "Haywire's" lead fights back, but "Magic Mike's" hero is beaten. He lives in happy self-denial, thinks of himself as a self-made man, an artist who "works with his hands", until he traumatically confronts his bondage. The film's tag-line is itself "Work all day, work it all night", epitomising a kind of all encompassing, blue-collar harlotry.While designed as critique, the films' messages are somewhat compromised by their medium: they're also about the beauty of bodies in motion, the allure of sex, the rush of violence, the cinematic joys of watching good-looking people perform extraordinary physical feats etc. Soderbergh doesn't fight these contractions. This is a stark contrast to his more Kubrickian "The Girlfriend Experience", which was so unsexy it made your nauseous (Soderbergh's a vocal fan of Antonioni, Pasolini and Kubrick; he worked with Antonioni on one anthology and named his production company after "Barry Lyndon").At least two of "Haywire's" action sequences are unique, the first a simple fist fight in a café, the other a cool foot chase over and within buildings. Elsewhere the film's violence toward women is unusually frank. Casting a martial artist also allows Soderbergh to mimic Hong Kong action cinema, using wide shots and long takes rather that rapid-fire editing to impart the illusion of physicality. "Haywire" also has a certain cultivated "flatness" about it (machine-like, emotionless), again reminiscent of "Schizopolis", in which characters said stuff like "generic greeting" or "generic greeting returned", thereby calling attention to the triviality of much (movie) dialogue. If "Haywire" intends to use a similar "flatness" for similar reasons, it's largely pointless. Affectlessness and cool-distance have themselves become the style of most conventional action movies.7.9/10 – Worth one viewing.

An awkward arty/spy movie made up for by killer moves

tt1506999

The trailers for Steven Soderbergh's "Haywire" promised me a solid cast and some serious fight scenes. It delivered on both counts, but deflated when the fists weren't flying. YouTube any of the TV spots for this thing, and you'll see that the fists and feet of fury were the centerpiece of the entire marketing campaign. Those ad guys knew what they were doing. But they were selling something akin to "Salt" or even a lady "Bourne", when the real thing is a much more stylish (dare I say, "arty") piece of violent espionage.And while I was entertained, Soderbergh's brand of cool groove and style is better suited to the crime and caper flick. "Haywire" becomes bogged down in the quiet talky scenes, leaving you antsy for the next fight sequence. And it grinds to a halt in the third act when things become Bill Paxton-centric. But that's my primary beef, and were it not for this, "Haywire" would be a solid 8.5But it still has plenty going for it. For one, it's very well-cast. Ewan McGregor, Michael Fassbender, Antonio Banderas and Michael Douglas all give engaging performances (especially Douglas). For any of "Haywire"'s faults, that at least can be counted on. There's some fine scenery, as well (especially Bill Paxton's house; great location). It's also very well-scored (Soderbergh + David Holmes = Win-Win), and Holmes supplies the lion's share of the film's groove. The one thing I really hate about this movie (might be a nitpick, I'm not sure) is the voice they dubbed in for Gina Carano. Can't stand that ADR voice; it sounds like a professional voice-over actress for a cosmetics commercial. Carano did the press junket for this thing, her voice isn't a secret. And her voice is ear candy! What the hell, Soderbergh?Which brings me to the main event, the sweet spot, the pièce de résistance: Ms. Carano. That they cast an MMA fighter injects the fight scenes with undeniable authenticity. And those fight scenes are lean, in-your-face and fist-pumpingly brutal (that seaside fight where McGregor gets his ass kicked was particularly satisfying). But even if you don't have a violence fetish, you can't take your eyes off of Carano. To watch this woman work is a true thing of beauty. Something to behold, fear, and ultimately shake your head in astonishment over. The wrestling holds, the parkour, the swift attacks ... And those legs! My god, I want to be a woman just to I can envy Carano for having gams like that! When she unloaded that monster kick on Fassbender in that dress ... hoo boy. Yeah, I know, I'm gonna stop now. But for its faults, it's "Haywire"'s final shot that leaves me with a beaming grin on my face; just the right high note to skip out on. It brands an indelible impression on the viewer as to the focus of the movie: a highly trained woman beating the snot out of her male counterparts. That spy business is just fluff; something to give seasoned actors some dialogue to work with. We all come here for the lady and we all damn well know it. 7/10

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1506999/reviews-372

ur1994077

title: An awkward arty/spy movie made up for by killer moves review: The trailers for Steven Soderbergh's "Haywire" promised me a solid cast and some serious fight scenes. It delivered on both counts, but deflated when the fists weren't flying. YouTube any of the TV spots for this thing, and you'll see that the fists and feet of fury were the centerpiece of the entire marketing campaign. Those ad guys knew what they were doing. But they were selling something akin to "Salt" or even a lady "Bourne", when the real thing is a much more stylish (dare I say, "arty") piece of violent espionage.And while I was entertained, Soderbergh's brand of cool groove and style is better suited to the crime and caper flick. "Haywire" becomes bogged down in the quiet talky scenes, leaving you antsy for the next fight sequence. And it grinds to a halt in the third act when things become Bill Paxton-centric. But that's my primary beef, and were it not for this, "Haywire" would be a solid 8.5But it still has plenty going for it. For one, it's very well-cast. Ewan McGregor, Michael Fassbender, Antonio Banderas and Michael Douglas all give engaging performances (especially Douglas). For any of "Haywire"'s faults, that at least can be counted on. There's some fine scenery, as well (especially Bill Paxton's house; great location). It's also very well-scored (Soderbergh + David Holmes = Win-Win), and Holmes supplies the lion's share of the film's groove. The one thing I really hate about this movie (might be a nitpick, I'm not sure) is the voice they dubbed in for Gina Carano. Can't stand that ADR voice; it sounds like a professional voice-over actress for a cosmetics commercial. Carano did the press junket for this thing, her voice isn't a secret. And her voice is ear candy! What the hell, Soderbergh?Which brings me to the main event, the sweet spot, the pièce de résistance: Ms. Carano. That they cast an MMA fighter injects the fight scenes with undeniable authenticity. And those fight scenes are lean, in-your-face and fist-pumpingly brutal (that seaside fight where McGregor gets his ass kicked was particularly satisfying). But even if you don't have a violence fetish, you can't take your eyes off of Carano. To watch this woman work is a true thing of beauty. Something to behold, fear, and ultimately shake your head in astonishment over. The wrestling holds, the parkour, the swift attacks ... And those legs! My god, I want to be a woman just to I can envy Carano for having gams like that! When she unloaded that monster kick on Fassbender in that dress ... hoo boy. Yeah, I know, I'm gonna stop now. But for its faults, it's "Haywire"'s final shot that leaves me with a beaming grin on my face; just the right high note to skip out on. It brands an indelible impression on the viewer as to the focus of the movie: a highly trained woman beating the snot out of her male counterparts. That spy business is just fluff; something to give seasoned actors some dialogue to work with. We all come here for the lady and we all damn well know it. 7/10

Nothing Special

tt1506999

This film scored 6/10 at a push because of some of the performances and the effects. 'Haywire' was a film I was quite excited about seeing because of its spectacular cast.The plot disappointed me; it was a fairly basic idea but they somehow managed to make it far more complicated than it had to be. They chose not to explain exactly why everyone was after Mallory but half-way through the film you had already pieced together the plot anyway and were left waiting patiently for them to finally explain it. When they do (right at the end of the film) it is done in a way that just makes you confused when you didn't have to be. They eventually explain the goings on with a small montage of people walking down corridors mumbling to one another with loud music over the top so you have to put subtitles on just to hear. The ending was rushed and sloppy and tried to add a pathetic touch of humour with Antonio Banderas' words at the end but because it has been so rushed you're still annoyed.Most of the acting was done really well; Gina Carano has made a great first feature film performance in this and I hope she makes a decent career out of this but I doubt it. Additional performances by Michael Fassbender, Michael Douglas, Antonio Banderas and especially Channing Tatum and Bill Paxton should also be noted. The last two's performances were too short however and deserved more screen time. The one problem I had with the acting was Ewan MacGregor who played the main antagonist in a way. Why anyone thought he would be able to give a powerful performance in such a central part of the story is bizarre; he is bland, has no on-screen presence in this film and actively drains any energy in a scene out of it. The stunts and effects in this film should be noted; it's been a while since I've seen fight scenes where it really does look like the people are fighting each other and causing serious harm. The fight scenes are really well choreographed too and are the main reason why I scored this film so high because in a way these scenes carried the entire film.I'm really disappointed with Steven Soderbergh because he has made some excellent films in his past. This film started out really good but by the end of it you just felt empty.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1506999/reviews-296

ur26267201

title: Nothing Special review: This film scored 6/10 at a push because of some of the performances and the effects. 'Haywire' was a film I was quite excited about seeing because of its spectacular cast.The plot disappointed me; it was a fairly basic idea but they somehow managed to make it far more complicated than it had to be. They chose not to explain exactly why everyone was after Mallory but half-way through the film you had already pieced together the plot anyway and were left waiting patiently for them to finally explain it. When they do (right at the end of the film) it is done in a way that just makes you confused when you didn't have to be. They eventually explain the goings on with a small montage of people walking down corridors mumbling to one another with loud music over the top so you have to put subtitles on just to hear. The ending was rushed and sloppy and tried to add a pathetic touch of humour with Antonio Banderas' words at the end but because it has been so rushed you're still annoyed.Most of the acting was done really well; Gina Carano has made a great first feature film performance in this and I hope she makes a decent career out of this but I doubt it. Additional performances by Michael Fassbender, Michael Douglas, Antonio Banderas and especially Channing Tatum and Bill Paxton should also be noted. The last two's performances were too short however and deserved more screen time. The one problem I had with the acting was Ewan MacGregor who played the main antagonist in a way. Why anyone thought he would be able to give a powerful performance in such a central part of the story is bizarre; he is bland, has no on-screen presence in this film and actively drains any energy in a scene out of it. The stunts and effects in this film should be noted; it's been a while since I've seen fight scenes where it really does look like the people are fighting each other and causing serious harm. The fight scenes are really well choreographed too and are the main reason why I scored this film so high because in a way these scenes carried the entire film.I'm really disappointed with Steven Soderbergh because he has made some excellent films in his past. This film started out really good but by the end of it you just felt empty.

A very entertaining action film

tt1506999

The classic "secret agent betrayed by the government" plot is one of the most popular ones in straight-to-DVD cinema, in which we have many times seen "actors" such as Steven Seagal, Dolph Lundgren and Casper Van Dien in cheap action films, fighting against generic villains and provoking all the destruction permitted by the low budget from the project. Under the direction from the acclaimed Steven Soderbergh, the film Haywire took a similar premise to the big screen, with various famous actors, exotic locations and a visual style much more elegant and elaborated than the one we have seen in the previously mentioned straight-to-DVD cinema.The plot from Haywire is simple, but screenwriter Lem Dobbs complicated it by telling it through flashbacks, and as a consequence, the screenplay takes shape gradually, creating suspense and occasionally surprising us when the connection between apparently isolated events is revealed. I also liked the way in which Dobbs outlined the story in broad strokes so that we take care of filling in the details, basing ourselves on the ambiguous dialogs and other clues left by the screenplay. I also liked the visual style, simultaneously retro and modern, but with an own identity which doesn't feel as an aesthetic ornament, but as a valid technique which complements the dynamic narrative.Gina Carano achieved fame in the Mixed Martial Arts sport, and she also participated in some TV roles. Haywire is her debut as a film actress, and I'm glad to say that her work is extraordinary. She displays a magnetic presence, overflowing charisma and an intensity we will never see in "action actresses" who obviously need stunt doubles even to open the door of a car (Jessica Alba and Katherine Heigl come to mind). In supporting roles, we find Michael Douglas, Antonio Banderas, Bill Paxton, Channing Tatum and Michael Fassbender playing characters which are a bit hollowly written, and which represent gear in order to facilitate the screenplay's advance. The only actor who plays a well built supporting role is Ewan McGregor, and he makes a solid work.In conclusion, I recommend Haywire. Despite a few forced details from the story and the previously mentioned hollow supporting characters, I liked it pretty much, because of its interesting screenplay, Carano's brilliant work, and Soderbergh's creative direction.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1506999/reviews-278

ur6216723

title: A very entertaining action film review: The classic "secret agent betrayed by the government" plot is one of the most popular ones in straight-to-DVD cinema, in which we have many times seen "actors" such as Steven Seagal, Dolph Lundgren and Casper Van Dien in cheap action films, fighting against generic villains and provoking all the destruction permitted by the low budget from the project. Under the direction from the acclaimed Steven Soderbergh, the film Haywire took a similar premise to the big screen, with various famous actors, exotic locations and a visual style much more elegant and elaborated than the one we have seen in the previously mentioned straight-to-DVD cinema.The plot from Haywire is simple, but screenwriter Lem Dobbs complicated it by telling it through flashbacks, and as a consequence, the screenplay takes shape gradually, creating suspense and occasionally surprising us when the connection between apparently isolated events is revealed. I also liked the way in which Dobbs outlined the story in broad strokes so that we take care of filling in the details, basing ourselves on the ambiguous dialogs and other clues left by the screenplay. I also liked the visual style, simultaneously retro and modern, but with an own identity which doesn't feel as an aesthetic ornament, but as a valid technique which complements the dynamic narrative.Gina Carano achieved fame in the Mixed Martial Arts sport, and she also participated in some TV roles. Haywire is her debut as a film actress, and I'm glad to say that her work is extraordinary. She displays a magnetic presence, overflowing charisma and an intensity we will never see in "action actresses" who obviously need stunt doubles even to open the door of a car (Jessica Alba and Katherine Heigl come to mind). In supporting roles, we find Michael Douglas, Antonio Banderas, Bill Paxton, Channing Tatum and Michael Fassbender playing characters which are a bit hollowly written, and which represent gear in order to facilitate the screenplay's advance. The only actor who plays a well built supporting role is Ewan McGregor, and he makes a solid work.In conclusion, I recommend Haywire. Despite a few forced details from the story and the previously mentioned hollow supporting characters, I liked it pretty much, because of its interesting screenplay, Carano's brilliant work, and Soderbergh's creative direction.

A Sophisticated Espionage Wannabee

tt1506999

If not for a relatively smart plot outline, though the actual script had problems, and also for a rather intelligent and more pedestrian approach to espionage, this movie could have been a cheap, American version of one of those by the numbers Asian martial art action movies. It's really difficult to determine whether the more casual and perhaps more realistic setting and behind the scenes look at spying made the movie for artistic, an art film, or a more less sharp, slow paced movie that seemed to be boring rather than compelling. The extended back and forth flashbacks seemed quite unnecessary and there were a number of strategic flaws in the movies such as when there was an obvious opportunity to break an arm or when there was missing shooting out only one instead of two vehicles' wheels. The actual fighting scenes were either more real or more dull depending on what the authentic fighting is really like. It is interesting that for a female contract agent, she sustains much more real spills and falls and injuries than in most espionage movies with men. Overall the movie was uneven, too slow in places, and sometimes much more difficult to follow than was necessary.This movie tried to be more sophisticating raising a refreshing new look, but it wasn't pulled off, especially with the use of the faded tone color for flashbacks and even the apparent avoidance of direct shots using only implied shots that lose the action (such as when an explosive device goes off later in the movie, the audience only hears it) even as the primary character herself set it up. Thus instead of movie such as The Informant! (2009) which has class as well as a unique personality with an interesting sense of humor, Wild Target (2010) that had a more classy look, it needed to incorporate more intelligent ambiance as The Good Shepard (2006) in order to meld the more artful look with the carefully choreographed fighting scenes that seemed as far as from the stylized, appealing scenes found in Elektra (2005).Instead the movie suffered from not being even more raw, gritty in its depiction as with Shadowboxer (2005) or Breach (2007) or the riveting pacing and action found in Deja Vu (2006) or the Bourne Identity (2002). Perhaps the overlooked but superlative espionage movie with Val Kilmer, Spartan (2004) had the right setting and tone and directing that was best suited for the intention of Haywire.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1506999/reviews-63

ur0972645

title: A Sophisticated Espionage Wannabee review: If not for a relatively smart plot outline, though the actual script had problems, and also for a rather intelligent and more pedestrian approach to espionage, this movie could have been a cheap, American version of one of those by the numbers Asian martial art action movies. It's really difficult to determine whether the more casual and perhaps more realistic setting and behind the scenes look at spying made the movie for artistic, an art film, or a more less sharp, slow paced movie that seemed to be boring rather than compelling. The extended back and forth flashbacks seemed quite unnecessary and there were a number of strategic flaws in the movies such as when there was an obvious opportunity to break an arm or when there was missing shooting out only one instead of two vehicles' wheels. The actual fighting scenes were either more real or more dull depending on what the authentic fighting is really like. It is interesting that for a female contract agent, she sustains much more real spills and falls and injuries than in most espionage movies with men. Overall the movie was uneven, too slow in places, and sometimes much more difficult to follow than was necessary.This movie tried to be more sophisticating raising a refreshing new look, but it wasn't pulled off, especially with the use of the faded tone color for flashbacks and even the apparent avoidance of direct shots using only implied shots that lose the action (such as when an explosive device goes off later in the movie, the audience only hears it) even as the primary character herself set it up. Thus instead of movie such as The Informant! (2009) which has class as well as a unique personality with an interesting sense of humor, Wild Target (2010) that had a more classy look, it needed to incorporate more intelligent ambiance as The Good Shepard (2006) in order to meld the more artful look with the carefully choreographed fighting scenes that seemed as far as from the stylized, appealing scenes found in Elektra (2005).Instead the movie suffered from not being even more raw, gritty in its depiction as with Shadowboxer (2005) or Breach (2007) or the riveting pacing and action found in Deja Vu (2006) or the Bourne Identity (2002). Perhaps the overlooked but superlative espionage movie with Val Kilmer, Spartan (2004) had the right setting and tone and directing that was best suited for the intention of Haywire.

Good, entertaining pulp thriller

tt1506999

This is a perfectly entertaining pulp thriller from a film maker who knows a thing or too about both pulp and thrills. The film is cool. The characters are perfumed with idiosyncrasy, not one of them wholly conforming to genre (I particularly like Michael Fassbender's more-than- cameo in this respect). The soundtrack is a winner, David Holmes' re- processing of 1970s fusion jazz managing to be at once urbane but not urban. There's also an experimental edge to one or two of the shots. Chases in Barcelona and Dublin (yes, it's all a little Bourne) are distended and use long edits. They're not totally successful but they are unusual but they're saying something worth listening to, out of the ordinary.Soderbergh has managed to get a hilariously A list cast together. Gina Carano isn't in their league as an actor but she has clearly been schooled well for this project and holds her own in terms of presence. The action is believable and has sufficient loony choreography to meet the leftfield nature of the rest of the production. Good fun. 6/10

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1506999/reviews-81

ur2206551

title: Good, entertaining pulp thriller review: This is a perfectly entertaining pulp thriller from a film maker who knows a thing or too about both pulp and thrills. The film is cool. The characters are perfumed with idiosyncrasy, not one of them wholly conforming to genre (I particularly like Michael Fassbender's more-than- cameo in this respect). The soundtrack is a winner, David Holmes' re- processing of 1970s fusion jazz managing to be at once urbane but not urban. There's also an experimental edge to one or two of the shots. Chases in Barcelona and Dublin (yes, it's all a little Bourne) are distended and use long edits. They're not totally successful but they are unusual but they're saying something worth listening to, out of the ordinary.Soderbergh has managed to get a hilariously A list cast together. Gina Carano isn't in their league as an actor but she has clearly been schooled well for this project and holds her own in terms of presence. The action is believable and has sufficient loony choreography to meet the leftfield nature of the rest of the production. Good fun. 6/10

Didn't do it for me I'm afraid...

tt1506999

It's a film that in the beginning seems extremely incoherent and that's no mistake… it is! The disjointed musical score by David Holmes doesn't help one bit either. As far as performances go, well Gina Carano did a reasonable job as Mallory Kane; I know she did most of her own stunt work which is quite impressive, but her acting skills may still need a little work. We then have the likes of Channing Tatum as Aaron, Michael Douglas as Alex Coblenz, Antonio Banderas as Rodrigo, Ewan McGregor as Kenneth, Michael Fassbender as Paul, Bill Paxton as John Kane and Michael Angarano as Scott who all played their parts well, but over all, for me, it didn't quite work.I have come across several of these films with a decent cast but I well know that this is no guarantee of a decent film. Yes, the fight scenes are pretty spectacular, but no more so than those in the 'Bourne' films. I found the plot far too complex and this wasn't helped by the characterisations which I found it very hard to engage with. It does all tie up quite neatly in the end, but it touches every single base on the way there. The film is only an hour and a half long and it seemed a lot longer than that by the time the final credits rolled… This is not a good sign I'm afraid and so this one does not get my seal of approval.SteelMonster's verdict: NOT RECOMMENDEDMy score: 4.3/10You can find an expanded version of this review on my blog: Thoughts of a SteelMonster.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1506999/reviews-333

ur29798050

title: Didn't do it for me I'm afraid... review: It's a film that in the beginning seems extremely incoherent and that's no mistake… it is! The disjointed musical score by David Holmes doesn't help one bit either. As far as performances go, well Gina Carano did a reasonable job as Mallory Kane; I know she did most of her own stunt work which is quite impressive, but her acting skills may still need a little work. We then have the likes of Channing Tatum as Aaron, Michael Douglas as Alex Coblenz, Antonio Banderas as Rodrigo, Ewan McGregor as Kenneth, Michael Fassbender as Paul, Bill Paxton as John Kane and Michael Angarano as Scott who all played their parts well, but over all, for me, it didn't quite work.I have come across several of these films with a decent cast but I well know that this is no guarantee of a decent film. Yes, the fight scenes are pretty spectacular, but no more so than those in the 'Bourne' films. I found the plot far too complex and this wasn't helped by the characterisations which I found it very hard to engage with. It does all tie up quite neatly in the end, but it touches every single base on the way there. The film is only an hour and a half long and it seemed a lot longer than that by the time the final credits rolled… This is not a good sign I'm afraid and so this one does not get my seal of approval.SteelMonster's verdict: NOT RECOMMENDEDMy score: 4.3/10You can find an expanded version of this review on my blog: Thoughts of a SteelMonster.

One is not many friends

tt1506999

Greetings again from the darkness. Caught an early screening of this one and my quick description is that it's a mash-up of The Bourne Identity, Salt, and the original Mod Squad (a retro feel). In other words, it's a fun ride full of stunning fight scenes filmed with an artistry only director Steven Soderbergh can achieve.Newcomer Gina Carano stars as Mallory Kane, an independent contractor ... the type who handles dirty work for governments and powerful people who must keep their hands somewhat clean. She gets double-crossed on a Barcelona job and becomes the target herself while in Dublin. So this lethal weapon goes on a globe-trotting mission of revenge and messes up people and hotel rooms in the process. If you think a woman can't carry action scenes, then you don't realize Ms. Carano is an MMA fighter. She is the real deal. Her physical skills are on full display and leave little doubt as to her deadly talent.Since this is a Soderbergh film, you know the cast is well-stocked. We get Michael Douglas, Antonio Banderas and Ewan McGregor all at their smarmy best. Additionally we see Michael Fassbender, Channing Tatum and Bill Paxton (as Mallory's father). Trust me when I say not all of these character fare so well in their showdowns with Mallory. Though the script from Lem Dobbs is pretty basic, Soderbergh's way of telling the story is compelling enough to keep us interested between Carano's fights.The color palette alternates between the brown/gold Soderbergh used for Traffic, and the blue/gray from his Ocean's franchise. The jazzy score from David Holmes is a wonderful compliment to the wide variety of scenes and locations, and the tongue-in-cheek humor is expert enough to keep you smiling through the all too serious business chats. A perfect example is the use of a particular S-word to both begin and end the movie.Soderbergh is one of the few directors who refuses to get pigeon-holed into making a certain type of movie. Never short on style or visual flair, he touches many genres and here proves he can twist the action-thriller in a new, fun to watch direction. If you kick back and go for the ride, Haywire will show you a great time.a note of trivia: Gina Carano is the daughter of former Dallas Cowboy quarterback Glenn Carano

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1506999/reviews-9

ur0806494

title: One is not many friends review: Greetings again from the darkness. Caught an early screening of this one and my quick description is that it's a mash-up of The Bourne Identity, Salt, and the original Mod Squad (a retro feel). In other words, it's a fun ride full of stunning fight scenes filmed with an artistry only director Steven Soderbergh can achieve.Newcomer Gina Carano stars as Mallory Kane, an independent contractor ... the type who handles dirty work for governments and powerful people who must keep their hands somewhat clean. She gets double-crossed on a Barcelona job and becomes the target herself while in Dublin. So this lethal weapon goes on a globe-trotting mission of revenge and messes up people and hotel rooms in the process. If you think a woman can't carry action scenes, then you don't realize Ms. Carano is an MMA fighter. She is the real deal. Her physical skills are on full display and leave little doubt as to her deadly talent.Since this is a Soderbergh film, you know the cast is well-stocked. We get Michael Douglas, Antonio Banderas and Ewan McGregor all at their smarmy best. Additionally we see Michael Fassbender, Channing Tatum and Bill Paxton (as Mallory's father). Trust me when I say not all of these character fare so well in their showdowns with Mallory. Though the script from Lem Dobbs is pretty basic, Soderbergh's way of telling the story is compelling enough to keep us interested between Carano's fights.The color palette alternates between the brown/gold Soderbergh used for Traffic, and the blue/gray from his Ocean's franchise. The jazzy score from David Holmes is a wonderful compliment to the wide variety of scenes and locations, and the tongue-in-cheek humor is expert enough to keep you smiling through the all too serious business chats. A perfect example is the use of a particular S-word to both begin and end the movie.Soderbergh is one of the few directors who refuses to get pigeon-holed into making a certain type of movie. Never short on style or visual flair, he touches many genres and here proves he can twist the action-thriller in a new, fun to watch direction. If you kick back and go for the ride, Haywire will show you a great time.a note of trivia: Gina Carano is the daughter of former Dallas Cowboy quarterback Glenn Carano

Carano Goes "Haywire" in a Good Way

tt1506999

Physically imposing Channing Tatum as Aaron politely asks Gina Carano as rogue agent Mallory to give herself up. She replies, "I don't think so…" Tatum throws hot coffee in Carano's face, and then viciously slams her head into the counter. She weathers the beating, and then picks her moment to unleash quick hooks. She manipulates Tatum to the ground and snaps his arm in a jujitsu lock. Carano is a fierce presence and a genuine force on screen. She is gorgeous—long black hair and ultra fit body. The former MMA champion is imposing herself standing at 5'8". But she is fighting ripped 6'1" Tatum and Michael Fassbender. Carano is the real deal. Director Steven Soderbergh does justice to her fighting acumen. In "Haywire" you see full body fight choreography with speed, power, and precision—no quick cut edits with torso shots. Carano delivers a vicious front kick to Fassbender that sends him crashing through a door that you can almost feel.So Soderbergh, known for "Ocean's Eleven" movies and "Traffic", is making an action movie? Curious, indeed. "Haywire" is at its best in accelerated mayhem and destruction. Lem Dobbs story seems almost an afterthought or excuse for Carano to just kick some ass—mostly a means to an end. Carano is a powerful physical presence. In Dobbs's story Carano plays Mallory Kane, who is black ops operative for clandestine group that contracts to the Company, headed by slick sociopathic Ewan McGregor as Kenneth. Kenneth is Mallory's former lover as well. Kenneth provides his manpower to Government Intelligence Head Coblenz played with menacing charm by Michael Douglas, who at times devours the scenery. Mallory along with Aaron run the hostage retrieval operation in Barcelona for the enigmatic Rodrigo played with passionate zeal by Antonio Banderas.Kenneth subsequently sends Mallory on a mission to Dublin as "eye candy" with Paul, deadly and cool Michael Fassbender. Mallory discovers her betrayal--her cover is blown and forced to go rogue. When does an operative ever not go rogue in a movie? Dobbs's story is formulaic, but then again it was never intended to be more. Of course Mallory is determined to exact her revenge with extreme prejudice. Soderbergh infuses sufficient style and motors through the narrative—what little exits. "Haywire" is at its best when Mallory is beating the crap out of bad and good dudes. When it slows, it is not so compelling. Bill Paxton plays retired Marine Lt. Col. Kane, Mallory's Dad. According to the story Mallory was also a Marine—in Special Forces? Here Dobbs's narrative is dicey. He never hints at the source of Mallory's elite killer skills. Are we to assume she is a prettier and leaner version of the Steven Seagal persona? However, here Soderbergh provides the dramatic arc for Mallory when she calmly warns Kenneth in her father's presence, "You can tell me right now why you sold me out." Or she will kill him.Carano is charismatic. However, is she really a compelling actor? Hard to discern—in "Haywire" she plays sullen and singular in focus. Soderbergh wisely orchestrates and leverages Carano's strengths. I think it would be interesting to see her in a more multi-dimensional role—she kind of hints at vulnerability here. She is solid in her part. She has an uncanny chemistry with Channing Tatum, who also has distinct physical presence. His laid back charm compliments Carano's intensity. Carano's physicality also has a downside, particularly in this vengeance tale. She may be too overpowering for the logical narrative showdown. Still watching Carano springing off the wall and crashing with devastating hooks and kicks is awesome. Too bad Soderbergh doesn't give Carano much more to do than that. At least they both leave us wanting to see more.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1506999/reviews-89

ur1016453

title: Carano Goes "Haywire" in a Good Way review: Physically imposing Channing Tatum as Aaron politely asks Gina Carano as rogue agent Mallory to give herself up. She replies, "I don't think so…" Tatum throws hot coffee in Carano's face, and then viciously slams her head into the counter. She weathers the beating, and then picks her moment to unleash quick hooks. She manipulates Tatum to the ground and snaps his arm in a jujitsu lock. Carano is a fierce presence and a genuine force on screen. She is gorgeous—long black hair and ultra fit body. The former MMA champion is imposing herself standing at 5'8". But she is fighting ripped 6'1" Tatum and Michael Fassbender. Carano is the real deal. Director Steven Soderbergh does justice to her fighting acumen. In "Haywire" you see full body fight choreography with speed, power, and precision—no quick cut edits with torso shots. Carano delivers a vicious front kick to Fassbender that sends him crashing through a door that you can almost feel.So Soderbergh, known for "Ocean's Eleven" movies and "Traffic", is making an action movie? Curious, indeed. "Haywire" is at its best in accelerated mayhem and destruction. Lem Dobbs story seems almost an afterthought or excuse for Carano to just kick some ass—mostly a means to an end. Carano is a powerful physical presence. In Dobbs's story Carano plays Mallory Kane, who is black ops operative for clandestine group that contracts to the Company, headed by slick sociopathic Ewan McGregor as Kenneth. Kenneth is Mallory's former lover as well. Kenneth provides his manpower to Government Intelligence Head Coblenz played with menacing charm by Michael Douglas, who at times devours the scenery. Mallory along with Aaron run the hostage retrieval operation in Barcelona for the enigmatic Rodrigo played with passionate zeal by Antonio Banderas.Kenneth subsequently sends Mallory on a mission to Dublin as "eye candy" with Paul, deadly and cool Michael Fassbender. Mallory discovers her betrayal--her cover is blown and forced to go rogue. When does an operative ever not go rogue in a movie? Dobbs's story is formulaic, but then again it was never intended to be more. Of course Mallory is determined to exact her revenge with extreme prejudice. Soderbergh infuses sufficient style and motors through the narrative—what little exits. "Haywire" is at its best when Mallory is beating the crap out of bad and good dudes. When it slows, it is not so compelling. Bill Paxton plays retired Marine Lt. Col. Kane, Mallory's Dad. According to the story Mallory was also a Marine—in Special Forces? Here Dobbs's narrative is dicey. He never hints at the source of Mallory's elite killer skills. Are we to assume she is a prettier and leaner version of the Steven Seagal persona? However, here Soderbergh provides the dramatic arc for Mallory when she calmly warns Kenneth in her father's presence, "You can tell me right now why you sold me out." Or she will kill him.Carano is charismatic. However, is she really a compelling actor? Hard to discern—in "Haywire" she plays sullen and singular in focus. Soderbergh wisely orchestrates and leverages Carano's strengths. I think it would be interesting to see her in a more multi-dimensional role—she kind of hints at vulnerability here. She is solid in her part. She has an uncanny chemistry with Channing Tatum, who also has distinct physical presence. His laid back charm compliments Carano's intensity. Carano's physicality also has a downside, particularly in this vengeance tale. She may be too overpowering for the logical narrative showdown. Still watching Carano springing off the wall and crashing with devastating hooks and kicks is awesome. Too bad Soderbergh doesn't give Carano much more to do than that. At least they both leave us wanting to see more.

An epic failure of a film!

tt1506999

The trailer for Haywire presented itself as a fun action-packed B-movie homage with A-list calibre talent, but what we get is a very bland, boring movie that fails as an action flick and as a thriller and should have been confined to straight-to-DVD hell.Mallory (Gina Carano) is a former marine and a private contractor for a security company. She is a professional ass-kicker and her skills are in high demand, which leads her to leave her current employer, Kenneth (Ewan McGregor). But on a mission in Dublin she is set up as a murderer and nearly killed. Mallory has to go the run and get revenge against Kenneth and anyone he is working with.Gina Carano is obviously an accomplished martial artist and the action scenes were very brutal, raw and hard-hitting. She is able to hold her own despite the initial shock of seeing grown men putting a beating on her. There's a nice moment when Carano enters her first fight against Channing Tatum and the music stops and you end up just watching two people having a gritty fight in which anything goes. But the music dropping out during the other fights quickly loses its impact to the point that the final fight is extremely anti-climactic.Steven Soderbergh is of course a respected director able to make a movie in almost any genre. But he can be very hit and miss at the same time. Haywire goes squarely in the miss category. His direction was very underwhelming. Haywire is slow, poorly paced and the action scenes are too few and far between. Rather than being an action movie it comes off as an uninteresting and very cheap-looking spy flick. The best bits of the movie are in the very misleading trailer. The plot is unremarkable, there is no real intelligence nor any character development whatsoever.Most of the actors throughout the movie were on autopilot and their performance reflected that, most of them being very boring. After trying to make porn star Sasha Grey into a legitimate actress, Soderbergh tries the same with Carano to no avail. It is clear that Carano is not a trained actress and she lets her fists do the talking. Her character was almost like Lisbeth Salander: cold, distant and clinical. The few times she speaks, her delivery is stiff. Tatum looked and sounded like he was drunk during the movie and McGregor and Michael Douglas were just so dull. Only Michael Fassbender comes out with some credit.The score by David Holmes is one of the worst and most misjudged I have ever heard. It sounds like a bad jazz album set to a '60s spy series, which doesn't fit the film's tone at all.Although many see this film as an attempt to "take back action cinema" or as a great example of female empowerment and a woman showing her credentials as a action hero, Kill Bill, Hanna and Kick-Ass are much better movies with strong ass-kicking female characters. Don't bother with Haywire.Please visit www.playeraffinity.com

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1506999/reviews-26

ur17571044

title: An epic failure of a film! review: The trailer for Haywire presented itself as a fun action-packed B-movie homage with A-list calibre talent, but what we get is a very bland, boring movie that fails as an action flick and as a thriller and should have been confined to straight-to-DVD hell.Mallory (Gina Carano) is a former marine and a private contractor for a security company. She is a professional ass-kicker and her skills are in high demand, which leads her to leave her current employer, Kenneth (Ewan McGregor). But on a mission in Dublin she is set up as a murderer and nearly killed. Mallory has to go the run and get revenge against Kenneth and anyone he is working with.Gina Carano is obviously an accomplished martial artist and the action scenes were very brutal, raw and hard-hitting. She is able to hold her own despite the initial shock of seeing grown men putting a beating on her. There's a nice moment when Carano enters her first fight against Channing Tatum and the music stops and you end up just watching two people having a gritty fight in which anything goes. But the music dropping out during the other fights quickly loses its impact to the point that the final fight is extremely anti-climactic.Steven Soderbergh is of course a respected director able to make a movie in almost any genre. But he can be very hit and miss at the same time. Haywire goes squarely in the miss category. His direction was very underwhelming. Haywire is slow, poorly paced and the action scenes are too few and far between. Rather than being an action movie it comes off as an uninteresting and very cheap-looking spy flick. The best bits of the movie are in the very misleading trailer. The plot is unremarkable, there is no real intelligence nor any character development whatsoever.Most of the actors throughout the movie were on autopilot and their performance reflected that, most of them being very boring. After trying to make porn star Sasha Grey into a legitimate actress, Soderbergh tries the same with Carano to no avail. It is clear that Carano is not a trained actress and she lets her fists do the talking. Her character was almost like Lisbeth Salander: cold, distant and clinical. The few times she speaks, her delivery is stiff. Tatum looked and sounded like he was drunk during the movie and McGregor and Michael Douglas were just so dull. Only Michael Fassbender comes out with some credit.The score by David Holmes is one of the worst and most misjudged I have ever heard. It sounds like a bad jazz album set to a '60s spy series, which doesn't fit the film's tone at all.Although many see this film as an attempt to "take back action cinema" or as a great example of female empowerment and a woman showing her credentials as a action hero, Kill Bill, Hanna and Kick-Ass are much better movies with strong ass-kicking female characters. Don't bother with Haywire.Please visit www.playeraffinity.com

Not what the trailer promised. Average action flick, nothing special.

tt1506999

The trailer told me to expect an explosive action thriller - A female black ops soldier/ assassin working for a private contractor is sold out by her employers and is hunted by the very people she served, leading to Jason Bournesque action sequences and a brisk, high paced plot... With a cast of Michael Douglas, Ewan McGregor, Antonio Banderas and Michael Fassbender, I had every reason to expect a solid action movie. The lead is played by Gina Carano - someone I had never heard of before, but that's OK. She looked the part of a highly trained soldier, and fit the role perfectly. But the film came up way below expectations - It was an OK plot, but nothing to write home about. There were some spurts of action which were done well. But the story was paaaaainfully slow. I kept chanting 'It's gonna pick up soon' over and over, but it just never really did. It's an OK watch if you have patience and time... But you have better options out there.Ooh, you get the soundtrack that comes over the end credits - Very lovely piece by music director David Holmes - That was really engrossing.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1506999/reviews-326

ur0981122

title: Not what the trailer promised. Average action flick, nothing special. review: The trailer told me to expect an explosive action thriller - A female black ops soldier/ assassin working for a private contractor is sold out by her employers and is hunted by the very people she served, leading to Jason Bournesque action sequences and a brisk, high paced plot... With a cast of Michael Douglas, Ewan McGregor, Antonio Banderas and Michael Fassbender, I had every reason to expect a solid action movie. The lead is played by Gina Carano - someone I had never heard of before, but that's OK. She looked the part of a highly trained soldier, and fit the role perfectly. But the film came up way below expectations - It was an OK plot, but nothing to write home about. There were some spurts of action which were done well. But the story was paaaaainfully slow. I kept chanting 'It's gonna pick up soon' over and over, but it just never really did. It's an OK watch if you have patience and time... But you have better options out there.Ooh, you get the soundtrack that comes over the end credits - Very lovely piece by music director David Holmes - That was really engrossing.

Dame Good But Disposable Distaff Thriller

tt1506999

Oscar winning director Steven Soderbergh of "Traffic" whipped together this modest little actioneer about one tough dame who is sold out by the government and destined to be murdered as part of a shady but complicated action. Pioneering Mixed Martial Arts athlete Gina Carano doesn't have the acting chops of her supporting cast, but she acquits herself splendidly in the three major set-pieces involving close-quarters combat with co-stars such as Michael Fassbinder, Channing Tatum, and Ewan McGregor. "Kafka" scribe Lem Dobbs has concocted what essentially amounts to a punchy little B-movie, and Soderbergh keeps things hustling at a dizzy pace as Mallory Kane (Gina Carano of "Blood & Bone") globe trots around Europe with gunmen on her six. Initially, she takes a contract to assist a British M1-6 agent (Michael Fassbinder) in rescuing a journalist that she believes is being held hostage. The catch is that Rodrigo (Antonio Banderas of "Desperado") has engineered a deal with Kane's boss, Kenneth (Ewan McGregor of "Transpotting"), to have her iced after she rescues the journalist. What nobody is prepared for is Mallory's resilience. She kills Paul in a motel room before he can rub her out. The remainder of the action follows our heroine as she tracks down the rest of the guys who set her up to die. In a sense, this is an existentialist thriller since Mallory has to piece together the plot to murder her from all parties involved in the conspiracy.The beauty of "Haywire" is the hell-bent-for-leather pace that Soderbergh maintains throughout this trim 93-minute melodrama. This Relativity Media release certainly never wears out its welcome. Unfortunately, aside from the pummeling action, there isn't much here to appreciate once you realize that Gina Carano is no cream-puff. She generates considerable credibility during her face to face fight scenes. Soderbergh doesn't tell this tale in chronological order because it would look like something that he knocked out over the weekend. Basically, as Mallory whittles down the opposition, we learn how she came to be in the predicament that she is in. Most of the plot specifics are delivered breathlessly in expository dialogue forays throughout the action. Happily, he has the services of a top-notch cast. Furthermore, when you consider that the Motion Picture Association of America gave this number an R-rating, you have to wonder why. Soderbergh keeps the hard-driving action pretty immaculate in terms of blood and gore. In other words, you won't see virtually any blood and gore, and our heroine and her dastardly opponents never take time out for sex. Soderbergh not only helmed this thriller, but he also served as the editor and cinematographer. Indeed, it is rather refreshing that Soderbergh lensed the action on actual locations in Dublin and Barcelona without relying on the usual visuals that emphasize national landmarks.At the end of the day, "Haywire" boils down to a disposable thriller with a gimmick: its one-of-a-kind woman can actually perform her own stunts. While it is lacking in substance, this nimble actioneer should be something that women will enjoy and men will like watching despite the conspicuous absence of nudity. Michael Douglas and Bill Paxton appear in other supporting roles.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1506999/reviews-365

ur2079400

title: Dame Good But Disposable Distaff Thriller review: Oscar winning director Steven Soderbergh of "Traffic" whipped together this modest little actioneer about one tough dame who is sold out by the government and destined to be murdered as part of a shady but complicated action. Pioneering Mixed Martial Arts athlete Gina Carano doesn't have the acting chops of her supporting cast, but she acquits herself splendidly in the three major set-pieces involving close-quarters combat with co-stars such as Michael Fassbinder, Channing Tatum, and Ewan McGregor. "Kafka" scribe Lem Dobbs has concocted what essentially amounts to a punchy little B-movie, and Soderbergh keeps things hustling at a dizzy pace as Mallory Kane (Gina Carano of "Blood & Bone") globe trots around Europe with gunmen on her six. Initially, she takes a contract to assist a British M1-6 agent (Michael Fassbinder) in rescuing a journalist that she believes is being held hostage. The catch is that Rodrigo (Antonio Banderas of "Desperado") has engineered a deal with Kane's boss, Kenneth (Ewan McGregor of "Transpotting"), to have her iced after she rescues the journalist. What nobody is prepared for is Mallory's resilience. She kills Paul in a motel room before he can rub her out. The remainder of the action follows our heroine as she tracks down the rest of the guys who set her up to die. In a sense, this is an existentialist thriller since Mallory has to piece together the plot to murder her from all parties involved in the conspiracy.The beauty of "Haywire" is the hell-bent-for-leather pace that Soderbergh maintains throughout this trim 93-minute melodrama. This Relativity Media release certainly never wears out its welcome. Unfortunately, aside from the pummeling action, there isn't much here to appreciate once you realize that Gina Carano is no cream-puff. She generates considerable credibility during her face to face fight scenes. Soderbergh doesn't tell this tale in chronological order because it would look like something that he knocked out over the weekend. Basically, as Mallory whittles down the opposition, we learn how she came to be in the predicament that she is in. Most of the plot specifics are delivered breathlessly in expository dialogue forays throughout the action. Happily, he has the services of a top-notch cast. Furthermore, when you consider that the Motion Picture Association of America gave this number an R-rating, you have to wonder why. Soderbergh keeps the hard-driving action pretty immaculate in terms of blood and gore. In other words, you won't see virtually any blood and gore, and our heroine and her dastardly opponents never take time out for sex. Soderbergh not only helmed this thriller, but he also served as the editor and cinematographer. Indeed, it is rather refreshing that Soderbergh lensed the action on actual locations in Dublin and Barcelona without relying on the usual visuals that emphasize national landmarks.At the end of the day, "Haywire" boils down to a disposable thriller with a gimmick: its one-of-a-kind woman can actually perform her own stunts. While it is lacking in substance, this nimble actioneer should be something that women will enjoy and men will like watching despite the conspicuous absence of nudity. Michael Douglas and Bill Paxton appear in other supporting roles.

'Haywire' looks really special but doesn't live up. It's merely decent.

tt1506999

Steven Soderbergh has a reputation for directing films that are great, weird or anywhere in between. You can, however, always depend on the right pieces to be in place, as he has a devoted following of A-list actors who agree to star in everything he does. With Michael Douglas, Antonio Banderas, Ewan McGregor, Channing Tatum and Michael Fassbender in supporting roles, "Haywire" certainly has a large part of the equation covered in order to work, but it falls decidedly in the "anywhere in between" category.MMA fighter Gina Carano is the foundation around which "Haywire" attaches its many Oscar- caliber ornaments. A fresh-faced action star padded with so many superb talents, Carano automatically rises to the top of this vanilla action-thriller concoction. Despite some really wooden line delivery in a number of scenes, she's got action star chops, and her character, contracted black ops agent and ex-marine Mallory Kane, isn't treated differently for being female."Haywire" isn't quite by-the-numbers as far as modern post-Bourne special agent action- thrillers go (nothing by Soderbergh ever is), but it places all its novelty in Carano's hands. She's an entertaining watch, but she's not going to take generic material and make it awesome — no one's that talented.Lem Dobbs' screenplay isn't really a problem, as plenty of films in the genre have been made out of worse, but neither he nor Soderbergh make an argument for why you should watch "Haywire" instead of another movie (or even another viewing of any "Bourne" film) other than to see all the stars that have been collected to play minor characters."Haywire" follows a classic betrayed agent looking for revenge premise. Mallory is an asset working for a private ops contractor named Kenneth (McGregor) who is thinking about getting out. The film opens after he's betrayed her and left her for dead in Dublin, and she's set to meet with him in upstate New York, except he sends her coworker, Aaron (Tatum), who attacks her in order to bring her in. She breaks his arm and escapes in the car of a random person at the diner (Michael Angarano) and tells him the whole story of her betrayal as she flees.Soderbergh downright refuses to follow some of the most fundamental conventions of the action genre in this film, which keeps "Haywire" fresh but ultimately renders it somewhat stagnant. The trade off for avoiding something stylistically generic is depriving the audience of some of the usual tactics of action films to engage and maintain interest. With a short run time, "Haywire" never gets too boring, but it does at times feel flat.The technique Soderbergh uses that stands out the most involves flipping the traditional use of scoring in an action film. Whereas most movies use silence to build suspense and then use music to underscore the intensity of an action sequence, Soderbergh does the opposite: he enlists David Holmes (of the "Ocean's" films) to create synthetic-sounding '70s action music leading up to action confrontations and then cuts the sound completely to make the fighting feel more raw and natural. It has an interesting effect that manages to work in the fight scenes, but it sets an awkward tone for the build-up given how dated the music sounds.The hand-to-hand (or I should say foot-to-throat) combat scenes we get are rather exciting with this raw presentation, and it suits Carano well given her talents before she decided to try acting. She is definitely beautiful, but she's not lady-like, and as you watch her you aren't distracted by her sex. The point is that it would be wrong to categorize her as a femme fatale or anything we've previously seen in this genre. She's an action star and she earns it here.Solid is one and perhaps the most applicable of the many unremarkable yet reputable adjectives one could use to describe "Haywire." Its detractors will likely come from disappointment over potential rather than poor filmmaking and considering the names on the poster, it's not an unwarranted complaint. One could also argue that without the level of pedigree, the material wouldn't warrant any attention but the bargain bin. Best, then, to attribute to "Haywire's" lack of being special to some miscalculation on all fronts. Fortunately, it's quite tolerable nonetheless.~Steven CThanks for reading! Visit moviemusereviews.com

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1506999/reviews-343

ur2496397

title: 'Haywire' looks really special but doesn't live up. It's merely decent. review: Steven Soderbergh has a reputation for directing films that are great, weird or anywhere in between. You can, however, always depend on the right pieces to be in place, as he has a devoted following of A-list actors who agree to star in everything he does. With Michael Douglas, Antonio Banderas, Ewan McGregor, Channing Tatum and Michael Fassbender in supporting roles, "Haywire" certainly has a large part of the equation covered in order to work, but it falls decidedly in the "anywhere in between" category.MMA fighter Gina Carano is the foundation around which "Haywire" attaches its many Oscar- caliber ornaments. A fresh-faced action star padded with so many superb talents, Carano automatically rises to the top of this vanilla action-thriller concoction. Despite some really wooden line delivery in a number of scenes, she's got action star chops, and her character, contracted black ops agent and ex-marine Mallory Kane, isn't treated differently for being female."Haywire" isn't quite by-the-numbers as far as modern post-Bourne special agent action- thrillers go (nothing by Soderbergh ever is), but it places all its novelty in Carano's hands. She's an entertaining watch, but she's not going to take generic material and make it awesome — no one's that talented.Lem Dobbs' screenplay isn't really a problem, as plenty of films in the genre have been made out of worse, but neither he nor Soderbergh make an argument for why you should watch "Haywire" instead of another movie (or even another viewing of any "Bourne" film) other than to see all the stars that have been collected to play minor characters."Haywire" follows a classic betrayed agent looking for revenge premise. Mallory is an asset working for a private ops contractor named Kenneth (McGregor) who is thinking about getting out. The film opens after he's betrayed her and left her for dead in Dublin, and she's set to meet with him in upstate New York, except he sends her coworker, Aaron (Tatum), who attacks her in order to bring her in. She breaks his arm and escapes in the car of a random person at the diner (Michael Angarano) and tells him the whole story of her betrayal as she flees.Soderbergh downright refuses to follow some of the most fundamental conventions of the action genre in this film, which keeps "Haywire" fresh but ultimately renders it somewhat stagnant. The trade off for avoiding something stylistically generic is depriving the audience of some of the usual tactics of action films to engage and maintain interest. With a short run time, "Haywire" never gets too boring, but it does at times feel flat.The technique Soderbergh uses that stands out the most involves flipping the traditional use of scoring in an action film. Whereas most movies use silence to build suspense and then use music to underscore the intensity of an action sequence, Soderbergh does the opposite: he enlists David Holmes (of the "Ocean's" films) to create synthetic-sounding '70s action music leading up to action confrontations and then cuts the sound completely to make the fighting feel more raw and natural. It has an interesting effect that manages to work in the fight scenes, but it sets an awkward tone for the build-up given how dated the music sounds.The hand-to-hand (or I should say foot-to-throat) combat scenes we get are rather exciting with this raw presentation, and it suits Carano well given her talents before she decided to try acting. She is definitely beautiful, but she's not lady-like, and as you watch her you aren't distracted by her sex. The point is that it would be wrong to categorize her as a femme fatale or anything we've previously seen in this genre. She's an action star and she earns it here.Solid is one and perhaps the most applicable of the many unremarkable yet reputable adjectives one could use to describe "Haywire." Its detractors will likely come from disappointment over potential rather than poor filmmaking and considering the names on the poster, it's not an unwarranted complaint. One could also argue that without the level of pedigree, the material wouldn't warrant any attention but the bargain bin. Best, then, to attribute to "Haywire's" lack of being special to some miscalculation on all fronts. Fortunately, it's quite tolerable nonetheless.~Steven CThanks for reading! Visit moviemusereviews.com

Seen It... Next Please

tt1506999

Funny enough, it's rare nowadays that a film's title actually sums up my feelings about an individual film, but that is the case with Haywire. A black ops soldier is set up and is now seeking revenge on the people who set her up. The only difference between this film and almost every action flick of the '90s is that it features a female protagonist (actress Gina Carano), and is directed by Steven Soderbergh. Unfortunately, this is not one of Soderbergh's better efforts. It's just when there is nothing new added to this tried story other than a female lead who is nowhere near as charismatic as the male action stars that anchored these kinds of movies in the '90s, why should I watch it? Not to mention, the movie's chaotic pace, that makes it hard to follow, leaving no time for emotion, making this film cold and heartless.I give Haywire a 4 out of 10!

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1506999/reviews-342

ur6136793

title: Seen It... Next Please review: Funny enough, it's rare nowadays that a film's title actually sums up my feelings about an individual film, but that is the case with Haywire. A black ops soldier is set up and is now seeking revenge on the people who set her up. The only difference between this film and almost every action flick of the '90s is that it features a female protagonist (actress Gina Carano), and is directed by Steven Soderbergh. Unfortunately, this is not one of Soderbergh's better efforts. It's just when there is nothing new added to this tried story other than a female lead who is nowhere near as charismatic as the male action stars that anchored these kinds of movies in the '90s, why should I watch it? Not to mention, the movie's chaotic pace, that makes it hard to follow, leaving no time for emotion, making this film cold and heartless.I give Haywire a 4 out of 10!

A 12-point review of "Haywire" (2011)

tt1506999

1) I am not an admirer of acclaimed, big-name Hollywood director Steven Soderbergh; however, I have long admired female mixed martial arts sensation Gina Carano (I'm a guy, so I'm allowed to have a crush on her - so what, you got a problem with that?), making her big-screen acting debut here in the 2011 martial arts action flick "Haywire" as an ex-Marine-turned-government-contractor who is forced to go on the run to clear her name after a botched job in Barcelona, Spain.2) How or why she was set up are unimportant to the overall plot (something about Kane's rescue of a kidnapped Chinese journalist who had been writing a series of articles exposing the crimes of a well-connected Irish businessman, or something similar). Scenes of "acting" and people standing around talking only exist to provide a thread tying together fight scenes of Carano's Mallory Kane out-punching, out-kicking, out-strangling, and many times out-gunning the assorted hit-men and other paid stock baddies in her way.3) Many of these other baddies include two one-time lovers - her ultra-shady ex-boss Kenneth (Ewan McGregor) and a fellow government agent, Aaron (Channing Tatum). Both of these two are able to hold their own fair enough, but, ultimately, are no match for Mallory Kane's expert Marine training. Another is a smooth-talking MI6 agent named Paul (Michael Fassbender).4) Mallory's flight to clear her name takes her from Barcelona, to Ireland, New York, San Diego, New Mexico, and finally Majorca.5) In most action movies these days, fight sequences are so quickly edited that they hardly make any sense and you can't tell what's going on.6) This is not so with "Haywire." Soderbergh stages some excellent, hard-hitting fight sequences that make full use of Carano's MMA training and amazing physicality. Most importantly, her fight scenes unfold merely as images and with little sound, bass-thumping techno music, or dialogue. You're actually able to make out all the moves and hard-hitting action.7) It is apparent that Carano did all of her own fights and stunts in this movie. One sequence features a daring chase through an apartment building that escalates with Carano's character having to jump from rooftop to rooftop to evade her would-be captors. She grunts, she sweats, and actually looks like she's getting tired from the pursuit. (I can see her being the new Lara Croft in a reboot of the "Tomb Raider" franchise, especially if it's based on the new "Tomb Raider" reboot video game that's due out soon.)8) Gina Carano isn't really much of an actress, despite a few dramatic scenes (like with her dad, John, played by the always-reliable Bill Paxton). But she remains an intensely fierce presence on-screen. (The only drawback was what they did with digitally altering her voice. Why the hell did they do that? I guess she sounded too feminine? Too sweet? Do I dare say, "innocent"?) Another thing is, the movie also does not make an issue of the fact that she's a woman (except maybe for one or two stray comments here and there), since many times her opponents are all men, and none of them go easy on her because she's a female. She takes more than a few licks of her own during her adventures, but always comes out on top (she has to, she's the star of the show). In other words, don't let her looks fool you: she may be a cutie, but she'll kick your a** between your shoulder blades twice before you know what hit you.9) Soderbergh has scoured the "B"-movie action movie circuit for his latest. In a genre that has been relegated to the likes of faded Hollywood action stars like Steven Seagal, Jean-Claude Van Damme and Wesley Snipes (nothing against any of them, since I admire many of their individual action flicks), Soderbergh injects a fierce shot of adrenalin - namely a huge budget and big-name stars - into a well-worn cinematic cliché.10) I guess that even big-name Hollywood hot-shots get to a point in their careers where they can do whatever they want and nobody can say anything about it. But I admire what Steven Soderbergh did with a movie that has an intentionally lackadaisical script (by long-time collaborator Lem Dobbs). I will not fault the material because that's pointless at this juncture. It's what's been done with it that's important, and how it's ultimately handled by the filmmakers.11) "Haywire" is a unique, fun new spin on a well-worn movie idea. It's hardly groundbreaking, but it will hopefully lead to a wonderful career for its beautiful star outside The Octagon.12) 6/10

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1506999/reviews-295

ur0892646

title: A 12-point review of "Haywire" (2011) review: 1) I am not an admirer of acclaimed, big-name Hollywood director Steven Soderbergh; however, I have long admired female mixed martial arts sensation Gina Carano (I'm a guy, so I'm allowed to have a crush on her - so what, you got a problem with that?), making her big-screen acting debut here in the 2011 martial arts action flick "Haywire" as an ex-Marine-turned-government-contractor who is forced to go on the run to clear her name after a botched job in Barcelona, Spain.2) How or why she was set up are unimportant to the overall plot (something about Kane's rescue of a kidnapped Chinese journalist who had been writing a series of articles exposing the crimes of a well-connected Irish businessman, or something similar). Scenes of "acting" and people standing around talking only exist to provide a thread tying together fight scenes of Carano's Mallory Kane out-punching, out-kicking, out-strangling, and many times out-gunning the assorted hit-men and other paid stock baddies in her way.3) Many of these other baddies include two one-time lovers - her ultra-shady ex-boss Kenneth (Ewan McGregor) and a fellow government agent, Aaron (Channing Tatum). Both of these two are able to hold their own fair enough, but, ultimately, are no match for Mallory Kane's expert Marine training. Another is a smooth-talking MI6 agent named Paul (Michael Fassbender).4) Mallory's flight to clear her name takes her from Barcelona, to Ireland, New York, San Diego, New Mexico, and finally Majorca.5) In most action movies these days, fight sequences are so quickly edited that they hardly make any sense and you can't tell what's going on.6) This is not so with "Haywire." Soderbergh stages some excellent, hard-hitting fight sequences that make full use of Carano's MMA training and amazing physicality. Most importantly, her fight scenes unfold merely as images and with little sound, bass-thumping techno music, or dialogue. You're actually able to make out all the moves and hard-hitting action.7) It is apparent that Carano did all of her own fights and stunts in this movie. One sequence features a daring chase through an apartment building that escalates with Carano's character having to jump from rooftop to rooftop to evade her would-be captors. She grunts, she sweats, and actually looks like she's getting tired from the pursuit. (I can see her being the new Lara Croft in a reboot of the "Tomb Raider" franchise, especially if it's based on the new "Tomb Raider" reboot video game that's due out soon.)8) Gina Carano isn't really much of an actress, despite a few dramatic scenes (like with her dad, John, played by the always-reliable Bill Paxton). But she remains an intensely fierce presence on-screen. (The only drawback was what they did with digitally altering her voice. Why the hell did they do that? I guess she sounded too feminine? Too sweet? Do I dare say, "innocent"?) Another thing is, the movie also does not make an issue of the fact that she's a woman (except maybe for one or two stray comments here and there), since many times her opponents are all men, and none of them go easy on her because she's a female. She takes more than a few licks of her own during her adventures, but always comes out on top (she has to, she's the star of the show). In other words, don't let her looks fool you: she may be a cutie, but she'll kick your a** between your shoulder blades twice before you know what hit you.9) Soderbergh has scoured the "B"-movie action movie circuit for his latest. In a genre that has been relegated to the likes of faded Hollywood action stars like Steven Seagal, Jean-Claude Van Damme and Wesley Snipes (nothing against any of them, since I admire many of their individual action flicks), Soderbergh injects a fierce shot of adrenalin - namely a huge budget and big-name stars - into a well-worn cinematic cliché.10) I guess that even big-name Hollywood hot-shots get to a point in their careers where they can do whatever they want and nobody can say anything about it. But I admire what Steven Soderbergh did with a movie that has an intentionally lackadaisical script (by long-time collaborator Lem Dobbs). I will not fault the material because that's pointless at this juncture. It's what's been done with it that's important, and how it's ultimately handled by the filmmakers.11) "Haywire" is a unique, fun new spin on a well-worn movie idea. It's hardly groundbreaking, but it will hopefully lead to a wonderful career for its beautiful star outside The Octagon.12) 6/10

Steven Soderbergh Has Made The Best Action Film Ever.

tt1506999

Steven Soderbergh Is A Master. "Haywire" Is An Excellent Film And Arguably The Great Action Film Ever. The Cast Is Extraordinary And Includes Michael Fassbender, Ewan McGregor, Bill Paxton, Michael Douglas, Channing Tatum, Antonio Banderas, And Gina Carano In Her Film Debut. The Action Is Riveting And Fluid. The Film Lacks The Choppy Editing Of Most Action Movies And Just Delivers Great Cinematic Fight Sequences. I Must Say That I Don't Care For Action Films, But I Absolutely Loved "Haywire". The Film Features Some Of The Best Actors In The World. Gina Carano Is A Fantastic Action Heroine Who I Would Love To See More Of. Carano Is An MMA Fighter With No Acting Experience. Soderbergh Know This And He Contstructs The Film Accordingly By Playing To Carano's Strengths. I Loved The Film's Gorgeous Cinematography And The Brilliant Choreography. "Haywire" Is Soderbergh At His Very Best And Absolutely My Favorite Action Film In Cinema History.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1506999/reviews-336

ur36405157

title: Steven Soderbergh Has Made The Best Action Film Ever. review: Steven Soderbergh Is A Master. "Haywire" Is An Excellent Film And Arguably The Great Action Film Ever. The Cast Is Extraordinary And Includes Michael Fassbender, Ewan McGregor, Bill Paxton, Michael Douglas, Channing Tatum, Antonio Banderas, And Gina Carano In Her Film Debut. The Action Is Riveting And Fluid. The Film Lacks The Choppy Editing Of Most Action Movies And Just Delivers Great Cinematic Fight Sequences. I Must Say That I Don't Care For Action Films, But I Absolutely Loved "Haywire". The Film Features Some Of The Best Actors In The World. Gina Carano Is A Fantastic Action Heroine Who I Would Love To See More Of. Carano Is An MMA Fighter With No Acting Experience. Soderbergh Know This And He Contstructs The Film Accordingly By Playing To Carano's Strengths. I Loved The Film's Gorgeous Cinematography And The Brilliant Choreography. "Haywire" Is Soderbergh At His Very Best And Absolutely My Favorite Action Film In Cinema History.

New WaveLeaks

tt1506999

Soderbergh may not have so much a bright visual imagination, but he is an honest, alert mind. He likes to puzzle about what it means to film, and has tackled at least two projects that underachieve in ambitious ways, one of them inherited from Malick. He has a grasp of film mechanics. So every time I sit down with him, reviews be damned, I prepare myself for introspective viewing. I expect layers of an onion to peel.I've said it again; his predicament is that he lacks a New Wave to belong to. So he films for an audience that will likely fail to appreciate subtleties in his work, a little like DePalma in this respect.Admittedly, this is a bit thin. One layer down we have the Bourne plot about a female covert ops agent framed by mysterious circumstances and looking for agency that moves the world, on the level of reality she is narrating the story to us and making sure we keep track of names and connections, then merging of the two layers and more super-spy stuff. Barcelona, Dublin, New Mexico, VeraCruz, Majorca, the places we visit. Her dad is a writer of military books, but we're told they have thin characters, like our film.The sorry aspect of the film is not that, like it or not, it cannot help but bring to mind Kill Bill. It's exercise without mind, a simple flexing of visual muscles, for instance the multicamera approach to the Barcelona operation.My theory is that every film can be improved with just a few tweaks, by deepening the anchors in the story. So, how about an ambiguously unreliable narrator, so no solid footing in reality, and inside the story being told stress emphasis on the WikiLeaks aspect and Chinese journalist. If you are like me, you find appealing the notion that WikiLeaks started with the wrong PC being used by Chinese whisteblowers as a nod in a TOR network.So a deeper causality than simply money moves the world. The pursuit would be of truth. The idea would be to have undercurrents between a story and identities being leaked that we have no way to know are true and not manipulated, and leaked documents that conceal or reveal part of the conspiracy while being a part of it. And leverage inside of that a deep-web infrastructure that seems shady but is in fact impersonal bureaucracy. The environment would be post-noir. The trigger an accident, in keeping with the birth of WikiLeaks.Maybe Soderbergh was merely flexing here because he was essaying a similar idea in Contagion. Too bad he didn't combine the two, this has a more appealing skeleton.The one revelation here is Gia Carano. She has the natural sexy cool of a Steve McQueen. More of her please.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1506999/reviews-273

ur17699578

title: New WaveLeaks review: Soderbergh may not have so much a bright visual imagination, but he is an honest, alert mind. He likes to puzzle about what it means to film, and has tackled at least two projects that underachieve in ambitious ways, one of them inherited from Malick. He has a grasp of film mechanics. So every time I sit down with him, reviews be damned, I prepare myself for introspective viewing. I expect layers of an onion to peel.I've said it again; his predicament is that he lacks a New Wave to belong to. So he films for an audience that will likely fail to appreciate subtleties in his work, a little like DePalma in this respect.Admittedly, this is a bit thin. One layer down we have the Bourne plot about a female covert ops agent framed by mysterious circumstances and looking for agency that moves the world, on the level of reality she is narrating the story to us and making sure we keep track of names and connections, then merging of the two layers and more super-spy stuff. Barcelona, Dublin, New Mexico, VeraCruz, Majorca, the places we visit. Her dad is a writer of military books, but we're told they have thin characters, like our film.The sorry aspect of the film is not that, like it or not, it cannot help but bring to mind Kill Bill. It's exercise without mind, a simple flexing of visual muscles, for instance the multicamera approach to the Barcelona operation.My theory is that every film can be improved with just a few tweaks, by deepening the anchors in the story. So, how about an ambiguously unreliable narrator, so no solid footing in reality, and inside the story being told stress emphasis on the WikiLeaks aspect and Chinese journalist. If you are like me, you find appealing the notion that WikiLeaks started with the wrong PC being used by Chinese whisteblowers as a nod in a TOR network.So a deeper causality than simply money moves the world. The pursuit would be of truth. The idea would be to have undercurrents between a story and identities being leaked that we have no way to know are true and not manipulated, and leaked documents that conceal or reveal part of the conspiracy while being a part of it. And leverage inside of that a deep-web infrastructure that seems shady but is in fact impersonal bureaucracy. The environment would be post-noir. The trigger an accident, in keeping with the birth of WikiLeaks.Maybe Soderbergh was merely flexing here because he was essaying a similar idea in Contagion. Too bad he didn't combine the two, this has a more appealing skeleton.The one revelation here is Gia Carano. She has the natural sexy cool of a Steve McQueen. More of her please.

Violence saves the day in this female revenge flick

tt1506999

FINALLY, a flick about a female Jason Bourne. Carano is attractive and ruthless in one go, and she's captivating to watch as she wallops all those who stand in her way in this study of female revenge.The movie is partially told in flashbacks and I, for one, loved watching her go through the motions.However, it's quite monotonous in its theme, in that violence is the panacea for all problems. Michael Douglas has a small character as an agent who manages Carano. He keeps his above the mess. Tatum plays Carano's love interest. But his character gets knocked off quickly.**www.jeffleemovies.com (FB and Twitter)

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1506999/reviews-321

ur35376992

title: Violence saves the day in this female revenge flick review: FINALLY, a flick about a female Jason Bourne. Carano is attractive and ruthless in one go, and she's captivating to watch as she wallops all those who stand in her way in this study of female revenge.The movie is partially told in flashbacks and I, for one, loved watching her go through the motions.However, it's quite monotonous in its theme, in that violence is the panacea for all problems. Michael Douglas has a small character as an agent who manages Carano. He keeps his above the mess. Tatum plays Carano's love interest. But his character gets knocked off quickly.**www.jeffleemovies.com (FB and Twitter)

Lazy story telling ruins what could have been a good film

tt1506999

Haywire feels like a film that is in need of a decent story and script and I have to blame Steven Soderbergh for most of the films problems. According to the DVD extras he saw Gina Carano fighting and thought that she would be great in a film. Unfortunately he didn't think that the film would have to have a decent plot or script. The film does have a plot but unfortunately it is very convoluted and messy, with huge holes and lazy story telling. The script feels rushed, everything is focused on getting Gina Carano into the next action or fight scene. Sonderbergh has been smart in a few areas. He has brought in some very good actors to back up Carano but they are generally given little to do and the dialogue is generally terrible. I didn't think Gina Carano was terrible as the lead and she is very convincing when she is battery the hell out of everyone. She isn't given much to do acting wise and this is maybe a good thing. Michael Fassbender is always good, though he isn't given much to work with. A similar story can be said of Michael Douglas. Ewan McGregor feels terribly miscast and I have to say that this is easily the worst performance I have seen from him. The fight and action scenes are handled very well and the cinematography is generally very well done. Gina Carano is easily the toughest action heroin and the fights are both brutal and convincing. One fight in particular reminded me of the fight between Sean Connery and Robert Shaw in From Russia with Love.One of the areas I really hated was the editing style and music. It felt very similar to the Ocean 11 films and took a lot of edge off of the film. Over all I was very disappointed with the film. It isn't bad but it barely gets a 6 from me. I will look out for Gina Carano, I think she could be a stand out action star, if given the right movie and some more acting lessons.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1506999/reviews-302

ur4126838

title: Lazy story telling ruins what could have been a good film review: Haywire feels like a film that is in need of a decent story and script and I have to blame Steven Soderbergh for most of the films problems. According to the DVD extras he saw Gina Carano fighting and thought that she would be great in a film. Unfortunately he didn't think that the film would have to have a decent plot or script. The film does have a plot but unfortunately it is very convoluted and messy, with huge holes and lazy story telling. The script feels rushed, everything is focused on getting Gina Carano into the next action or fight scene. Sonderbergh has been smart in a few areas. He has brought in some very good actors to back up Carano but they are generally given little to do and the dialogue is generally terrible. I didn't think Gina Carano was terrible as the lead and she is very convincing when she is battery the hell out of everyone. She isn't given much to do acting wise and this is maybe a good thing. Michael Fassbender is always good, though he isn't given much to work with. A similar story can be said of Michael Douglas. Ewan McGregor feels terribly miscast and I have to say that this is easily the worst performance I have seen from him. The fight and action scenes are handled very well and the cinematography is generally very well done. Gina Carano is easily the toughest action heroin and the fights are both brutal and convincing. One fight in particular reminded me of the fight between Sean Connery and Robert Shaw in From Russia with Love.One of the areas I really hated was the editing style and music. It felt very similar to the Ocean 11 films and took a lot of edge off of the film. Over all I was very disappointed with the film. It isn't bad but it barely gets a 6 from me. I will look out for Gina Carano, I think she could be a stand out action star, if given the right movie and some more acting lessons.

Decent action thriller

tt1506999

Told mostly in flashback this film shows how mercenary Mallory Kane is betrayed by her employers. She is initially sent to Barcelona to extract a hostage then, almost immediately afterwards she is sent on a mission to Dublin. Here she has a bit of a shock when she finds the man she had just rescued dead in a storeroom and her contact tries to kill her. She manages to overcome him and evade the Garda to get back to the United States; here she sets about finding out who set her up and why.This may not be a classic but it is a solid action thriller that fans of the genre are likely to enjoy. The cast list features plenty of well-known actors but they are in the secondary roles; the star is the virtually unknown Gina Carano; a martial arts expert who shows off her impressive fighting skills in the films action scenes. These scenes are surprisingly visceral and look genuinely painful at times. The story of fairly standard; we just have to wonder who betrayed her and how she will deal with them when she catches up with them. The fight scenes may provide the best action but there are good chases and the occasional shoot out too. Overall I'd say this is a fun way to pass an hour and a half if you like films with some good solid action.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1506999/reviews-405

ur13977076

title: Decent action thriller review: Told mostly in flashback this film shows how mercenary Mallory Kane is betrayed by her employers. She is initially sent to Barcelona to extract a hostage then, almost immediately afterwards she is sent on a mission to Dublin. Here she has a bit of a shock when she finds the man she had just rescued dead in a storeroom and her contact tries to kill her. She manages to overcome him and evade the Garda to get back to the United States; here she sets about finding out who set her up and why.This may not be a classic but it is a solid action thriller that fans of the genre are likely to enjoy. The cast list features plenty of well-known actors but they are in the secondary roles; the star is the virtually unknown Gina Carano; a martial arts expert who shows off her impressive fighting skills in the films action scenes. These scenes are surprisingly visceral and look genuinely painful at times. The story of fairly standard; we just have to wonder who betrayed her and how she will deal with them when she catches up with them. The fight scenes may provide the best action but there are good chases and the occasional shoot out too. Overall I'd say this is a fun way to pass an hour and a half if you like films with some good solid action.

Unexpectedly good

tt1506999

Haywire is a spy thriller centring on Mallory (Gina Carano) who works for a shadowy organisation which works for another shadowy organisation and who, as the film starts, is trying to come back from a betrayal which has put her on the run. I won't summarise the plot, which is less complicated than it appears, but is made more complicated by the decision to start the film in the middle, so that the first part is told in flashback to a kidnapped motorist (Michael Angarano, who has the misfortune to play a character who is needed only for his car and his abilities to bandage a wound and listen).This movie is interesting - it is, of its kind, quite good. The plot works fairly well, there is always a well-staged action sequence just around the corner, and there is an excellent cast - Ewan McGregor, Channing Tatum, Michael Fassbender, Michael Douglas, Bill Paxton, Antonio Banderas) - and the main character is played by Gina Carano.My first thought was "Gina who?" My second was that she must be the go-to girl when they can't get Angelina Jolie. But both thoughts turn out to be unkind because, coming out of nowhere (particularly to the British viewer: apparently she was on the US Gladiators TV show), she successfully holds this movie together. She has an attractive and agreeable screen presence, and strong physical charisma and is, by no means, overshadowed by the higher profile names who are supporting her.I didn't expect this to be good - it was very much better than I thought it would be.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1506999/reviews-24

ur7813355

title: Unexpectedly good review: Haywire is a spy thriller centring on Mallory (Gina Carano) who works for a shadowy organisation which works for another shadowy organisation and who, as the film starts, is trying to come back from a betrayal which has put her on the run. I won't summarise the plot, which is less complicated than it appears, but is made more complicated by the decision to start the film in the middle, so that the first part is told in flashback to a kidnapped motorist (Michael Angarano, who has the misfortune to play a character who is needed only for his car and his abilities to bandage a wound and listen).This movie is interesting - it is, of its kind, quite good. The plot works fairly well, there is always a well-staged action sequence just around the corner, and there is an excellent cast - Ewan McGregor, Channing Tatum, Michael Fassbender, Michael Douglas, Bill Paxton, Antonio Banderas) - and the main character is played by Gina Carano.My first thought was "Gina who?" My second was that she must be the go-to girl when they can't get Angelina Jolie. But both thoughts turn out to be unkind because, coming out of nowhere (particularly to the British viewer: apparently she was on the US Gladiators TV show), she successfully holds this movie together. She has an attractive and agreeable screen presence, and strong physical charisma and is, by no means, overshadowed by the higher profile names who are supporting her.I didn't expect this to be good - it was very much better than I thought it would be.

Gina Carano is the IT girl of action movies.

tt1506999

I said after seeing Columbiana that Zoe Saldana is a female Jason Statham, but after seeing Haywire I think Gina Carano is more worthy of that title. The action here is not over the top like in Mission Impossible, but more like The Bourne Movies, the Gina Carano character half the time almost felt like a female Jason Bourne.The story has been too many times, so I won't some it up. But I'd be lying saying I was not entertained, which I was. There are some intense fight scenes. And all the actors from Ewan McGregor, Channing Tatum, Michael Douglas, Michael Fassbender, Bill Paxton, and Antoneo Banderas all shine in there own way. And Gina Carano is beautiful and sexy, but at the same time we take her seriously.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1506999/reviews-74

ur4593705

title: Gina Carano is the IT girl of action movies. review: I said after seeing Columbiana that Zoe Saldana is a female Jason Statham, but after seeing Haywire I think Gina Carano is more worthy of that title. The action here is not over the top like in Mission Impossible, but more like The Bourne Movies, the Gina Carano character half the time almost felt like a female Jason Bourne.The story has been too many times, so I won't some it up. But I'd be lying saying I was not entertained, which I was. There are some intense fight scenes. And all the actors from Ewan McGregor, Channing Tatum, Michael Douglas, Michael Fassbender, Bill Paxton, and Antoneo Banderas all shine in there own way. And Gina Carano is beautiful and sexy, but at the same time we take her seriously.

A solid action thriller

tt1506999

Steven Soderbergh's outbreak thriller Contagion was one of the biggest sleeper hits of last year. The film made a respectable amount at the box office and was critically praised, but if you're like me then you may have written off seeing it in theaters since most films in the same vein weren't so great, but Contagion broke the mold you may have thought it fit into and some of the credit can be attributed to the rather phenomenal ensemble cast. I'm behind with much of Soderbergh's work, but the general consensus is that he's always able to put together one hell of a cast for nearly every one of his feature films. His latest effort Haywire is no exception.I don't follow MMA, so I had no idea who Gina Carano was going into Haywire. After it ended though, I certainly wanted to see more of her especially with how beautiful she is. Carano handles herself extremely well on-screen and is a fairly solid actress. The fact that she's able to kick ass and at least appear to have acting range is a serious plus. Despite the incredible cast, you're left wishing that the majority of them were around longer than they actually are. I'm looking at you, Michael Fassbender. Channing Tatum seemed a little less annoying than he usually is in his on-screen efforts while Ewan McGregor stepped outside of his comfort zone a bit and played for the opposing team for once. There was a lot of potential for Michael Douglas' Coblenz character, but he's used so sparingly as he's only in three scenes or so. Antonio Banderas appears on-screen about as often as Douglas, but plays a bigger role in the storyline as far as who's pulling the strings on who betrayed whom as far as Mallory's (Carano) mission goes. The only person who's somewhat forgettable is Bill Paxton. There's an amazing scene that takes place at his house, but he doesn't really contribute and is just kind of there.One of the interesting things about Haywire is that nearly every scene that takes place inside of a building has this yellow filter to it. The hum of fluorescent lighting makes a scene that is otherwise just talking a bit more memorable. It's more than likely a Soderbergh trademark as I seem to recall the same technique being used in Contagion, as well. As Mallory tells her story to Scott (Michael Angarano), we're shown what transpired in Barcelona which is what sparked the events to come. The set up process is fairly meticulous and feels somewhat similar to the preparations a team would have to make to pull off a successful heist. There's this well executed montage in Barcelona with no dialogue and a killer soundtrack that is incredibly memorable. The soundtrack is really fantastic anyway as it has this bluesy jazz kind of feel to it that is really exceptional. When the action gets heavy though, the music disappears and you're left with the loud clamoring of two or more individuals beating the snot out of each other. Those sound effects along with seeing opponents' skulls bounce off counter corners and being thrown through windows are perhaps the greatest moments the film has to offer.Haywire establishes this feeling that Mallory is being followed at all times, which is a must because she basically is. The way the camera shows how she's being tailed and those over the shoulder shots to show how she slipped behind a wall just in time to escape their line of vision is pretty extraordinary. The film takes us all over the world as we see the likes of Barcelona, San Diego, New York, Dublin, London, and New Mexico. One of the issues though is that despite a slight change in setting, every place feels exactly the same because a similar sequence of events occurs in every city. I overheard some people saying there were quite a few holes in the film, but I felt like the screenplay was incredibly solid. The spoken dialogue did a really superb job of reeling the viewer in while mostly feeling very natural. With that said though, it would have been nice to have a bit more action to compliment all of the talking.Haywire is an energetic powerhouse of an action thriller with a fantastic ensemble cast, a story that throws you right in the middle of the action, and an absorbing script. The sensational soundtrack compliments the film in the best of ways. Just keep in mind that while Haywire is pretty good, it's nowhere near as good or as epic as the beard Antonio Banderas shows off in the film. That Peter Griffin beard of his is certainly something grandiose to be proud of.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1506999/reviews-17

ur5811408

title: A solid action thriller review: Steven Soderbergh's outbreak thriller Contagion was one of the biggest sleeper hits of last year. The film made a respectable amount at the box office and was critically praised, but if you're like me then you may have written off seeing it in theaters since most films in the same vein weren't so great, but Contagion broke the mold you may have thought it fit into and some of the credit can be attributed to the rather phenomenal ensemble cast. I'm behind with much of Soderbergh's work, but the general consensus is that he's always able to put together one hell of a cast for nearly every one of his feature films. His latest effort Haywire is no exception.I don't follow MMA, so I had no idea who Gina Carano was going into Haywire. After it ended though, I certainly wanted to see more of her especially with how beautiful she is. Carano handles herself extremely well on-screen and is a fairly solid actress. The fact that she's able to kick ass and at least appear to have acting range is a serious plus. Despite the incredible cast, you're left wishing that the majority of them were around longer than they actually are. I'm looking at you, Michael Fassbender. Channing Tatum seemed a little less annoying than he usually is in his on-screen efforts while Ewan McGregor stepped outside of his comfort zone a bit and played for the opposing team for once. There was a lot of potential for Michael Douglas' Coblenz character, but he's used so sparingly as he's only in three scenes or so. Antonio Banderas appears on-screen about as often as Douglas, but plays a bigger role in the storyline as far as who's pulling the strings on who betrayed whom as far as Mallory's (Carano) mission goes. The only person who's somewhat forgettable is Bill Paxton. There's an amazing scene that takes place at his house, but he doesn't really contribute and is just kind of there.One of the interesting things about Haywire is that nearly every scene that takes place inside of a building has this yellow filter to it. The hum of fluorescent lighting makes a scene that is otherwise just talking a bit more memorable. It's more than likely a Soderbergh trademark as I seem to recall the same technique being used in Contagion, as well. As Mallory tells her story to Scott (Michael Angarano), we're shown what transpired in Barcelona which is what sparked the events to come. The set up process is fairly meticulous and feels somewhat similar to the preparations a team would have to make to pull off a successful heist. There's this well executed montage in Barcelona with no dialogue and a killer soundtrack that is incredibly memorable. The soundtrack is really fantastic anyway as it has this bluesy jazz kind of feel to it that is really exceptional. When the action gets heavy though, the music disappears and you're left with the loud clamoring of two or more individuals beating the snot out of each other. Those sound effects along with seeing opponents' skulls bounce off counter corners and being thrown through windows are perhaps the greatest moments the film has to offer.Haywire establishes this feeling that Mallory is being followed at all times, which is a must because she basically is. The way the camera shows how she's being tailed and those over the shoulder shots to show how she slipped behind a wall just in time to escape their line of vision is pretty extraordinary. The film takes us all over the world as we see the likes of Barcelona, San Diego, New York, Dublin, London, and New Mexico. One of the issues though is that despite a slight change in setting, every place feels exactly the same because a similar sequence of events occurs in every city. I overheard some people saying there were quite a few holes in the film, but I felt like the screenplay was incredibly solid. The spoken dialogue did a really superb job of reeling the viewer in while mostly feeling very natural. With that said though, it would have been nice to have a bit more action to compliment all of the talking.Haywire is an energetic powerhouse of an action thriller with a fantastic ensemble cast, a story that throws you right in the middle of the action, and an absorbing script. The sensational soundtrack compliments the film in the best of ways. Just keep in mind that while Haywire is pretty good, it's nowhere near as good or as epic as the beard Antonio Banderas shows off in the film. That Peter Griffin beard of his is certainly something grandiose to be proud of.

Bourne on a Wire

tt1506999

Damn. Damn shame. Steven Soderbergh USED to be my favorite director. But, after a string of mediocre films, leading up to this one,Haywire, I'm jumping ship.Actually, I did that with Contagion, but this was the nail in his coffin.I'm a fan of the Ocean's films – YES, even #12, though that ranks #3 of 3 – but this one screamed too much Ocean's, minus the good dialogue, suspense, acting, chemistry, originality and fun. How it mirrored it was with a (now) annoying and overbearing score and fifty camera angles, color or not, of the same shot. It was a good gimmick at one time – fun, fresh and kept us going. Here, it was just plain irritating.But even Soderbergh was wishy-washy with if he wanted the whole movie like that – thank GOD he didn't, or just certain scenes.At any rate, for a minute number of scenes, the movie worked. And I'm only talking about the fairly decent and choreographed fight scenes involving our "heroine" Mallory (Carano.) She was fantastic and all the way through – her action scenes or, even, just posing, she made me think of her becoming a more serious Lara Croft in a reboot or in a (finally) Wonder Woman movie. It made me really smile when one character does, in fact, call her "Wonder Woman." I guess I'm not alone.Although I might as well have been since this mess of a movie made practically nothing. The movie was predictable as all hell, the conversations stunk, the acting subpar, the suspense:meh and worse of all – and I'm talking a deal-breaker for me ever seeing this again: it contained the most unbelievable and outrageously appalling scene between our super-spy Mallory and a civilian she car jacks and spills her adventures/secrets to.Think sixteen degrees below Jason Bourne and his civilian, Marie. EVEN with memory loss, at least Bourne truly acted like an agent of doom and Marie truly acted like a human in a unique and scary situation. On the flipside, we have this poor and useless of a character, Scott (Angarano), who somewhat acts scared when he's in the middle of death-duel between Mallory and a guy, Aaron (the ever cute-yet-stupid Channing Tatum) and then Scott gets car jacked. For about 1.5 seconds, these events concern him and then he joyfully cares for the stranger, listens to her and repeats back her story of her misadventures.The movie's so obvious, it needs not a synopsis, but suffice to say, super-spy Mallory is double crossed – oh, my! that's new! – and she spends the obligatory rest of the movie on the lam and hunting whodunit.Like I said, I DID enjoy the brief action sequences – Carano really did kick butt and looked great (for the most part) doing it. But it's that other 80% of the film that was just taxing and felt like a film student's attempt at an indie Bourne. SKIP IT.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1506999/reviews-364

ur17825945

title: Bourne on a Wire review: Damn. Damn shame. Steven Soderbergh USED to be my favorite director. But, after a string of mediocre films, leading up to this one,Haywire, I'm jumping ship.Actually, I did that with Contagion, but this was the nail in his coffin.I'm a fan of the Ocean's films – YES, even #12, though that ranks #3 of 3 – but this one screamed too much Ocean's, minus the good dialogue, suspense, acting, chemistry, originality and fun. How it mirrored it was with a (now) annoying and overbearing score and fifty camera angles, color or not, of the same shot. It was a good gimmick at one time – fun, fresh and kept us going. Here, it was just plain irritating.But even Soderbergh was wishy-washy with if he wanted the whole movie like that – thank GOD he didn't, or just certain scenes.At any rate, for a minute number of scenes, the movie worked. And I'm only talking about the fairly decent and choreographed fight scenes involving our "heroine" Mallory (Carano.) She was fantastic and all the way through – her action scenes or, even, just posing, she made me think of her becoming a more serious Lara Croft in a reboot or in a (finally) Wonder Woman movie. It made me really smile when one character does, in fact, call her "Wonder Woman." I guess I'm not alone.Although I might as well have been since this mess of a movie made practically nothing. The movie was predictable as all hell, the conversations stunk, the acting subpar, the suspense:meh and worse of all – and I'm talking a deal-breaker for me ever seeing this again: it contained the most unbelievable and outrageously appalling scene between our super-spy Mallory and a civilian she car jacks and spills her adventures/secrets to.Think sixteen degrees below Jason Bourne and his civilian, Marie. EVEN with memory loss, at least Bourne truly acted like an agent of doom and Marie truly acted like a human in a unique and scary situation. On the flipside, we have this poor and useless of a character, Scott (Angarano), who somewhat acts scared when he's in the middle of death-duel between Mallory and a guy, Aaron (the ever cute-yet-stupid Channing Tatum) and then Scott gets car jacked. For about 1.5 seconds, these events concern him and then he joyfully cares for the stranger, listens to her and repeats back her story of her misadventures.The movie's so obvious, it needs not a synopsis, but suffice to say, super-spy Mallory is double crossed – oh, my! that's new! – and she spends the obligatory rest of the movie on the lam and hunting whodunit.Like I said, I DID enjoy the brief action sequences – Carano really did kick butt and looked great (for the most part) doing it. But it's that other 80% of the film that was just taxing and felt like a film student's attempt at an indie Bourne. SKIP IT.

Boring film, with good cast to throw everyone off

tt1506999

This film, on its own, would have received a subaverage rating for the bad acting, the boring plot and the pointless action. However, done by Soderbergh and having Ewan McGregor, Antonio Banderas, Michael Fassbender and Michael Douglas in the cast... I rate it even lower for the pure impudence of using a few good actors in order to sell a bad film.The story is simple: betrayed super duper agent seeks the people that set her up. It has been done to death, but each time there was something added to make it interesting: exotic locations, good actors, flamboyant action scenes. Instead, this had a bleak, fractured feel that left the viewer confused and not because the plot was terribly convoluted, but because it was malexplained. Gina Carano is no actress and it shows. The music was something stolen from Ocean's Eleven.Bottom line: Soderbergh wanted to make a movie and show his craftsmanship in a genre that is making a comeback now, after everybody has forgotten most of the experiments in stupidity from three or four decades ago in the same genre. He called a few friends and made them play small roles so that he could also sell the movie, no matter how bad it was. In the end, he can cry that no one understands art while he counts the cash he makes from duped viewers like you and me. Shame on you, Soderbergh!

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1506999/reviews-337

ur3146136

title: Boring film, with good cast to throw everyone off review: This film, on its own, would have received a subaverage rating for the bad acting, the boring plot and the pointless action. However, done by Soderbergh and having Ewan McGregor, Antonio Banderas, Michael Fassbender and Michael Douglas in the cast... I rate it even lower for the pure impudence of using a few good actors in order to sell a bad film.The story is simple: betrayed super duper agent seeks the people that set her up. It has been done to death, but each time there was something added to make it interesting: exotic locations, good actors, flamboyant action scenes. Instead, this had a bleak, fractured feel that left the viewer confused and not because the plot was terribly convoluted, but because it was malexplained. Gina Carano is no actress and it shows. The music was something stolen from Ocean's Eleven.Bottom line: Soderbergh wanted to make a movie and show his craftsmanship in a genre that is making a comeback now, after everybody has forgotten most of the experiments in stupidity from three or four decades ago in the same genre. He called a few friends and made them play small roles so that he could also sell the movie, no matter how bad it was. In the end, he can cry that no one understands art while he counts the cash he makes from duped viewers like you and me. Shame on you, Soderbergh!

A short-circuited misfire - 62%

tt1506999

Steven Soderbergh is not a director I associate with gripping, thrilling action films. Too-clever-by-half screenplays and impressive cast lists, yes but bullet-heavy blasts? Not really. Alas, such is the fate that befalls this movie which I wanted to like more than I do. It isn't that original if we're honest, even if it makes our protagonist a woman in the shape of former MMA star Gina Carano. But what it lacks in set pieces, it makes up for with its fantastic cast and twisting plot. But even here, there's a problem – with a cast filled with great actors, isn't there a danger that our new heroine is going to be gravely overshadowed? Carano plays Mallory Kane, a Black-Ops soldier employed by her former lover Kenneth (Ewan McGregor) for a shadowy agency which will happily engage in dirty work on behalf of the US Government. After securing the release of an investigative journalist (Anthony Brandon Wong) in Barcelona, Mallory reluctantly agrees to a new mission – accompany MI6 operative Paul (Michael Fassbender) to a meeting in Dublin for a few days and come back home. But she soon finds out that she is the actual target and barely escapes with her life. Realising that she can't trust anybody, she must uncover the truth and deal with them in her own, unique way… "Haywire" is actually a more effective thriller than it is straight-up action shooter, which was my initial impression of it. The plot makes a few leaps in logic as the mystery seems to solve itself while Carano certainly works her socks off in the action sequences which aspire to the same level as the Jason Bourne series but instead appear obscured in moody lighting, even on a beach. The other issue is that alongside the likes of McGregor, Fassbender, Michael Douglas and Antonio Banderas, Carano's acting is shown as very much a work-in-progress. I can't recall her smiling or showing any emotion beyond 'determined' – I certainly can't imagine her sharing a joke with her colleagues or falling in love, for example. Like Ronda Rousey in the recent "Expendables 3", Carano is a rare prospect – a female action star that might well have a future ahead of her. But once you're used to Mallory Kane, the film slows to a slog with only occasional fights and shoot-outs to wake you back up again. In a way, it reminded me of another girl-with-guns flick – "Hanna", released the same year. Both were filmed in European cities ("Hanna" in Berlin, "Haywire" mainly in Dublin), had a female lead and a conspiracy bubbling away beneath the surface. But the appeal of "Hanna" lay with Saoirse Ronan as the teenage super-spy and the film's sometimes otherworldly approach to the subject matter. By contrast, "Haywire" feels a little safe and sterile as though Soderbergh was sticking too closely to the tried-and-tested formula.I wanted to like "Haywire" but for me, this is a rare misfire from Soderbergh. The direction feels remote and uninterested, as though Soderbergh was concentrating on trying to confuse his audience like he did with "Ocean's 11" instead of delivering a full-throttle action picture. Instead, we have a muddled and slightly dull spy-versus-spy film that clearly aspires to be better than it is. Carano is not necessarily to blame but it's easy to imagine the role of Kane being played by the likes of Angelina Jolie – maybe because she was in the eerily similar "Salt" the year before. It makes me wonder why Soderbergh signed on as director because this isn't his sort of film – other than the cast, I can't think of exactly what he brought to the material. As it is, "Haywire" is less of a shock and more of a short circuit.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1506999/reviews-408

ur3035115

title: A short-circuited misfire - 62% review: Steven Soderbergh is not a director I associate with gripping, thrilling action films. Too-clever-by-half screenplays and impressive cast lists, yes but bullet-heavy blasts? Not really. Alas, such is the fate that befalls this movie which I wanted to like more than I do. It isn't that original if we're honest, even if it makes our protagonist a woman in the shape of former MMA star Gina Carano. But what it lacks in set pieces, it makes up for with its fantastic cast and twisting plot. But even here, there's a problem – with a cast filled with great actors, isn't there a danger that our new heroine is going to be gravely overshadowed? Carano plays Mallory Kane, a Black-Ops soldier employed by her former lover Kenneth (Ewan McGregor) for a shadowy agency which will happily engage in dirty work on behalf of the US Government. After securing the release of an investigative journalist (Anthony Brandon Wong) in Barcelona, Mallory reluctantly agrees to a new mission – accompany MI6 operative Paul (Michael Fassbender) to a meeting in Dublin for a few days and come back home. But she soon finds out that she is the actual target and barely escapes with her life. Realising that she can't trust anybody, she must uncover the truth and deal with them in her own, unique way… "Haywire" is actually a more effective thriller than it is straight-up action shooter, which was my initial impression of it. The plot makes a few leaps in logic as the mystery seems to solve itself while Carano certainly works her socks off in the action sequences which aspire to the same level as the Jason Bourne series but instead appear obscured in moody lighting, even on a beach. The other issue is that alongside the likes of McGregor, Fassbender, Michael Douglas and Antonio Banderas, Carano's acting is shown as very much a work-in-progress. I can't recall her smiling or showing any emotion beyond 'determined' – I certainly can't imagine her sharing a joke with her colleagues or falling in love, for example. Like Ronda Rousey in the recent "Expendables 3", Carano is a rare prospect – a female action star that might well have a future ahead of her. But once you're used to Mallory Kane, the film slows to a slog with only occasional fights and shoot-outs to wake you back up again. In a way, it reminded me of another girl-with-guns flick – "Hanna", released the same year. Both were filmed in European cities ("Hanna" in Berlin, "Haywire" mainly in Dublin), had a female lead and a conspiracy bubbling away beneath the surface. But the appeal of "Hanna" lay with Saoirse Ronan as the teenage super-spy and the film's sometimes otherworldly approach to the subject matter. By contrast, "Haywire" feels a little safe and sterile as though Soderbergh was sticking too closely to the tried-and-tested formula.I wanted to like "Haywire" but for me, this is a rare misfire from Soderbergh. The direction feels remote and uninterested, as though Soderbergh was concentrating on trying to confuse his audience like he did with "Ocean's 11" instead of delivering a full-throttle action picture. Instead, we have a muddled and slightly dull spy-versus-spy film that clearly aspires to be better than it is. Carano is not necessarily to blame but it's easy to imagine the role of Kane being played by the likes of Angelina Jolie – maybe because she was in the eerily similar "Salt" the year before. It makes me wonder why Soderbergh signed on as director because this isn't his sort of film – other than the cast, I can't think of exactly what he brought to the material. As it is, "Haywire" is less of a shock and more of a short circuit.

Who To Trust?

tt1506999

Mercenary contract worker and spy Mallory (Gina Carano) goes on a mission, is betrayed and the rest of the film is her running to or from the Good Guys or the Bad Guys because you won't be able to tell the good from the bad and she can't either. She is scared and trusts no one. One reason no one can tell the good guys from the bad ones is because they all seem to look alike. And, I am not talking about Antonio Bandaras' character or Michael Douglas' character. They don't confuse you because you know what they look like, but you are still not sure if one or both of them are good or bad. The darkened scenes help with this confusion and they go by quickly. Most of the movie is Mallory running on foot and no racing vehicles CGI here. (Gina Carano spent a lot of time working out for this movie and she wants to make sure you see the results. Actually, not bad. Kudos.) Mallory doesn't know if she is doing the right thing; and, of course, you don't either but you stay with her because you know she is the only good guy (gal) in here. The editing for these runs is very good. Reminded me of Enemy of the State, the standard I use. If Michael Douglas and Antonio Banderas had more screen time, this could have been a major movie, but they didn't. What they had was good, but we wanted more.Not much face time in here and don't expect things to slow down so you can figure all this out. You may figure all this out with the last few scenes. Maybe.By the end of the movie you will either be satisfied or not. Will we see a sequel in this arena or another Laura Croft? I am ready for either one. (6/10)Violence: Yes. Sex: No. Nudity: No. Language: Only a couple S-words were heard.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1506999/reviews-225

ur15857362

title: Who To Trust? review: Mercenary contract worker and spy Mallory (Gina Carano) goes on a mission, is betrayed and the rest of the film is her running to or from the Good Guys or the Bad Guys because you won't be able to tell the good from the bad and she can't either. She is scared and trusts no one. One reason no one can tell the good guys from the bad ones is because they all seem to look alike. And, I am not talking about Antonio Bandaras' character or Michael Douglas' character. They don't confuse you because you know what they look like, but you are still not sure if one or both of them are good or bad. The darkened scenes help with this confusion and they go by quickly. Most of the movie is Mallory running on foot and no racing vehicles CGI here. (Gina Carano spent a lot of time working out for this movie and she wants to make sure you see the results. Actually, not bad. Kudos.) Mallory doesn't know if she is doing the right thing; and, of course, you don't either but you stay with her because you know she is the only good guy (gal) in here. The editing for these runs is very good. Reminded me of Enemy of the State, the standard I use. If Michael Douglas and Antonio Banderas had more screen time, this could have been a major movie, but they didn't. What they had was good, but we wanted more.Not much face time in here and don't expect things to slow down so you can figure all this out. You may figure all this out with the last few scenes. Maybe.By the end of the movie you will either be satisfied or not. Will we see a sequel in this arena or another Laura Croft? I am ready for either one. (6/10)Violence: Yes. Sex: No. Nudity: No. Language: Only a couple S-words were heard.

Good For What it Is!

tt1506999

I can't believe all the hate this film, Haywire is getting from general movie audiences. Critics adored this film, so I find it baffling that there would be a startling difference between the two audiences. Despite offering nothing new and having a plot than have been done so many times before, I couldn't help but enjoy most of this movie. I'm a big sucker for these kind of plots, so I knew I'd like it. I liked some of the action scenes because I got to see some MMA moves in a movie. To the dismay of some people, this film has many scenes of talk so that may throw people off.Steven Soderbergh's film is about a black ops girl whose government has turned against her. Now Mallory must run from the people she trusted the most.This is the first movie role Gina Carano has ever done. That being the case, she should improve her acting as she gets more roles. It wasn't great, but she at least shown her ability to be an action heroine. This film boasts an impressive supporting cast by Ewan McGregor, Michael Douglas, Michael Fassbender, Antonio Banderas, and even Bill Paxton. They were all really enjoyable to watch.Overall, this is a good film even though it did not bring anything new to the table. There are some great fight scenes. If Gina had better acting skills, this would have been a great movie. But for a middle of January release, it's good for what it is. It's better than what people think. I rate this film 8/10.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1506999/reviews-378

ur17646017

title: Good For What it Is! review: I can't believe all the hate this film, Haywire is getting from general movie audiences. Critics adored this film, so I find it baffling that there would be a startling difference between the two audiences. Despite offering nothing new and having a plot than have been done so many times before, I couldn't help but enjoy most of this movie. I'm a big sucker for these kind of plots, so I knew I'd like it. I liked some of the action scenes because I got to see some MMA moves in a movie. To the dismay of some people, this film has many scenes of talk so that may throw people off.Steven Soderbergh's film is about a black ops girl whose government has turned against her. Now Mallory must run from the people she trusted the most.This is the first movie role Gina Carano has ever done. That being the case, she should improve her acting as she gets more roles. It wasn't great, but she at least shown her ability to be an action heroine. This film boasts an impressive supporting cast by Ewan McGregor, Michael Douglas, Michael Fassbender, Antonio Banderas, and even Bill Paxton. They were all really enjoyable to watch.Overall, this is a good film even though it did not bring anything new to the table. There are some great fight scenes. If Gina had better acting skills, this would have been a great movie. But for a middle of January release, it's good for what it is. It's better than what people think. I rate this film 8/10.

Star-studded action B-movie that lacks a sense of fun

tt1506999

(56%) Very much a B movie that so happens to have an A movie director and cast. The casting itself is almost a bizarre distraction as the largely unknown to cinema Gina Carano is joined early on by Channing Tatum, then Ewan McGregor appears with Michael Douglas and a bushy bearded Antonio Banderas, then soon after that Michael Fassbender and Bill Paxton show up. It's like one of those dreams that doesn't quite make sense as famous faces keep popping up out of nowhere. The plot is simple as iced water and has been done many times before, they've tinkered around with it a little, but even casual movie goers will know what's coming. And while the few fight scenes are very well done, and Carano more than holds her own both in action and acting, the dialogue throughout is monotonous and flat which really pulls the movie down. And why Soderbergh felt the need to mindlessly switch between black and white and colour during a few scenes is any ones guess (because it looks arty and edgy yet so very pointless). So in the end a film with nothing really new to offer, a bland script, a great, all be very random cast, with some nice action thrown in. If that's what you want, then that's all you'll get from this slightly oddball little flick.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1506999/reviews-409

ur54757473

title: Star-studded action B-movie that lacks a sense of fun review: (56%) Very much a B movie that so happens to have an A movie director and cast. The casting itself is almost a bizarre distraction as the largely unknown to cinema Gina Carano is joined early on by Channing Tatum, then Ewan McGregor appears with Michael Douglas and a bushy bearded Antonio Banderas, then soon after that Michael Fassbender and Bill Paxton show up. It's like one of those dreams that doesn't quite make sense as famous faces keep popping up out of nowhere. The plot is simple as iced water and has been done many times before, they've tinkered around with it a little, but even casual movie goers will know what's coming. And while the few fight scenes are very well done, and Carano more than holds her own both in action and acting, the dialogue throughout is monotonous and flat which really pulls the movie down. And why Soderbergh felt the need to mindlessly switch between black and white and colour during a few scenes is any ones guess (because it looks arty and edgy yet so very pointless). So in the end a film with nothing really new to offer, a bland script, a great, all be very random cast, with some nice action thrown in. If that's what you want, then that's all you'll get from this slightly oddball little flick.

Boring and unoriginal action flick...The fight scenes were raw though

tt1506999

Okay, so the main 2 reasons I saw this movie was to see Gina Carano who is a real MMA fighter kick butt and because of Michael Fassbender. Now the fight sequences was alright but what really stands out about it, is the rawness of it all. It seems a bit exaggerated when it comes to the guys fighting but the fight sequences looked real when it came to Gina Carano. Michael Fassbender isn't in this much and didn't stand out as much as I expected. For a bit of a B action movie it has a roster of actors that has a name in the movie business. The plot however was dull and has nothing new going for it, it's just unoriginal and the execution for the most part is pretty darn boring. The cover has Gina Carano duel wielding guns but that is a fake marketing, since it has her doing more hand to hand fights than gun fights. Which can be a positive to some audience and negative to others. I first thought this would be a straight forward and narrow action movie with a lot of explosions. But it turns out to be a simple story told in a complicated way, which isn't a good thing. Simple and effective is good but that just isn't the case for this one. And the movie doesn't depend on explosions but actually tries to go in a story direction which is pretty flat. Not saying explosions make a action movie or anything like that, but the action just seemed a bit dull in some areas. I am not sure if the director wanted to make a female Jason Bourne style movie but it lacks in many areas if that was the idea. There is only one thing memorable about this movie is how the fight scenes doesn't seem choreographed and looks real when it comes to Gina Carano. It just wasn't that entertaining or thrilling.4.5/10

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1506999/reviews-253

ur22171966

title: Boring and unoriginal action flick...The fight scenes were raw though review: Okay, so the main 2 reasons I saw this movie was to see Gina Carano who is a real MMA fighter kick butt and because of Michael Fassbender. Now the fight sequences was alright but what really stands out about it, is the rawness of it all. It seems a bit exaggerated when it comes to the guys fighting but the fight sequences looked real when it came to Gina Carano. Michael Fassbender isn't in this much and didn't stand out as much as I expected. For a bit of a B action movie it has a roster of actors that has a name in the movie business. The plot however was dull and has nothing new going for it, it's just unoriginal and the execution for the most part is pretty darn boring. The cover has Gina Carano duel wielding guns but that is a fake marketing, since it has her doing more hand to hand fights than gun fights. Which can be a positive to some audience and negative to others. I first thought this would be a straight forward and narrow action movie with a lot of explosions. But it turns out to be a simple story told in a complicated way, which isn't a good thing. Simple and effective is good but that just isn't the case for this one. And the movie doesn't depend on explosions but actually tries to go in a story direction which is pretty flat. Not saying explosions make a action movie or anything like that, but the action just seemed a bit dull in some areas. I am not sure if the director wanted to make a female Jason Bourne style movie but it lacks in many areas if that was the idea. There is only one thing memorable about this movie is how the fight scenes doesn't seem choreographed and looks real when it comes to Gina Carano. It just wasn't that entertaining or thrilling.4.5/10

A woman that gives as good as she gets.

tt1506999

High octane ass whipping. MMA fighter Gina Carano is Mallory Kane, a stunning secret operative that takes a last minute mission in Dublin, that abruptly falls apart when she is betrayed. Why, she doesn't know; but she realizes that her life is definitely in danger and the only way she will survive is to outwit and outlast her enemies. The story line is pretty shaky at best with just enough dialog to break up the power packed fight scenes. This martial arts operative kicks ass all the way through the cast. She gives as good as she gets. A white-knuckle action flick with no CGI or unbelievable stunts. You can't say that Carano's acting skills are stellar, but there is some top notch names rounding out the cast: Michael Angarano, Channing Tatum, Michael Douglas, Antonio Bandaras, Michael Fassbender, Bill Paxton and Ewan McGregor.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1506999/reviews-270

ur0449021

title: A woman that gives as good as she gets. review: High octane ass whipping. MMA fighter Gina Carano is Mallory Kane, a stunning secret operative that takes a last minute mission in Dublin, that abruptly falls apart when she is betrayed. Why, she doesn't know; but she realizes that her life is definitely in danger and the only way she will survive is to outwit and outlast her enemies. The story line is pretty shaky at best with just enough dialog to break up the power packed fight scenes. This martial arts operative kicks ass all the way through the cast. She gives as good as she gets. A white-knuckle action flick with no CGI or unbelievable stunts. You can't say that Carano's acting skills are stellar, but there is some top notch names rounding out the cast: Michael Angarano, Channing Tatum, Michael Douglas, Antonio Bandaras, Michael Fassbender, Bill Paxton and Ewan McGregor.

An action movie without any excitement.

tt1506999

This is definitely one of the lesser Soderbergh movies that I have seen. But as it turns out; even a lesser Soderbergh is still a perfectly watchable movie.There were quite a few issues I was having with this movie, while watching it. It picks an original enough spy genre approach, that just isn't a very exciting one however. Seems that it wanted to go for realism but yet the movie is being filmed as a typical action-flick, even while this is definitely not a spectacular or action-filled movie.But also the story itself is being told in such a messy way that it becomes just too hard to follow. It makes you loose interest in it, pretty early on already. It doesn't help that the movie feels like it isn't going anywhere with its story. It doesn't lay things out clearly for you and you constantly need to pay attention. Nothing wrong with that of course but it just doesn't work out too well for the movie. simply because it's never getting interesting enough. I just couldn't care less about anything that was happening in it, or for any of its characters.And really, Gina Carano, who plays the lead role, was absolutely horrendous. She just can't act, which totally took me out of the movie. Watching her act with greats such as Michael Douglas, Ewan McGregor, Michael Fassbender and Antonio Banderas doesn't ever look right. Watching her doing spy stuff doesn't ever look right or convincing. And even watching her fight doesn't look right. It sounds strange, since she is a professional fighter and all but seeing her doing wrestling moves, in a spy movie, just doesn't look right at all and came across as quite ridicules, to me.Nothing about the movie really impressed me but that doesn't mean it's a bad movie as well. It's still a maintaining enough, little spy thriller, that however in the end is extremely forgettable.6/10http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1506999/reviews-105

ur1416505

title: An action movie without any excitement. review: This is definitely one of the lesser Soderbergh movies that I have seen. But as it turns out; even a lesser Soderbergh is still a perfectly watchable movie.There were quite a few issues I was having with this movie, while watching it. It picks an original enough spy genre approach, that just isn't a very exciting one however. Seems that it wanted to go for realism but yet the movie is being filmed as a typical action-flick, even while this is definitely not a spectacular or action-filled movie.But also the story itself is being told in such a messy way that it becomes just too hard to follow. It makes you loose interest in it, pretty early on already. It doesn't help that the movie feels like it isn't going anywhere with its story. It doesn't lay things out clearly for you and you constantly need to pay attention. Nothing wrong with that of course but it just doesn't work out too well for the movie. simply because it's never getting interesting enough. I just couldn't care less about anything that was happening in it, or for any of its characters.And really, Gina Carano, who plays the lead role, was absolutely horrendous. She just can't act, which totally took me out of the movie. Watching her act with greats such as Michael Douglas, Ewan McGregor, Michael Fassbender and Antonio Banderas doesn't ever look right. Watching her doing spy stuff doesn't ever look right or convincing. And even watching her fight doesn't look right. It sounds strange, since she is a professional fighter and all but seeing her doing wrestling moves, in a spy movie, just doesn't look right at all and came across as quite ridicules, to me.Nothing about the movie really impressed me but that doesn't mean it's a bad movie as well. It's still a maintaining enough, little spy thriller, that however in the end is extremely forgettable.6/10http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/

Solid and well made

tt1506999

A solid and well made thriller indeed. No matter that in the end you don't arrive at knowing who works for whom and for what or against whom or what and who betrays whom and for what. But nothing is misrepresented or faked. You simply are not told explicitly about it that's all. But what is important in this movie is that technically and formally it's one of the best of this kind with constant action and chases and superb hand-to-hand struggles and a fabulous performance of Gina Carano in her role of special (?) agent. The end is inconclusive but never mind since the images will fulfill your taste for thrill entirely despite also a few of the usual improbable episodes of the action.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1506999/reviews-249

ur1046460

title: Solid and well made review: A solid and well made thriller indeed. No matter that in the end you don't arrive at knowing who works for whom and for what or against whom or what and who betrays whom and for what. But nothing is misrepresented or faked. You simply are not told explicitly about it that's all. But what is important in this movie is that technically and formally it's one of the best of this kind with constant action and chases and superb hand-to-hand struggles and a fabulous performance of Gina Carano in her role of special (?) agent. The end is inconclusive but never mind since the images will fulfill your taste for thrill entirely despite also a few of the usual improbable episodes of the action.

Not as good as expected:

tt1506999

This movie just wasn't quite as good as I was hoping for. It was paraded around like the female version of the Bourne series and while it has a similar feel, it doesn't have the depth. Gina Carano is beautiful and a legitimate female BA who makes the Angelina Jolie's of the world who try and play characters like Salt look ridiculous in comparison. That being said, her acting ability leaves a lot to be desired. That plus the weak development of the plot and characters take away from the outstanding action sequences. Also, I am not a big fan of the new movement in Hollywood to try and throw an 80's vibe into modern films. It comes off as corny and makes the movies feel cheap. Nonetheless, the movie is still worth watching and, even though I may have been a little harsh on the grading of it, I would like to see them continue the movie into a series and see how Carano can grow as an actress.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1506999/reviews-231

ur23843983

title: Not as good as expected: review: This movie just wasn't quite as good as I was hoping for. It was paraded around like the female version of the Bourne series and while it has a similar feel, it doesn't have the depth. Gina Carano is beautiful and a legitimate female BA who makes the Angelina Jolie's of the world who try and play characters like Salt look ridiculous in comparison. That being said, her acting ability leaves a lot to be desired. That plus the weak development of the plot and characters take away from the outstanding action sequences. Also, I am not a big fan of the new movement in Hollywood to try and throw an 80's vibe into modern films. It comes off as corny and makes the movies feel cheap. Nonetheless, the movie is still worth watching and, even though I may have been a little harsh on the grading of it, I would like to see them continue the movie into a series and see how Carano can grow as an actress.

Another muddled mess from Steven Soderbergh

tt1506999

Steven Soderbergh, Hollywood's most overrated living director, once again demonstrates his talents are closer to Ed Wood than Sergio Leone, with "Haywire". How else can one explain how mixed-martial arts expert Gina Carano can appear less capable than Angelina Jolie in "Salt," "Wanted" or either of the Lara Croft films. However, like Jolie, Carano is another striking beauty and has enough acting chops to generate interests in spite of Soderbergh's ineptitude. This is no small achievement, given the inability of veterans Oscar winner Michael Douglas, multiple Golden Globe nominees Antonio Banderas and Bill Paxton to register any impact at all. Soderbergh's annoying style of using minimal, frequently unintelligible dialog, medium shots which fail to capture acting nuances and little or no establishing narrative certainly don't help. Even the guns look phony in "Haywire". As much as I normally hate voice-overs, I certainly would have welcomed Carano's, not only because her voice is sexy, but because I would have actually understood what the heck was going on before I lost interest. Maybe next time, Carano will be fortunate enough to work with Phil Noyce ("Salt") or Doug Liman (The Bourne Series) or someone who actually understands how to direct engaging action films. I give "Haywire" a 5, solely for showcasing Carano.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1506999/reviews-227

ur0018365

title: Another muddled mess from Steven Soderbergh review: Steven Soderbergh, Hollywood's most overrated living director, once again demonstrates his talents are closer to Ed Wood than Sergio Leone, with "Haywire". How else can one explain how mixed-martial arts expert Gina Carano can appear less capable than Angelina Jolie in "Salt," "Wanted" or either of the Lara Croft films. However, like Jolie, Carano is another striking beauty and has enough acting chops to generate interests in spite of Soderbergh's ineptitude. This is no small achievement, given the inability of veterans Oscar winner Michael Douglas, multiple Golden Globe nominees Antonio Banderas and Bill Paxton to register any impact at all. Soderbergh's annoying style of using minimal, frequently unintelligible dialog, medium shots which fail to capture acting nuances and little or no establishing narrative certainly don't help. Even the guns look phony in "Haywire". As much as I normally hate voice-overs, I certainly would have welcomed Carano's, not only because her voice is sexy, but because I would have actually understood what the heck was going on before I lost interest. Maybe next time, Carano will be fortunate enough to work with Phil Noyce ("Salt") or Doug Liman (The Bourne Series) or someone who actually understands how to direct engaging action films. I give "Haywire" a 5, solely for showcasing Carano.

A New Action Hero

tt1506999

I'm certain I can say with absolute certainty that everyone is sick of seeing Angelina Jolie pretending to kick people's ass. Gina Carano is Brilliant in this film; is she an"A" actress? Not even close, is she terrible, no, for her first feature film she did an amazing job, and the stunts? well they were absolute perfection.The star studded cast also made this film what it was, but throw in all the fantastic fights most of them do, and this film is a solid well acted flick that everyone will (should) enjoy. As generic as the storyline is, I believe it to be completely different with Carano as the lead, I think her acting made the film "feel" different and that added to the uniqueness of the film, but as much as I love her and the film, she needs to work on her acting chops but luckily she can only go up from here.So with that this is a solid action/spy flick that has a different flavor to it that I believe will add to it success and make Gina a new action star that people will want and continue to see in future movies.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1506999/reviews-55

ur17395962

title: A New Action Hero review: I'm certain I can say with absolute certainty that everyone is sick of seeing Angelina Jolie pretending to kick people's ass. Gina Carano is Brilliant in this film; is she an"A" actress? Not even close, is she terrible, no, for her first feature film she did an amazing job, and the stunts? well they were absolute perfection.The star studded cast also made this film what it was, but throw in all the fantastic fights most of them do, and this film is a solid well acted flick that everyone will (should) enjoy. As generic as the storyline is, I believe it to be completely different with Carano as the lead, I think her acting made the film "feel" different and that added to the uniqueness of the film, but as much as I love her and the film, she needs to work on her acting chops but luckily she can only go up from here.So with that this is a solid action/spy flick that has a different flavor to it that I believe will add to it success and make Gina a new action star that people will want and continue to see in future movies.

Gina Carano rewrites the book on the modern female action star.

tt1506999

Real life female mixed martial arts star Gina Carano convincingly beats up the blokes in this lean Steven Soderbergh action thriller. Brimming with star turns and ignoring any kind of over complexity, Soderbergh's film is all about tempo. Instead of using rapid fire cutting to accentuate and heighten danger, (Chris Nolan/Paul Greengrass anyone?) the camera just holds to pay witness to the exhilarating action. Script and plot are borderline non-existent, and Ewan McGregor's American accent slips around a little, but from the off it's all about Carano doing her stuff supported by an impressive A-list cast. Does she do it well? Oh yes! While the film isn't going to leave a lasting impression, it's star certainly does. On a few occasions now i've seen Angelina Jolie pummel guys three times her size into the ground and although Jolie has the acting smarts, somehow the sight of her skinny frame doing extensively lethal damage has yet to fully convince. You can forget that with Carano, from the off she writes a new book on the female action star as she looks more than a match for any of her male opponents. Carano dishes out the brutality while at the same time remaining beautiful and alluring. It's a curious mix and an inspired piece of casting, more the shame that the film itself lacks better ideas to support it's eye catching protagonist. 7/10

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1506999/reviews-297

ur9150302

title: Gina Carano rewrites the book on the modern female action star. review: Real life female mixed martial arts star Gina Carano convincingly beats up the blokes in this lean Steven Soderbergh action thriller. Brimming with star turns and ignoring any kind of over complexity, Soderbergh's film is all about tempo. Instead of using rapid fire cutting to accentuate and heighten danger, (Chris Nolan/Paul Greengrass anyone?) the camera just holds to pay witness to the exhilarating action. Script and plot are borderline non-existent, and Ewan McGregor's American accent slips around a little, but from the off it's all about Carano doing her stuff supported by an impressive A-list cast. Does she do it well? Oh yes! While the film isn't going to leave a lasting impression, it's star certainly does. On a few occasions now i've seen Angelina Jolie pummel guys three times her size into the ground and although Jolie has the acting smarts, somehow the sight of her skinny frame doing extensively lethal damage has yet to fully convince. You can forget that with Carano, from the off she writes a new book on the female action star as she looks more than a match for any of her male opponents. Carano dishes out the brutality while at the same time remaining beautiful and alluring. It's a curious mix and an inspired piece of casting, more the shame that the film itself lacks better ideas to support it's eye catching protagonist. 7/10

Great action flick

tt1506999

I get why the studio was nervous to release this film: too artsy and slower paced with an unknown in the lead. I can also tell why audiences will be divided: female action leads tend to be a tough sell. People expecting balls to the wall action, with explosions and bullet fire every five seconds will have to look elsewhere. What we get is an arty action movie with some of the best filmed action I have seen. I rather enjoyed the story about a female operative being betrayed by her organization. Its been done before, but never so expertly here. The only thing I frowned on was that Gina's voice in the film sounds altered. I saw her in interviews for the film, and wish they would have kept her natural voice. She shines in this role, and easily is the best contender for the lead if DC ever gets off their laurels and makes a wonder woman film. Bottom line, very watchable action flick, with decent acting ( in an action movie? No way!!) amazing action and a stylized film style. Plus, my best friend and I couldn't help but grooving to the 60's spy style music of the film. Great way to spend an afternoon!!

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1506999/reviews-64

ur5435620

title: Great action flick review: I get why the studio was nervous to release this film: too artsy and slower paced with an unknown in the lead. I can also tell why audiences will be divided: female action leads tend to be a tough sell. People expecting balls to the wall action, with explosions and bullet fire every five seconds will have to look elsewhere. What we get is an arty action movie with some of the best filmed action I have seen. I rather enjoyed the story about a female operative being betrayed by her organization. Its been done before, but never so expertly here. The only thing I frowned on was that Gina's voice in the film sounds altered. I saw her in interviews for the film, and wish they would have kept her natural voice. She shines in this role, and easily is the best contender for the lead if DC ever gets off their laurels and makes a wonder woman film. Bottom line, very watchable action flick, with decent acting ( in an action movie? No way!!) amazing action and a stylized film style. Plus, my best friend and I couldn't help but grooving to the 60's spy style music of the film. Great way to spend an afternoon!!

You Fight Like A Girl! Carano kicks serious ass and proves herself a new face for action flix!

tt1506999

HAYWIRE (2011) *** Gina Carano, Ewan McGregor, Channing Tatum, Antonio Banderas, Michael Fassbender, Michael Douglas, Bill Paxton, Michael Angarano. Filmmaker Steven Soderbergh's too-cool-for-school spy vs. spy action set piece tailor made for MMA Corano (in her big-screen debut) as a wet-ops agent seeking answers and revenge – not necessarily in that order – when she's targeted for death with some loose ends to be tightened (preferably around her double-crossers' collective throats). Lean-and-mean screenplay by Lem Dobbs (who collaborated with Soderbergh on the criminally underrated indie gem THE LIMEY) sets things in motion with the beautifully lethal Carano (chosen personally by Soderbergh for her sweet skills in kicking some serious ass) up to the task in basically beating the snot out of her dubious co-stars. Shrewdly directed (i.e. the fights are thankfully not a chop-chop edited mélange of WTF just happened; clean and visible and Real! And altering Carano's voice to have a huskier tone is an interesting conceit) with razor-sharp pacing and just enough intrigue to keep the pot boiling. A veteran ensemble cast and the globe-trotting usual plotting mixed in the blend comes across as a toxic tonic for the espionage gone awry crowd. Best bit: Fassbender's pas-de-deux with our Wonder Woman (indeed); I'm in love.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1506999/reviews-29

ur0937743

title: You Fight Like A Girl! Carano kicks serious ass and proves herself a new face for action flix! review: HAYWIRE (2011) *** Gina Carano, Ewan McGregor, Channing Tatum, Antonio Banderas, Michael Fassbender, Michael Douglas, Bill Paxton, Michael Angarano. Filmmaker Steven Soderbergh's too-cool-for-school spy vs. spy action set piece tailor made for MMA Corano (in her big-screen debut) as a wet-ops agent seeking answers and revenge – not necessarily in that order – when she's targeted for death with some loose ends to be tightened (preferably around her double-crossers' collective throats). Lean-and-mean screenplay by Lem Dobbs (who collaborated with Soderbergh on the criminally underrated indie gem THE LIMEY) sets things in motion with the beautifully lethal Carano (chosen personally by Soderbergh for her sweet skills in kicking some serious ass) up to the task in basically beating the snot out of her dubious co-stars. Shrewdly directed (i.e. the fights are thankfully not a chop-chop edited mélange of WTF just happened; clean and visible and Real! And altering Carano's voice to have a huskier tone is an interesting conceit) with razor-sharp pacing and just enough intrigue to keep the pot boiling. A veteran ensemble cast and the globe-trotting usual plotting mixed in the blend comes across as a toxic tonic for the espionage gone awry crowd. Best bit: Fassbender's pas-de-deux with our Wonder Woman (indeed); I'm in love.

Haywire

tt1506999

I had seen the DVD cover for this film so often, I may have heard about it a little during its release, and I noticed how many good actors it had in it, I had to give a try and hope for the best, and the title sounded catchy as well, from director Steven Soderbergh (Sex, Lies, and Videotape; Traffic, Ocean's Eleven). Basically Mallory Kane (Gina Carano) is a freelance covert operative, she works for various global entities when hired by her handler to perform the jobs that governments cannot authorise and the heads of state would rather not know about. She is assigned on a mission to go to Barcelona and rescue a hostage, and then follows an assignment in Dublin, but this mission goes wrong and she is framed in some way to become an international target herself. Mallory finds out she has been double crossed and is on the hunt, using all her skills, tricks and abilities to escape the manhunt and gets answers from the people who would know what has happened and exact her revenge on the traitors, returning to the United States and she also has to protect her family. Also starring Ewan McGregor as Kenneth, Channing Tatum as Aaron, Michael Fassbender as Paul, Antonio Banderas as Rodrigo, Michael Douglas as Alex Coblenz, Bill Paxton as John Kane, Mathieu Kassovitz as Studer and Michael Angarano as Scott. I will be honest and say I didn't pay as full attention as I probably should have done, I just about understood what was going on, at least I spotted all the good faces of the cast, and I suppose the moments I did see had some interesting parts, like near the end when McGregor is trapped in-between rocks as the tide comes in on a beach, it did not have enough chases or explosions that I think it needed, but it's an alright action thriller. Worth watching, at least once!

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1506999/reviews-360

ur4248714

title: Haywire review: I had seen the DVD cover for this film so often, I may have heard about it a little during its release, and I noticed how many good actors it had in it, I had to give a try and hope for the best, and the title sounded catchy as well, from director Steven Soderbergh (Sex, Lies, and Videotape; Traffic, Ocean's Eleven). Basically Mallory Kane (Gina Carano) is a freelance covert operative, she works for various global entities when hired by her handler to perform the jobs that governments cannot authorise and the heads of state would rather not know about. She is assigned on a mission to go to Barcelona and rescue a hostage, and then follows an assignment in Dublin, but this mission goes wrong and she is framed in some way to become an international target herself. Mallory finds out she has been double crossed and is on the hunt, using all her skills, tricks and abilities to escape the manhunt and gets answers from the people who would know what has happened and exact her revenge on the traitors, returning to the United States and she also has to protect her family. Also starring Ewan McGregor as Kenneth, Channing Tatum as Aaron, Michael Fassbender as Paul, Antonio Banderas as Rodrigo, Michael Douglas as Alex Coblenz, Bill Paxton as John Kane, Mathieu Kassovitz as Studer and Michael Angarano as Scott. I will be honest and say I didn't pay as full attention as I probably should have done, I just about understood what was going on, at least I spotted all the good faces of the cast, and I suppose the moments I did see had some interesting parts, like near the end when McGregor is trapped in-between rocks as the tide comes in on a beach, it did not have enough chases or explosions that I think it needed, but it's an alright action thriller. Worth watching, at least once!

A Nutshell Review: Haywire

tt1506999

You have got to salute the marketing folks for giving Steven Soderbergh's Haywire such a high octane sounding synopsis that promises plenty of action given a plot that treads on the usual betrayal of an alpha-character who comes back to seek revenge against the handlers. The film isn't anything like what its synopsis had promised, being silent for the most parts and having little spoken segments, relying on plenty of mood and music generated, which reminded me of Drive, but without the coolness and chic since it's very much grounded in reality with no frills and no flamboyance.And by that I mean no exaggeration in its fight action sequences, where sound effects usually get amplified and for some cinema, elevated to becoming a key component to camouflage the lack of hard hitting impact, which in real life hardly ever happens anyway unless someone possesses some out of this world bionics, or ability to whistle one's punches when punching through to another body. The fight choreography by JJ Perry and team is so vividly real that the choreography itself is invisible, where exponents rely on just about everything within grasp to be used as an advantageous weapon and use just about every component of one's body to gain tactical advantage, which is why MMA works. Everyone seems to hit very hard in very convincing fashion onto the other and go for the jugular, and never fail to make you wince when the fighters begin their no holds barred battles that can happen just about anywhere, anytime.Which is why for the longest time I was waiting for yet another MMA film to show itself after Wilson Yip's Flashpoint, given the potential of the martial arts for more cinematic screen time, and who would have thought that it would come from Soderbergh instead, not exactly when known for tackling the pure out and out action genre in his filmography. But there's always a first time, and why not before the director decides to retire from filmmaking to dabble in painting. Curiously it's how the director had decided to treat the entire material, not just allowing the fights to take centrestage, but to weave a tale of curious jet setting espionage around it, dealing with shady characters with even shadier intents, and assemble a wealth of acting talent and action knuckle-men in its testosterone filled ensemble cast - check this out: Ewan McGregor, Michael Fassbender, Bill Paxton, Channing Tatum, Antonio Banderas, Michael Douglas etc - at his disposal to deliver on all fronts.Before you go Gina Carano who? in terms of the lead actress on whose broad shoulders the weight of this film got carried upon, it's good background to know that she's a one time #3 in Unified Women's MMA Rankings, thus making her the genuine deal required of an action heroine, sorely missed in Hollywood these days, especially those who possess real skills and not poser ones that any camera can turn one into. While Haywire is not her debut feature film role, it doesn't mean that Carano already possesses that varied range of acting emotions, but reserves her range for her battling abilities instead, from hammering away at key anatomical parts, to gripping one's head in vice-like thighs, and so on. My personal favourite of her fight sequences happen to be that with Michael Fassbender, which began so suddenly, threw just about everything into it, and ended on a brutal yet anti-climatic note which deliberately stripped away all romanticism associated with on screen violence.Somehow, watching this film is like watching a Bruce Lee film (who arguably is one of the first MMA proponents), where regardless of the plot we know who to align our emotions to, and are sitting on the edge of our seats just waiting for the scheme of things to pass so that our hero(ine) can begin to kick ass. There isn't much talk here by the leading character as she devotes herself to carrying out her mission and overcoming obstacles put in her way, and Soderbergh fashions the pace and mood of the film almost like a typical 80s B-action movie if not for its European trot from Barcelona to Dublin predominantly told in a series of flashbacks. MMA embodies plenty of fight utilizing just about every body part available to inflict damage, with its fair share of throws and grappling, and when done well like what Haywire features, can simply be engaging on the big screen.Unfortunately the plot pales in comparison to its action and treatment, and you'll be holding your breath for the next big action sequence to come on screen in between the double crossing and scheming committed by men in power. It shouldn't have to be this way if Lem Dobbs' story managed to provide a proper emotional centre for its central lead, which would have made her less of a one-dimensional character. Still, it's action that had piqued one's interest to come see this, and thankfully that aspect didn't disappoint, save for the long waits in between to endure before you get rewarded for your patience.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1506999/reviews-20

ur0317399

title: A Nutshell Review: Haywire review: You have got to salute the marketing folks for giving Steven Soderbergh's Haywire such a high octane sounding synopsis that promises plenty of action given a plot that treads on the usual betrayal of an alpha-character who comes back to seek revenge against the handlers. The film isn't anything like what its synopsis had promised, being silent for the most parts and having little spoken segments, relying on plenty of mood and music generated, which reminded me of Drive, but without the coolness and chic since it's very much grounded in reality with no frills and no flamboyance.And by that I mean no exaggeration in its fight action sequences, where sound effects usually get amplified and for some cinema, elevated to becoming a key component to camouflage the lack of hard hitting impact, which in real life hardly ever happens anyway unless someone possesses some out of this world bionics, or ability to whistle one's punches when punching through to another body. The fight choreography by JJ Perry and team is so vividly real that the choreography itself is invisible, where exponents rely on just about everything within grasp to be used as an advantageous weapon and use just about every component of one's body to gain tactical advantage, which is why MMA works. Everyone seems to hit very hard in very convincing fashion onto the other and go for the jugular, and never fail to make you wince when the fighters begin their no holds barred battles that can happen just about anywhere, anytime.Which is why for the longest time I was waiting for yet another MMA film to show itself after Wilson Yip's Flashpoint, given the potential of the martial arts for more cinematic screen time, and who would have thought that it would come from Soderbergh instead, not exactly when known for tackling the pure out and out action genre in his filmography. But there's always a first time, and why not before the director decides to retire from filmmaking to dabble in painting. Curiously it's how the director had decided to treat the entire material, not just allowing the fights to take centrestage, but to weave a tale of curious jet setting espionage around it, dealing with shady characters with even shadier intents, and assemble a wealth of acting talent and action knuckle-men in its testosterone filled ensemble cast - check this out: Ewan McGregor, Michael Fassbender, Bill Paxton, Channing Tatum, Antonio Banderas, Michael Douglas etc - at his disposal to deliver on all fronts.Before you go Gina Carano who? in terms of the lead actress on whose broad shoulders the weight of this film got carried upon, it's good background to know that she's a one time #3 in Unified Women's MMA Rankings, thus making her the genuine deal required of an action heroine, sorely missed in Hollywood these days, especially those who possess real skills and not poser ones that any camera can turn one into. While Haywire is not her debut feature film role, it doesn't mean that Carano already possesses that varied range of acting emotions, but reserves her range for her battling abilities instead, from hammering away at key anatomical parts, to gripping one's head in vice-like thighs, and so on. My personal favourite of her fight sequences happen to be that with Michael Fassbender, which began so suddenly, threw just about everything into it, and ended on a brutal yet anti-climatic note which deliberately stripped away all romanticism associated with on screen violence.Somehow, watching this film is like watching a Bruce Lee film (who arguably is one of the first MMA proponents), where regardless of the plot we know who to align our emotions to, and are sitting on the edge of our seats just waiting for the scheme of things to pass so that our hero(ine) can begin to kick ass. There isn't much talk here by the leading character as she devotes herself to carrying out her mission and overcoming obstacles put in her way, and Soderbergh fashions the pace and mood of the film almost like a typical 80s B-action movie if not for its European trot from Barcelona to Dublin predominantly told in a series of flashbacks. MMA embodies plenty of fight utilizing just about every body part available to inflict damage, with its fair share of throws and grappling, and when done well like what Haywire features, can simply be engaging on the big screen.Unfortunately the plot pales in comparison to its action and treatment, and you'll be holding your breath for the next big action sequence to come on screen in between the double crossing and scheming committed by men in power. It shouldn't have to be this way if Lem Dobbs' story managed to provide a proper emotional centre for its central lead, which would have made her less of a one-dimensional character. Still, it's action that had piqued one's interest to come see this, and thankfully that aspect didn't disappoint, save for the long waits in between to endure before you get rewarded for your patience.

Glossy straight to DVD hokum dressed up for the big screen

tt1506999

STAR RATING: ***** Saturday Night **** Friday Night *** Friday Morning ** Sunday Night * Monday MorningAfter a mission in Barcelona doesn't go to plan, Agent Mallory Kane (Gina Carono) keeps a low profile for a while, until she is once again approached by her superior Kenneth (Ewan McGregor) to travel to Ireland, to pose with another agent (Michael Fassbender) as a couple at an exclusive retreat, in order to snare a French national who's been up to no good. But when Kane finds herself double crossed, she finds herself on the run, framed for a murder she committed in self defense and unable to trust anyone.The novelty of having a bona fide martial artist in the lead role isn't as strong as it was in the halycon years of Seagal and Van Damme, being in the age of wire fu and CGI and such. So female MA sensation Gina Carano will probably find herself diving nose first towards the straight to DVD path now. As indeed this none event little offering really should have, had it not been for the inexplicable all star cast, a range of old and younger hot talent, and even more inexplicable big name director. One might only assume Steven Soderbergh has some Nicolas Cage style weird leaning towards B action movies, because it's either that or he's really allowed his standards to fall.An incoherent, convoluted story is matched by a long interval of deadly dull nothingness, as the movie goes through the motions, throwing up all the usual genre clichés, from the characters to the scenarios, with a big name cast carrying it all through, but with all the passion and sincerity of a dead fish. From relative new comers McGregor and Fassbender, to old hands like Antonio Banderas and Michael Douglas in standard crooked double agents supporting roles, it just smacks of an easy pay cheque to all involved, some trying to big up their careers while the good stuff stalls and others just grateful for the work still coming their way in the autumn of their careers. Other than that, it's really hard to figure out what anyone involved was hoping to achieve from it. **

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1506999/reviews-299

ur0345596

title: Glossy straight to DVD hokum dressed up for the big screen review: STAR RATING: ***** Saturday Night **** Friday Night *** Friday Morning ** Sunday Night * Monday MorningAfter a mission in Barcelona doesn't go to plan, Agent Mallory Kane (Gina Carono) keeps a low profile for a while, until she is once again approached by her superior Kenneth (Ewan McGregor) to travel to Ireland, to pose with another agent (Michael Fassbender) as a couple at an exclusive retreat, in order to snare a French national who's been up to no good. But when Kane finds herself double crossed, she finds herself on the run, framed for a murder she committed in self defense and unable to trust anyone.The novelty of having a bona fide martial artist in the lead role isn't as strong as it was in the halycon years of Seagal and Van Damme, being in the age of wire fu and CGI and such. So female MA sensation Gina Carano will probably find herself diving nose first towards the straight to DVD path now. As indeed this none event little offering really should have, had it not been for the inexplicable all star cast, a range of old and younger hot talent, and even more inexplicable big name director. One might only assume Steven Soderbergh has some Nicolas Cage style weird leaning towards B action movies, because it's either that or he's really allowed his standards to fall.An incoherent, convoluted story is matched by a long interval of deadly dull nothingness, as the movie goes through the motions, throwing up all the usual genre clichés, from the characters to the scenarios, with a big name cast carrying it all through, but with all the passion and sincerity of a dead fish. From relative new comers McGregor and Fassbender, to old hands like Antonio Banderas and Michael Douglas in standard crooked double agents supporting roles, it just smacks of an easy pay cheque to all involved, some trying to big up their careers while the good stuff stalls and others just grateful for the work still coming their way in the autumn of their careers. Other than that, it's really hard to figure out what anyone involved was hoping to achieve from it. **

Gorgeous, rich true-life portrayals

tt0443680

Although as long as its title is unwieldy, The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford is (apparently) true to life and is the beneficiary of a smart, uncharacteristically supporting performance by Brad Pitt as the folk-hero villain and a strong, if a bit mannered, performance by Casey Affleck as his eventual killer.It's the latter days of the James Gang, and weary older brother Frank (Sam Shepard) is calling it quits after one last train robbery. Jesse's not so inclined, though, so he assembles a new crew of cutthroats, including the Ford brothers, Charley (Sam Rockwell) and Bob (Affleck). But all the while, Jesse is always looking over his shoulder, sure that someone's about to cut him down, perhaps even someone from his own gang. It doesn't help that he's written terroristic telegrams to governors and presidents alike, either.The story's told through the eyes of Bob Ford, a stammering young man who strongly idolizes Jesse to the point of carrying around a shoebox of dime novels about the legendary outlaw and knowing all sorts of arcane facts about Jesse. Not surprisingly, to Jesse and the rest of the gang (including Bob's brother Charley), this seems childish and downright pathetic, and consequently they don't give the young Ford much respect.This attitude leads to a strange mixture of resentment and continued idolatry on the part of Robert Ford. Should he continue to try to ingratiate himself with Jesse, or should he turn him in to the authorities? Turning him in might make him a hero - the one man who could fell Jesse James - but then he'd really lose whatever remaining respect Jessie had for Bob. (To Bob's thinking, he's one of Jesse's pals.) Affleck's Oscar-nominated performance is wonderful, walking the fine line between hammy and nuanced. A less-capable actor (or, perhaps, an actor less on top of his game) might have taken Bob's idiosyncrasies and run with them, played them up rather than muting them somewhat, making them feel more natural. You get the sense that although Bob is not a good man by any means, he is human in his actions and reactions; he can be a cold-blooded murderer and thief, but how he deals with each minicrisis is neither insincere nor cartoonish. It might be a testament to Affleck that he's able to make something out of the relatively dull character of Robert Ford.Brad Pitt is simply Brad Pitt. He's come a long way since movies like Legends of the Fall and A River Runs through It; he's now a Good Actor, not just a beefcake model, and he's effectively menacing and confusing as James, who was (the movie says) going a bit off the deep end in his waning years even without having to deal with the specter of betrayal. James is sad, excitable, angry, dissonant, and Pitt is up to the task. Weirdly enough, though, although Jesse James is the nominal subject of the movie, Pitt takes a backseat to Affleck. This isn't about romanticizing the lawless West and the tough fiends who populated it; it's about dreams crushed and comeuppance delivered.At more than two and a half hours, this is not a broad, unsubtle look at real-life events, and it's not always easy to watch. James is not only not presented positively, he's shown as a realistically diabolical criminal, not just some pretty boy with a lot of "cute" facial hair. Multilayered characterizations and sweeping, Oscar-nominated cinematography make this an effective Western.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443680/reviews-145

ur0543054

title: Gorgeous, rich true-life portrayals review: Although as long as its title is unwieldy, The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford is (apparently) true to life and is the beneficiary of a smart, uncharacteristically supporting performance by Brad Pitt as the folk-hero villain and a strong, if a bit mannered, performance by Casey Affleck as his eventual killer.It's the latter days of the James Gang, and weary older brother Frank (Sam Shepard) is calling it quits after one last train robbery. Jesse's not so inclined, though, so he assembles a new crew of cutthroats, including the Ford brothers, Charley (Sam Rockwell) and Bob (Affleck). But all the while, Jesse is always looking over his shoulder, sure that someone's about to cut him down, perhaps even someone from his own gang. It doesn't help that he's written terroristic telegrams to governors and presidents alike, either.The story's told through the eyes of Bob Ford, a stammering young man who strongly idolizes Jesse to the point of carrying around a shoebox of dime novels about the legendary outlaw and knowing all sorts of arcane facts about Jesse. Not surprisingly, to Jesse and the rest of the gang (including Bob's brother Charley), this seems childish and downright pathetic, and consequently they don't give the young Ford much respect.This attitude leads to a strange mixture of resentment and continued idolatry on the part of Robert Ford. Should he continue to try to ingratiate himself with Jesse, or should he turn him in to the authorities? Turning him in might make him a hero - the one man who could fell Jesse James - but then he'd really lose whatever remaining respect Jessie had for Bob. (To Bob's thinking, he's one of Jesse's pals.) Affleck's Oscar-nominated performance is wonderful, walking the fine line between hammy and nuanced. A less-capable actor (or, perhaps, an actor less on top of his game) might have taken Bob's idiosyncrasies and run with them, played them up rather than muting them somewhat, making them feel more natural. You get the sense that although Bob is not a good man by any means, he is human in his actions and reactions; he can be a cold-blooded murderer and thief, but how he deals with each minicrisis is neither insincere nor cartoonish. It might be a testament to Affleck that he's able to make something out of the relatively dull character of Robert Ford.Brad Pitt is simply Brad Pitt. He's come a long way since movies like Legends of the Fall and A River Runs through It; he's now a Good Actor, not just a beefcake model, and he's effectively menacing and confusing as James, who was (the movie says) going a bit off the deep end in his waning years even without having to deal with the specter of betrayal. James is sad, excitable, angry, dissonant, and Pitt is up to the task. Weirdly enough, though, although Jesse James is the nominal subject of the movie, Pitt takes a backseat to Affleck. This isn't about romanticizing the lawless West and the tough fiends who populated it; it's about dreams crushed and comeuppance delivered.At more than two and a half hours, this is not a broad, unsubtle look at real-life events, and it's not always easy to watch. James is not only not presented positively, he's shown as a realistically diabolical criminal, not just some pretty boy with a lot of "cute" facial hair. Multilayered characterizations and sweeping, Oscar-nominated cinematography make this an effective Western.

We may know how it ends, but perhaps the biggest achievement of the piece is the manner in which director Dominik makes us forget how it does with a stunning study.

tt0443680

There is an underlying and quite eerie sense of substance in Andrew Dominik's 2007 film The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford, the kind that is linked to the fact it is a study of an individual's obsession with a celebrity; a lust to be like a certain other, no matter how infamous or hated they may be. Here is a film with a central idea; a central study that is executed wonderfully well, with a slow burning and alluring approach which compliments the slow and steady delving into obsession. Simply put, it's great to look at; wonderful to watch and by the end, rather frightening.The film, whose central study is got across in one brilliant scene, looks at what is an unhealthy fondness of someone who has got to a relative pinnacle of a career by way of murder; robbery and bullying. In what might be the film's best scene, we encounter the outlaw Jesse James (Pitt) in a bath tub – at his most raw, at his most vulnerable and at his most revealing. At the entrance to the bathroom stands the proclaimed 'coward', Robert Ford (Affleck), and they exchange words before James poses him the question around which the study revolves: "Do you want to be like me, or actually BE me?" Here is an exchange in which James, in his rawest of forms, challenges Ford's ideologies to do with an unnatural fondness and makes us aware, that he himself is aware, that he might carry a certain aura about him.The film documents James from 1881 to 1882, while incorporating any feats, robberies and murders that unfolded at that time on a twin parallel with Ford's gradual coming to terms with the fact this idolisation exists within him. The entire piece is narrated by a certain Hugh Ross, adding an interesting ingredient on top of an already interesting study. The inclusion of a narrator initially felt, at least to me, unwarranted or perhaps un-needed. Whatever tale or recalling of events that needed to play out didn't necessarily strike me as the sort that required narration from an agent uninvolved. But I think the inclusion is merited when you link it to the overall picture; that fact the film might be seen as a lecture, or a warning of sorts, of this sort of intrigue and obsession with violence in the media and aspiration to become someone, or someone of similar ilk, whom isn't a particularly good role model.But that's not to say the film talks down to us. It very cleverly distances us from unfolding the film from either of one of the two lead's points of view. We see this from a third person perspective; someone not directly involved in the text which feeds off two people, one of which is a hardened and rather nasty outlaw while the other is a young man whom comes complete with stalker-like tendencies and an unnatural fondness for a national villain. During one scene set around a dinner table in Ford's home, James sits amidst the rest of the family as tensions flair. But the film additionally seems to like the notion that Jesse James might act as an alter-ego to the rest of Ford's family, as well as the American Dream in general. He sits there, almost as some sort of a visualisation of an amoral manner in which to garner attention, money, fame and, ultimately, admirers. This, twinned with whatever conflict going on between James and Ford, adds a certain extra layer of antagonism between James and the Fords.As the film nears its conclusion and the inevitable nears, certain flashbacks see Jesse refer to himself in the third person sense as some kind of overwhelming anxiety and an aspect of suicidal ideation begins to overcome him. We are given his point of view, a rarity up to this point as the film provides us with a blurred and wide angled lens as he stares out of a window giving off a very uncanny sense of dread and a delicate mindset coming close to crumbling down. The film finishes what it starts in a true and engaging manner. The epilogue and Ford's supposedly newfound celebrity status following the shooting of James brings him nothing but misery, and he never, ever – as the voice over states, comes anywhere near replicating the aura nor fame James had when he was at his peak of 'celebrity' status. What was an unhealthy obsession, quickly turned into a realisation and then into an unhealthy groove of trivialisation and guilt. Ford gave himself the big build up, latched onto the wrong beliefs and paid for it, and this film is an impressive documentation of that process.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443680/reviews-301

ur0855231

title: We may know how it ends, but perhaps the biggest achievement of the piece is the manner in which director Dominik makes us forget how it does with a stunning study. review: There is an underlying and quite eerie sense of substance in Andrew Dominik's 2007 film The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford, the kind that is linked to the fact it is a study of an individual's obsession with a celebrity; a lust to be like a certain other, no matter how infamous or hated they may be. Here is a film with a central idea; a central study that is executed wonderfully well, with a slow burning and alluring approach which compliments the slow and steady delving into obsession. Simply put, it's great to look at; wonderful to watch and by the end, rather frightening.The film, whose central study is got across in one brilliant scene, looks at what is an unhealthy fondness of someone who has got to a relative pinnacle of a career by way of murder; robbery and bullying. In what might be the film's best scene, we encounter the outlaw Jesse James (Pitt) in a bath tub – at his most raw, at his most vulnerable and at his most revealing. At the entrance to the bathroom stands the proclaimed 'coward', Robert Ford (Affleck), and they exchange words before James poses him the question around which the study revolves: "Do you want to be like me, or actually BE me?" Here is an exchange in which James, in his rawest of forms, challenges Ford's ideologies to do with an unnatural fondness and makes us aware, that he himself is aware, that he might carry a certain aura about him.The film documents James from 1881 to 1882, while incorporating any feats, robberies and murders that unfolded at that time on a twin parallel with Ford's gradual coming to terms with the fact this idolisation exists within him. The entire piece is narrated by a certain Hugh Ross, adding an interesting ingredient on top of an already interesting study. The inclusion of a narrator initially felt, at least to me, unwarranted or perhaps un-needed. Whatever tale or recalling of events that needed to play out didn't necessarily strike me as the sort that required narration from an agent uninvolved. But I think the inclusion is merited when you link it to the overall picture; that fact the film might be seen as a lecture, or a warning of sorts, of this sort of intrigue and obsession with violence in the media and aspiration to become someone, or someone of similar ilk, whom isn't a particularly good role model.But that's not to say the film talks down to us. It very cleverly distances us from unfolding the film from either of one of the two lead's points of view. We see this from a third person perspective; someone not directly involved in the text which feeds off two people, one of which is a hardened and rather nasty outlaw while the other is a young man whom comes complete with stalker-like tendencies and an unnatural fondness for a national villain. During one scene set around a dinner table in Ford's home, James sits amidst the rest of the family as tensions flair. But the film additionally seems to like the notion that Jesse James might act as an alter-ego to the rest of Ford's family, as well as the American Dream in general. He sits there, almost as some sort of a visualisation of an amoral manner in which to garner attention, money, fame and, ultimately, admirers. This, twinned with whatever conflict going on between James and Ford, adds a certain extra layer of antagonism between James and the Fords.As the film nears its conclusion and the inevitable nears, certain flashbacks see Jesse refer to himself in the third person sense as some kind of overwhelming anxiety and an aspect of suicidal ideation begins to overcome him. We are given his point of view, a rarity up to this point as the film provides us with a blurred and wide angled lens as he stares out of a window giving off a very uncanny sense of dread and a delicate mindset coming close to crumbling down. The film finishes what it starts in a true and engaging manner. The epilogue and Ford's supposedly newfound celebrity status following the shooting of James brings him nothing but misery, and he never, ever – as the voice over states, comes anywhere near replicating the aura nor fame James had when he was at his peak of 'celebrity' status. What was an unhealthy obsession, quickly turned into a realisation and then into an unhealthy groove of trivialisation and guilt. Ford gave himself the big build up, latched onto the wrong beliefs and paid for it, and this film is an impressive documentation of that process.

Jesse Was Actually Bored to Death

tt0443680

Even if one is not versed in history, the title gives away the ending so there's no suspense here. The point of the movie is the journey, but this one is so mind-numbingly boring that one has to repeatedly ask, "Are we there yet?" About 13 hours into the movie, Robert finally shoots Jesse (hurray!). However, the film goes on for another three hours after that! In fact, it may still be playing. There are too many talking heads blabbering on and on about uninteresting things and much of the dialog is either slurred or mumbled (especially Afleck). The pompous narration adds to the misery. And what's with the repeated usage of the lens with blurry edges? Epic failure.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443680/reviews-311

ur2590596

title: Jesse Was Actually Bored to Death review: Even if one is not versed in history, the title gives away the ending so there's no suspense here. The point of the movie is the journey, but this one is so mind-numbingly boring that one has to repeatedly ask, "Are we there yet?" About 13 hours into the movie, Robert finally shoots Jesse (hurray!). However, the film goes on for another three hours after that! In fact, it may still be playing. There are too many talking heads blabbering on and on about uninteresting things and much of the dialog is either slurred or mumbled (especially Afleck). The pompous narration adds to the misery. And what's with the repeated usage of the lens with blurry edges? Epic failure.

he Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford is epic film-making.

tt0443680

Robert Ford, who's idolized Jesse James since childhood, tries hard to join the reforming gang of the Missouri outlaw, but gradually becomes resentful of the bandit leader. The last months of Jesse James's life, from meeting Robert Ford, a 19-year-old who idolizes Jesse, to the day Ford shoots him. Jesse's a wanted man, living under a pseudonym, carrying out a train robbery, disappearing to Kentucky, and reappearing to plan a bank holdup with Robert and Robert's brother as his team. The rest of the gang is dead, arrested, or gone from Missouri. Whenever Jesse's around, there's tension: he's murderous, quixotic, depressed, and cautious. Ford wants to be somebody and wants the reward. On April 3, 1882, things come to a head: Jesse is 34, Robert 20. Ford becomes famous, reenacting the shooting on stage, facing down the label "coward," shot dead in 1892. Roger Ebert wrote: "Few things have earned me more grief from readers than my recent suggestion that in the sport of sex, Capt. Renault of "Casablanca" plays for both teams. I think I will get less disagreement when I focus on the homosexual undertones of "The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford." Jesse (Brad Pitt) is certainly not gay, but the Coward (Casey Affleck) is so powerfully mesmerized by him that hero worship shades into lust. Since sex between them is out of the question, their relationship turns into a curiously erotic dance of death; it is clear to both of them (and to anyone reading the title) what must happen at the end, and they move together toward that event with almost trancelike inevitability. Yes, it is long, at 160 minutes. There is a sense that an epic must have duration to have importance. The time reaching ahead of us must be as generous as the landscape unfolding before us. On this canvas Dominik portrays his hero at a time when most men were so powerless, they envied Jesse James even for imposing his will on such as they." The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford. Andrew Dominik's The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford, is a deliberately paced, stunningly visualized, and emotionally charged exploration of the early development of mass media celebrity in America.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443680/reviews-422

ur26897720

title: he Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford is epic film-making. review: Robert Ford, who's idolized Jesse James since childhood, tries hard to join the reforming gang of the Missouri outlaw, but gradually becomes resentful of the bandit leader. The last months of Jesse James's life, from meeting Robert Ford, a 19-year-old who idolizes Jesse, to the day Ford shoots him. Jesse's a wanted man, living under a pseudonym, carrying out a train robbery, disappearing to Kentucky, and reappearing to plan a bank holdup with Robert and Robert's brother as his team. The rest of the gang is dead, arrested, or gone from Missouri. Whenever Jesse's around, there's tension: he's murderous, quixotic, depressed, and cautious. Ford wants to be somebody and wants the reward. On April 3, 1882, things come to a head: Jesse is 34, Robert 20. Ford becomes famous, reenacting the shooting on stage, facing down the label "coward," shot dead in 1892. Roger Ebert wrote: "Few things have earned me more grief from readers than my recent suggestion that in the sport of sex, Capt. Renault of "Casablanca" plays for both teams. I think I will get less disagreement when I focus on the homosexual undertones of "The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford." Jesse (Brad Pitt) is certainly not gay, but the Coward (Casey Affleck) is so powerfully mesmerized by him that hero worship shades into lust. Since sex between them is out of the question, their relationship turns into a curiously erotic dance of death; it is clear to both of them (and to anyone reading the title) what must happen at the end, and they move together toward that event with almost trancelike inevitability. Yes, it is long, at 160 minutes. There is a sense that an epic must have duration to have importance. The time reaching ahead of us must be as generous as the landscape unfolding before us. On this canvas Dominik portrays his hero at a time when most men were so powerless, they envied Jesse James even for imposing his will on such as they." The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford. Andrew Dominik's The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford, is a deliberately paced, stunningly visualized, and emotionally charged exploration of the early development of mass media celebrity in America.

Beautiful, tedious and self-regarding

tt0443680

All right, all right, enough of the glowing reviews! three pages in, and almost every single review I've read is burning with praise for what many seem to consider a 'perfect' film. So of course I'm going to come off like a total philistine, but I don't care. I sat down to seriously absorb this film. After a very short while I was staring at the ceiling with my mouth open to catch flies, making tea, making more tea, fidgeting, picking my nails clean - anything was more tempting than sitting still and watching as the decade's most overlong and tedious 'art' film unfolded itself on the screen.I love the American Story - particularly westerns, of most types, and of which I think this film is one: something of Budd Boetticher's with a barrel-chested Randolph Scott; black and white shoot-em-ups on high speed film accompanied by stirring strings or some warbling tenor; Joan Crawford glorious in Nicholas Ray's "Johnny Guitar"; revisionist life-with-the-Indians westerns; westerns made by Europeans (such as the VERY interesting "Eagle's Wing"); "Brokeback Mountain"; soul-searching 70s offerings such as "McCabe & Mrs Miller", "Jeremiah Johnson" and "The Outlaw Josey Wales"; and, the crowning glory, Sergio Leone's "Once Upon a Time in the West". So I have, I think, an open mind, happy to give an unusual film a go. But so little happens in this film! - not just the lack of physical action - there's no inner life in these characters! They just look out of windows a lot! That's not an inner life! I couldn't wait for the end, and was relieved, and entirely unmoved, when it finally came. Despite being self-important and sententious, I didn't read into the film some crucial message about America's present sense of self. I think these kinds of films, taken from books (see also "There Will be Blood"), are the triumph of a director's hubris over experience. The magic of a book may be said to lie in being able to explore the psychological drama in the minds of the protagonists over hundreds of pages. In the immediacy of visual media, cenic shots and men looking thoughtful/vain/foolish just isn't a good enough transcription. I don't doubt that Casey Affleck, and perhaps even Brad Pitt, are doing a very good job; but I would never recommend this film, as art, history, psychodrama, western or entertainment. Does that make me shamefully lowbrow? Oh well. For the ultimate slow-burner art film I'd watch Tartovsky's extraordinary "Nostalgia" or "Andrei Rublov", either of which knock the socks off this. Right now I'm off to watch some terrible TV movie or maybe scoff at some art.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443680/reviews-286

ur11719161

title: Beautiful, tedious and self-regarding review: All right, all right, enough of the glowing reviews! three pages in, and almost every single review I've read is burning with praise for what many seem to consider a 'perfect' film. So of course I'm going to come off like a total philistine, but I don't care. I sat down to seriously absorb this film. After a very short while I was staring at the ceiling with my mouth open to catch flies, making tea, making more tea, fidgeting, picking my nails clean - anything was more tempting than sitting still and watching as the decade's most overlong and tedious 'art' film unfolded itself on the screen.I love the American Story - particularly westerns, of most types, and of which I think this film is one: something of Budd Boetticher's with a barrel-chested Randolph Scott; black and white shoot-em-ups on high speed film accompanied by stirring strings or some warbling tenor; Joan Crawford glorious in Nicholas Ray's "Johnny Guitar"; revisionist life-with-the-Indians westerns; westerns made by Europeans (such as the VERY interesting "Eagle's Wing"); "Brokeback Mountain"; soul-searching 70s offerings such as "McCabe & Mrs Miller", "Jeremiah Johnson" and "The Outlaw Josey Wales"; and, the crowning glory, Sergio Leone's "Once Upon a Time in the West". So I have, I think, an open mind, happy to give an unusual film a go. But so little happens in this film! - not just the lack of physical action - there's no inner life in these characters! They just look out of windows a lot! That's not an inner life! I couldn't wait for the end, and was relieved, and entirely unmoved, when it finally came. Despite being self-important and sententious, I didn't read into the film some crucial message about America's present sense of self. I think these kinds of films, taken from books (see also "There Will be Blood"), are the triumph of a director's hubris over experience. The magic of a book may be said to lie in being able to explore the psychological drama in the minds of the protagonists over hundreds of pages. In the immediacy of visual media, cenic shots and men looking thoughtful/vain/foolish just isn't a good enough transcription. I don't doubt that Casey Affleck, and perhaps even Brad Pitt, are doing a very good job; but I would never recommend this film, as art, history, psychodrama, western or entertainment. Does that make me shamefully lowbrow? Oh well. For the ultimate slow-burner art film I'd watch Tartovsky's extraordinary "Nostalgia" or "Andrei Rublov", either of which knock the socks off this. Right now I'm off to watch some terrible TV movie or maybe scoff at some art.

Poignant & Powerful.

tt0443680

Although the film title gives away the plot do not be dissuaded from watching this wonderfully rich production.Everything about this film has been created with real sheen from the cinematography to the screenplay. Casey Affleck is outstanding as Robert Ford while Brad Pitt is staggeringly engaging as notorious Jesse James. I was mesmerized by the film and rather perplexed at it lack of Oscar nominations. This is the first film that I have seen in a while that I would place near the heights of greatness!Go watch it and enjoy!

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443680/reviews-201

ur1545857

title: Poignant & Powerful. review: Although the film title gives away the plot do not be dissuaded from watching this wonderfully rich production.Everything about this film has been created with real sheen from the cinematography to the screenplay. Casey Affleck is outstanding as Robert Ford while Brad Pitt is staggeringly engaging as notorious Jesse James. I was mesmerized by the film and rather perplexed at it lack of Oscar nominations. This is the first film that I have seen in a while that I would place near the heights of greatness!Go watch it and enjoy!

The Assassination of Cinema in the Name of Jesse James

tt0443680

It is truly amazing how a first rate cast and wonderful cinematography can combine to provide two and a half hours of absolute boredom, and contribute nothing to one's knowledge of the story which it is purportedly about. Not a moment of enjoyment exists in this film! First, none of the characters are discernible from each other, except for Jesse and Bob. This includes the women, who are easily confused with each other. Casey Affleck's Bob Ford is a sniveling dolt, with no redeeming qualities. Perhaps that is how it should be, but it makes for dull cinema. Affleck's annoying voice and lack of acting ability make it painful whenever he is on screen.We are never informed why anyone is doing anything or what that anything might be. We don't know why they are shooting each other, or why they are not shooting each other. It is the director who should be shot.Brad Pitt turns in the only performance of note, with Sam Shepard also making a brief attempt to help the movie with his taciturn presence. Neither Brad or Sam can save this moldering turkey. The movie is at least a half hour too long, maybe an hour (or maybe two and a half hours!).All I was thinking for the whole time I watched it was, Gee, I'm glad I didn't pay $10 to see this crap.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443680/reviews-271

ur4205035

title: The Assassination of Cinema in the Name of Jesse James review: It is truly amazing how a first rate cast and wonderful cinematography can combine to provide two and a half hours of absolute boredom, and contribute nothing to one's knowledge of the story which it is purportedly about. Not a moment of enjoyment exists in this film! First, none of the characters are discernible from each other, except for Jesse and Bob. This includes the women, who are easily confused with each other. Casey Affleck's Bob Ford is a sniveling dolt, with no redeeming qualities. Perhaps that is how it should be, but it makes for dull cinema. Affleck's annoying voice and lack of acting ability make it painful whenever he is on screen.We are never informed why anyone is doing anything or what that anything might be. We don't know why they are shooting each other, or why they are not shooting each other. It is the director who should be shot.Brad Pitt turns in the only performance of note, with Sam Shepard also making a brief attempt to help the movie with his taciturn presence. Neither Brad or Sam can save this moldering turkey. The movie is at least a half hour too long, maybe an hour (or maybe two and a half hours!).All I was thinking for the whole time I watched it was, Gee, I'm glad I didn't pay $10 to see this crap.

Wonderful Cinematic Experience

tt0443680

Jesse James is the mot well known outlaw in America. He's a wanted man who lives under a pseudonym and never stays for too long in one place. There's not a single soul that hasn't heard about his courage and bravery or the stories of his robberies.Robert Ford idolizes Jesse James since his childhood collecting everything related to Jesse and dreaming about being more like him or even being him someday.Robert finally meets Jesse but keeps getting teased and even tough he wants to join Jesse's gang he's never taken seriously.Robert gradually becomes resentful of Jesse and when he finally joins the gang he ends up killing Jesse(with Jesse's consent as I see it)... The Assassination Of Jesse James By The Coward Robert Ford tries to humanize and de-mythologize Jesse James and at the same time show who Robert Ford truly was. Jesse was not really a hero and Ford was not an evil person.Both are often perceived as something they were not. This is a beautiful movie. The musical score was perfect and matched the overall atmosphere of the film.Both Oscar nominations were well deserved, the film is hauntingly beautiful and Casey Affleck performance was truly fantastic.Obviously Brad Pitt was amazing as well and you should know he co-produced the film.A great film. 8/10

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443680/reviews-279

ur14321363

title: Wonderful Cinematic Experience review: Jesse James is the mot well known outlaw in America. He's a wanted man who lives under a pseudonym and never stays for too long in one place. There's not a single soul that hasn't heard about his courage and bravery or the stories of his robberies.Robert Ford idolizes Jesse James since his childhood collecting everything related to Jesse and dreaming about being more like him or even being him someday.Robert finally meets Jesse but keeps getting teased and even tough he wants to join Jesse's gang he's never taken seriously.Robert gradually becomes resentful of Jesse and when he finally joins the gang he ends up killing Jesse(with Jesse's consent as I see it)... The Assassination Of Jesse James By The Coward Robert Ford tries to humanize and de-mythologize Jesse James and at the same time show who Robert Ford truly was. Jesse was not really a hero and Ford was not an evil person.Both are often perceived as something they were not. This is a beautiful movie. The musical score was perfect and matched the overall atmosphere of the film.Both Oscar nominations were well deserved, the film is hauntingly beautiful and Casey Affleck performance was truly fantastic.Obviously Brad Pitt was amazing as well and you should know he co-produced the film.A great film. 8/10

An intriguing Western character study

tt0443680

This film follows Jesse James (Brad Pitt) in the final days of the the James Gang as he becomes increasingly paranoid that the gang's members are out to betray him. If that wasn't already true, James's tactics only hasten the end that will come to him by way of Robert Ford (Casey Affleck).The performances are good for the most part but I didn't think much of Brad Pitt as Jesse James. He didn't convince me that James was a character whose fate I should care about in the least. Casey Affleck's Robert Ford, on the other hand, showed an interesting blend of hero worship and spite and was certainly worthy of the Oscar nomination that resulted. Also, the underrated Sam Rockwell gave a noteworthy performance as Charley Ford.The film looks attractive, although some of that imagery is snatched practically verbatim from other films like "The Searchers". I feel that the main detraction from the film's overall appeal is in the storyline. The film performs well as a character study but the plot falls flat until the late stages when some life is finally injected into the proceedings. Nevertheless, the film is undeniably interesting when, at the end, you step back to take a look at the big picture.I recommend this film to fans of the Western genre but those more interested in straight drama will likely get the most out of it.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443680/reviews-255

ur17822437

title: An intriguing Western character study review: This film follows Jesse James (Brad Pitt) in the final days of the the James Gang as he becomes increasingly paranoid that the gang's members are out to betray him. If that wasn't already true, James's tactics only hasten the end that will come to him by way of Robert Ford (Casey Affleck).The performances are good for the most part but I didn't think much of Brad Pitt as Jesse James. He didn't convince me that James was a character whose fate I should care about in the least. Casey Affleck's Robert Ford, on the other hand, showed an interesting blend of hero worship and spite and was certainly worthy of the Oscar nomination that resulted. Also, the underrated Sam Rockwell gave a noteworthy performance as Charley Ford.The film looks attractive, although some of that imagery is snatched practically verbatim from other films like "The Searchers". I feel that the main detraction from the film's overall appeal is in the storyline. The film performs well as a character study but the plot falls flat until the late stages when some life is finally injected into the proceedings. Nevertheless, the film is undeniably interesting when, at the end, you step back to take a look at the big picture.I recommend this film to fans of the Western genre but those more interested in straight drama will likely get the most out of it.

Modern fandom complexities & character studies, set in the Old West... have seldom looked so poetic!

tt0443680

The title says it all. This is the more unheard of "legends" of the man who both idolized and shot the infamous outlaw Jesse James. I'd be reluctant to call it a Western, because foremost, we get a male character study flexing many muscles and nuances, that seems to just happen to be set in the old west. Yes, there is gun-play but that's not what made the filmmakers get this ambitious drama off the ground, for sure. The modern complexity of idol fandom and fame coveting, (which is unnervingly reminiscent of such famous cases as the John Lennon & Ronald Reagan shootings) plus the film's psychological character interplay very much discloses this fact.Told most elaborately and poetically, writer/director Australian Dominik has made sure it almost never gets too boring, though, as every scene is as artistically shot as a wall painting. The West has seldom looked both so rugged, flamboyant and beautiful as here, as those snow scenes will stay long on my retina! And if that doesn't do the trick, pitch-perfect performances are plenty to enjoy, with Affleck delivering a haunting and unforgettable portrait of Ford.A note to the ones watching this who are having trouble with languid pace and atmosphere: stick with it, because those final 20 minutes is a masterful showcase of more trimmed, riveting storytelling underlining the story's double tragedy. Biggest flaw which holds back my higher rating: It IS overlong by at least half an hour and an already fine movie would have been great, if cut down.7 out of 10 from Ozjeppe

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443680/reviews-346

ur1168730

title: Modern fandom complexities & character studies, set in the Old West... have seldom looked so poetic! review: The title says it all. This is the more unheard of "legends" of the man who both idolized and shot the infamous outlaw Jesse James. I'd be reluctant to call it a Western, because foremost, we get a male character study flexing many muscles and nuances, that seems to just happen to be set in the old west. Yes, there is gun-play but that's not what made the filmmakers get this ambitious drama off the ground, for sure. The modern complexity of idol fandom and fame coveting, (which is unnervingly reminiscent of such famous cases as the John Lennon & Ronald Reagan shootings) plus the film's psychological character interplay very much discloses this fact.Told most elaborately and poetically, writer/director Australian Dominik has made sure it almost never gets too boring, though, as every scene is as artistically shot as a wall painting. The West has seldom looked both so rugged, flamboyant and beautiful as here, as those snow scenes will stay long on my retina! And if that doesn't do the trick, pitch-perfect performances are plenty to enjoy, with Affleck delivering a haunting and unforgettable portrait of Ford.A note to the ones watching this who are having trouble with languid pace and atmosphere: stick with it, because those final 20 minutes is a masterful showcase of more trimmed, riveting storytelling underlining the story's double tragedy. Biggest flaw which holds back my higher rating: It IS overlong by at least half an hour and an already fine movie would have been great, if cut down.7 out of 10 from Ozjeppe

Character assassination

tt0443680

New Zealand director Andrew Dominik breaks many genre rules with this unconventional western about the illustrious outlaw Jesse James and his assassin Bob Ford. Better he should have broken something else (let's start with his type-writer) in this turgid, sluggish western that moves slower than a Conestoga wagon through the Badlands in the 19th century.The first rule he forgoes is in ignoring the axiom that Western characters are men of few words. The James brothers are in the twilight of their careers and this last gang they have assembled is a band of dullards and morons that have trouble putting a sentence together in between long vacant stares. The film opens promisingly enough as the brothers plan a train robbery in a stark wilderness setting. Here Bob Ford, the delusional, James worshiping sidekick attempts to inveigle his way into the good graces of Frank (played with a fine stoic, resignation by Sam Shepard) who will have none of it.Casey Affleck's speech and tick affected Ford is interesting for the first half hour of the film before he becomes downright annoying for the rest of it. Nevertheless, brother Jesse takes him under his wing and for over two hours we are given obvious hints from the pursuit of fame to latent homosexuality as reasons for Ford's ultimate act of treachery. Director Dominik clearly loves cowboy movies. He manages to plagiarize (in a decent film this would be called homage) from westerns good and bad. The Searchers, McCabe and Mrs. Miller, The Left handed Gun, The Great Train Robbery and Dead Man are among others all hinted at. Visually it has some striking moments but overall the cinematography is uneven. At ninety minutes this would have been a bad film. At two and one half hours it becomes a tortuous one. While the heavy handed Dominick deserves most of the blame, producer and actor Brad Pitt should have strangled this project at birth. His comatose performance of Jesse is all pose and little substance and as producer he green lighted this soporific monstrosities running time. For more engrossing, entertaining, better acted and filmed evocations of the James legend I strongly suggest you see The 1939 Henry King Jesse James with Tyrone Power and Henry Fonda and the 1973 Philip Kauffman film The Great Northfield Minnesota Raid.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443680/reviews-42

ur13178622

title: Character assassination review: New Zealand director Andrew Dominik breaks many genre rules with this unconventional western about the illustrious outlaw Jesse James and his assassin Bob Ford. Better he should have broken something else (let's start with his type-writer) in this turgid, sluggish western that moves slower than a Conestoga wagon through the Badlands in the 19th century.The first rule he forgoes is in ignoring the axiom that Western characters are men of few words. The James brothers are in the twilight of their careers and this last gang they have assembled is a band of dullards and morons that have trouble putting a sentence together in between long vacant stares. The film opens promisingly enough as the brothers plan a train robbery in a stark wilderness setting. Here Bob Ford, the delusional, James worshiping sidekick attempts to inveigle his way into the good graces of Frank (played with a fine stoic, resignation by Sam Shepard) who will have none of it.Casey Affleck's speech and tick affected Ford is interesting for the first half hour of the film before he becomes downright annoying for the rest of it. Nevertheless, brother Jesse takes him under his wing and for over two hours we are given obvious hints from the pursuit of fame to latent homosexuality as reasons for Ford's ultimate act of treachery. Director Dominik clearly loves cowboy movies. He manages to plagiarize (in a decent film this would be called homage) from westerns good and bad. The Searchers, McCabe and Mrs. Miller, The Left handed Gun, The Great Train Robbery and Dead Man are among others all hinted at. Visually it has some striking moments but overall the cinematography is uneven. At ninety minutes this would have been a bad film. At two and one half hours it becomes a tortuous one. While the heavy handed Dominick deserves most of the blame, producer and actor Brad Pitt should have strangled this project at birth. His comatose performance of Jesse is all pose and little substance and as producer he green lighted this soporific monstrosities running time. For more engrossing, entertaining, better acted and filmed evocations of the James legend I strongly suggest you see The 1939 Henry King Jesse James with Tyrone Power and Henry Fonda and the 1973 Philip Kauffman film The Great Northfield Minnesota Raid.

well written and well acted

tt0443680

this is more than just a movie about the killing of Jesse James.the story is about the event leading up to the title and the aftermath.it's a well done movie with great performances from Brad Pitt as James,Sam Rockwell as Charlie Ford,and Casey Affleck as Robert Ford.the supporting performances are also very good.this is not an action film,but a deliberately paced character study.the film is well written and has some very good dialogue.it also has a voice over narration,which i thought worked well with this movie.it does tend a bit toward slowness,but only for brief moments and only occasionally,and is never boring.the story and characters are quite compelling.i found myself quite engrossed in the story and the characters.for me,The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford is a 9/10

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443680/reviews-180

ur11423174

title: well written and well acted review: this is more than just a movie about the killing of Jesse James.the story is about the event leading up to the title and the aftermath.it's a well done movie with great performances from Brad Pitt as James,Sam Rockwell as Charlie Ford,and Casey Affleck as Robert Ford.the supporting performances are also very good.this is not an action film,but a deliberately paced character study.the film is well written and has some very good dialogue.it also has a voice over narration,which i thought worked well with this movie.it does tend a bit toward slowness,but only for brief moments and only occasionally,and is never boring.the story and characters are quite compelling.i found myself quite engrossed in the story and the characters.for me,The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford is a 9/10

Stunning all round.

tt0443680

You can tell from the opening shots and voice-over that 'Assassination' is going to be a good film. There are no credits and very little to introduce anyone before the James gang embark on their spectacularly shot last train robbery. From the outset the cinematography is breathtaking and as they block the track and get masked up the mist rolls and the music, second outing for Nick Cave and Warren Ellis after last years 'The Proposition', swirls in grand crescendos and fits the haunting night time scene. Brad Pitt is quite the Jesse James flitting from brooding intelligence to moody madness and Casey Affleck's portrayal of Robert Ford from bumbling simpleton to calculated killer and back again is almost as good. The story of Roberts obsession with James is akin to a modern day stalker and had the internet been invented then I'm sure Robert would have started many facebook groups dedicated to his childhood hero, it veers from sinister to just plain creepy. This then brings out the whys, why did James let the obviously obsessed Ford into his gang and inner circle? Was it a case of keep your enemies close or did he in fact love the adoration that ultimately would be his downfall? It posses more questions than it answers and in this respect gives the viewer plenty to think about during and after the film. My only criticism of the movie would have to be the length at two hours and thirty nine minutes it's quite the stamina test and I don't see why this couldn't be trimmed a little and still be as good. But that said strong performances all round, amazing scenery; a twisted tale rooted in truth and a great script makes 'Assassination' one of the best films of the year. A must see.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443680/reviews-84

ur4995240

title: Stunning all round. review: You can tell from the opening shots and voice-over that 'Assassination' is going to be a good film. There are no credits and very little to introduce anyone before the James gang embark on their spectacularly shot last train robbery. From the outset the cinematography is breathtaking and as they block the track and get masked up the mist rolls and the music, second outing for Nick Cave and Warren Ellis after last years 'The Proposition', swirls in grand crescendos and fits the haunting night time scene. Brad Pitt is quite the Jesse James flitting from brooding intelligence to moody madness and Casey Affleck's portrayal of Robert Ford from bumbling simpleton to calculated killer and back again is almost as good. The story of Roberts obsession with James is akin to a modern day stalker and had the internet been invented then I'm sure Robert would have started many facebook groups dedicated to his childhood hero, it veers from sinister to just plain creepy. This then brings out the whys, why did James let the obviously obsessed Ford into his gang and inner circle? Was it a case of keep your enemies close or did he in fact love the adoration that ultimately would be his downfall? It posses more questions than it answers and in this respect gives the viewer plenty to think about during and after the film. My only criticism of the movie would have to be the length at two hours and thirty nine minutes it's quite the stamina test and I don't see why this couldn't be trimmed a little and still be as good. But that said strong performances all round, amazing scenery; a twisted tale rooted in truth and a great script makes 'Assassination' one of the best films of the year. A must see.

Test of Patience Pays Off

tt0443680

Yes this movie is overlong and ponderous. I am not unsympathetic to the commenter's herein that the movie bored them. But the finer points of Assn. of Jesse James ultimately overcome such. While I can appreciate the observations that this movie intended to show the beginnings of American hero worship, I think this was merely a beneficial side effect. The Oedipal, homo-erotic undertones of the film were so palpable you could almost see them floating on the screen. I didn't read the book and don't know if such was fiction or nonfiction. Accordingly I don't know who to thank but the director and choreographer deserve considerable praise, as do Affleck and Pitt. Not a single actor overdid his/her role. In effect the tone of the movie was perfect. A good example is the various characters' reaction to the shooting death of Jesse's cousin, which was maybe unlike any movie death scene you have ever witnessed. Rather than callous indifference or emotional venting, the survivors remain poised and dignified and behave like people who recognize death as an ordinary aspect of life. As Robert Ford therein remarks, "Lets wish him well on his journey". Personally, I enjoyed the use of the English language, which appeared very carefully crafted to reflect the words, patterns and content circa 1880; e.g., delivered best by Afflect and Sheppard by the railroad at the beginning of the movie. Given the limited commercial viability of Assn. of Jesse James..., we should be grateful the film got made.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443680/reviews-193

ur0697468

title: Test of Patience Pays Off review: Yes this movie is overlong and ponderous. I am not unsympathetic to the commenter's herein that the movie bored them. But the finer points of Assn. of Jesse James ultimately overcome such. While I can appreciate the observations that this movie intended to show the beginnings of American hero worship, I think this was merely a beneficial side effect. The Oedipal, homo-erotic undertones of the film were so palpable you could almost see them floating on the screen. I didn't read the book and don't know if such was fiction or nonfiction. Accordingly I don't know who to thank but the director and choreographer deserve considerable praise, as do Affleck and Pitt. Not a single actor overdid his/her role. In effect the tone of the movie was perfect. A good example is the various characters' reaction to the shooting death of Jesse's cousin, which was maybe unlike any movie death scene you have ever witnessed. Rather than callous indifference or emotional venting, the survivors remain poised and dignified and behave like people who recognize death as an ordinary aspect of life. As Robert Ford therein remarks, "Lets wish him well on his journey". Personally, I enjoyed the use of the English language, which appeared very carefully crafted to reflect the words, patterns and content circa 1880; e.g., delivered best by Afflect and Sheppard by the railroad at the beginning of the movie. Given the limited commercial viability of Assn. of Jesse James..., we should be grateful the film got made.

"Don't that picture look dusty?"

tt0443680

There is beauty to be found everywhere in this world – in the haunting loneliness of the deep American wilderness; in the glowing, brooding eyes of a man before a fireplace; in the subtle, nervous flicker of the eyelids, a barely discernible inflection of human interaction; even in the murder of a man, the bullet thumping shockingly through the back of the head, his neck slumping forwards into the frame of a polished canvas depicting a nautical vessel. The beauty is to be found in the details, in the magnificent unknown elements that fall between the lines of historical records and glorified parables. 'The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford (2007)' is only the second film from Australian director Andrew Dominik, who spent five years crafting his intricate follow-up to the impressive local production, 'Chopper (2000).' Though originally intended for a 2006 release, the film arrived just in time for the Western genre "revival" that took place in 2007, the finest example from a group that included James Mangold's '3:10 to Yuma (2007)' and the Coen brothers' 'No Country For Old Men (2007)' {which some critics have described as a "modern Western"}.Even if you were to find little else worth mentioning in 'The Assassination of Jesse James…,' most will agree that it is among the most visually-stunning films you'll ever see, with Roger Deakins' sumptuous cinematography capturing the landscapes and moods of Jesse James' tale with breathtaking majesty. Every shot is elegantly and faultlessly composed and executed, offering a visual depth to the film that certainly complements the narrative {unlike Seamus McGarvey's work for 'Atonement (2007),' which was gorgeous but occasionally struck me as superficial}. The slow-burning plot is guided by the brilliance of the photography, but, rather than being overshadowed by the visuals, merges into a single entity that envelopes the viewer, absorbing them into the brooding world of both Jesse James and Robert Ford, the man who would put a bullet into his head. Though, on several occasions, I felt that the plot was deviating slightly from the vital interactions between James and Ford, a little patience convinced me that these elements of the story were nevertheless vital to the plot. The pacing of the 160-minute picture is deliberate, lyrical and contemplative, but never slow – anybody who suggests otherwise was obviously viewing the film in the wrong mindset.The two characters highlighted in the film's lengthy title are portrayed with impeccable precision by Brad Pitt and Casey Affleck, respectively, who deliver performances equal to anything else they've ever done. In today's Hollywood, Pitt is an under-appreciated talent, too often berated for his "pretty boy" persona and often criticised for playing a version of himself. The latter is an easy mistake to make, however, a closer inspection reveals that Jesse James is like nobody that the star has played before. Though his performance doesn't initially stand out as being particularly notable, Pitt inhabits the infamous outlaw so convincingly that you hardly give him a second thought. Every gesture and movement – his granulated blue eyes burning with fire and suspicion, his cautious and knowing tone of voice, his confident yet understated stride – is perfect to the letter. Affleck, who is hopefully steering towards a Best Supporting Actor Oscar at present, portrays a lonely, pathetic sycophant, a seamless performance that is exemplified by the subtle nuances of his character, from the tentative Southern drawl to the frequent downward flicker of his eyes. Also worth mentioning is Sam Rockwell, who has a prominent role as Robert's brother, Charley.In criticising 'The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford,' some have cited the segments of Hugh Ross' narration for distracting from the plot. However, I thought it was very well suited to the tone of the film, highlighting one major theme of the story – that history, as it is written, fails absolutely in reconstructing the events of April 3, 1882. Ross' narration is dry and professional, which, along with the occasionally cloudy cinematography, seems to be Dominik's way of stressing that the film's events are merely an assumed fictionalisation of real, ultimately unknowable events. The intentional encyclopedia-like tone of the voice-over could perhaps also operate as a critique of itself, a subtle satire that scorns the notion that any historical record could possibly communicate the mood and emotions of Robert Ford's relationship with Jesse James. Both mesmerising and entertaining, Andrew Dominik's memorable motion picture is one of the year's finest offerings, and possibly among the top ten to have been released this decade.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443680/reviews-136

ur10334028

title: "Don't that picture look dusty?" review: There is beauty to be found everywhere in this world – in the haunting loneliness of the deep American wilderness; in the glowing, brooding eyes of a man before a fireplace; in the subtle, nervous flicker of the eyelids, a barely discernible inflection of human interaction; even in the murder of a man, the bullet thumping shockingly through the back of the head, his neck slumping forwards into the frame of a polished canvas depicting a nautical vessel. The beauty is to be found in the details, in the magnificent unknown elements that fall between the lines of historical records and glorified parables. 'The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford (2007)' is only the second film from Australian director Andrew Dominik, who spent five years crafting his intricate follow-up to the impressive local production, 'Chopper (2000).' Though originally intended for a 2006 release, the film arrived just in time for the Western genre "revival" that took place in 2007, the finest example from a group that included James Mangold's '3:10 to Yuma (2007)' and the Coen brothers' 'No Country For Old Men (2007)' {which some critics have described as a "modern Western"}.Even if you were to find little else worth mentioning in 'The Assassination of Jesse James…,' most will agree that it is among the most visually-stunning films you'll ever see, with Roger Deakins' sumptuous cinematography capturing the landscapes and moods of Jesse James' tale with breathtaking majesty. Every shot is elegantly and faultlessly composed and executed, offering a visual depth to the film that certainly complements the narrative {unlike Seamus McGarvey's work for 'Atonement (2007),' which was gorgeous but occasionally struck me as superficial}. The slow-burning plot is guided by the brilliance of the photography, but, rather than being overshadowed by the visuals, merges into a single entity that envelopes the viewer, absorbing them into the brooding world of both Jesse James and Robert Ford, the man who would put a bullet into his head. Though, on several occasions, I felt that the plot was deviating slightly from the vital interactions between James and Ford, a little patience convinced me that these elements of the story were nevertheless vital to the plot. The pacing of the 160-minute picture is deliberate, lyrical and contemplative, but never slow – anybody who suggests otherwise was obviously viewing the film in the wrong mindset.The two characters highlighted in the film's lengthy title are portrayed with impeccable precision by Brad Pitt and Casey Affleck, respectively, who deliver performances equal to anything else they've ever done. In today's Hollywood, Pitt is an under-appreciated talent, too often berated for his "pretty boy" persona and often criticised for playing a version of himself. The latter is an easy mistake to make, however, a closer inspection reveals that Jesse James is like nobody that the star has played before. Though his performance doesn't initially stand out as being particularly notable, Pitt inhabits the infamous outlaw so convincingly that you hardly give him a second thought. Every gesture and movement – his granulated blue eyes burning with fire and suspicion, his cautious and knowing tone of voice, his confident yet understated stride – is perfect to the letter. Affleck, who is hopefully steering towards a Best Supporting Actor Oscar at present, portrays a lonely, pathetic sycophant, a seamless performance that is exemplified by the subtle nuances of his character, from the tentative Southern drawl to the frequent downward flicker of his eyes. Also worth mentioning is Sam Rockwell, who has a prominent role as Robert's brother, Charley.In criticising 'The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford,' some have cited the segments of Hugh Ross' narration for distracting from the plot. However, I thought it was very well suited to the tone of the film, highlighting one major theme of the story – that history, as it is written, fails absolutely in reconstructing the events of April 3, 1882. Ross' narration is dry and professional, which, along with the occasionally cloudy cinematography, seems to be Dominik's way of stressing that the film's events are merely an assumed fictionalisation of real, ultimately unknowable events. The intentional encyclopedia-like tone of the voice-over could perhaps also operate as a critique of itself, a subtle satire that scorns the notion that any historical record could possibly communicate the mood and emotions of Robert Ford's relationship with Jesse James. Both mesmerising and entertaining, Andrew Dominik's memorable motion picture is one of the year's finest offerings, and possibly among the top ten to have been released this decade.

Bang Bang

tt0443680

Very cool, very stylish, a new approach towards the western cowboy movie welcomed back. Those slow train coming scenes just before the symbolically ghostlike gang hop on to what is going to be their last train robbery together by night, those scenes are so marvelously shot and definitely going to remain engrained in my mind as top classic in cinema. Brad Pitt pulls off the role of Jesse James very convincingly predictably and so does the rest of the cast do a great job to give this film an all round quality. I love the color and I love how all throughout the film there is this echoing poetry. The story itself, a sad one, at least here were we seem to be witnessing what appears to be the end of a long Saga between the members of the Jesse James gang. Everybody seems to be splitting. I think Jesse James actually lets Robert Ford hand on out of a sense of nostalgia, due to Ford's youthful thirst for adventure, excitement, all things expiring in Jesse himself. The times they are changing. The Assassination itself does indeed recall those last scenes in the movie "Road to Perdition", the likes of which I think are brilliant to say the least, they are sublime. Then Nick Cave just had to butt in there with the famous song, did he not? This is a great movie, I definitely recommend.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443680/reviews-151

ur9619380

title: Bang Bang review: Very cool, very stylish, a new approach towards the western cowboy movie welcomed back. Those slow train coming scenes just before the symbolically ghostlike gang hop on to what is going to be their last train robbery together by night, those scenes are so marvelously shot and definitely going to remain engrained in my mind as top classic in cinema. Brad Pitt pulls off the role of Jesse James very convincingly predictably and so does the rest of the cast do a great job to give this film an all round quality. I love the color and I love how all throughout the film there is this echoing poetry. The story itself, a sad one, at least here were we seem to be witnessing what appears to be the end of a long Saga between the members of the Jesse James gang. Everybody seems to be splitting. I think Jesse James actually lets Robert Ford hand on out of a sense of nostalgia, due to Ford's youthful thirst for adventure, excitement, all things expiring in Jesse himself. The times they are changing. The Assassination itself does indeed recall those last scenes in the movie "Road to Perdition", the likes of which I think are brilliant to say the least, they are sublime. Then Nick Cave just had to butt in there with the famous song, did he not? This is a great movie, I definitely recommend.

A long and detailed look at the supposed assassin of the famous outlaw Jesse James

tt0443680

With a long title, this long and serious film takes a hard and detailed look at the self claimed assassin of Jesse James through a soft, romantic and warm lens. I'm not familiar with the details of this famous 19th century American outlaw and the circumstances surrounding his untimely death. So, I cannot attest to it's historical accuracy. In this film, the focus is more on the motives of his would be assassin. For those not familiar with the circumstances after the death of Jesse James, there is a surprise in store near the end of the film. From beginning to end, there's plenty of biographical information, narrated, to inform those not familiar with the details of Jesse James and the story of his supposed assassin.Acclaimed cinematographer Roger Deakins provides some exceptionally beautiful widescreen Western style photography. For a complicated and dark story, we, the audience, are viewing it through a soft, sentimental, warm and romantic lens. Casey Affleck's performance as the assassin Robert Ford is convincingly complicated and serious.I'm a modest fan of old westerns and more a fan of biographical films of famous historical people. The photography and detailed narration initially drew me into this film. The screenplay, with it's carefully used and timed narration, works effectively throughout the entire film. Curiosity about the famous outlaw aside, the excellent cinematography of Roger Deakins and the acting performance of Casey Affleck, make this long film absorbing and engaging from beginning to end.2 Academy Award Nominations: Best Cinematography (Roger Deakins) and Best Supporting Actor (Casey Affleck).

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443680/reviews-244

ur2955935

title: A long and detailed look at the supposed assassin of the famous outlaw Jesse James review: With a long title, this long and serious film takes a hard and detailed look at the self claimed assassin of Jesse James through a soft, romantic and warm lens. I'm not familiar with the details of this famous 19th century American outlaw and the circumstances surrounding his untimely death. So, I cannot attest to it's historical accuracy. In this film, the focus is more on the motives of his would be assassin. For those not familiar with the circumstances after the death of Jesse James, there is a surprise in store near the end of the film. From beginning to end, there's plenty of biographical information, narrated, to inform those not familiar with the details of Jesse James and the story of his supposed assassin.Acclaimed cinematographer Roger Deakins provides some exceptionally beautiful widescreen Western style photography. For a complicated and dark story, we, the audience, are viewing it through a soft, sentimental, warm and romantic lens. Casey Affleck's performance as the assassin Robert Ford is convincingly complicated and serious.I'm a modest fan of old westerns and more a fan of biographical films of famous historical people. The photography and detailed narration initially drew me into this film. The screenplay, with it's carefully used and timed narration, works effectively throughout the entire film. Curiosity about the famous outlaw aside, the excellent cinematography of Roger Deakins and the acting performance of Casey Affleck, make this long film absorbing and engaging from beginning to end.2 Academy Award Nominations: Best Cinematography (Roger Deakins) and Best Supporting Actor (Casey Affleck).

A New Western Classic

tt0443680

What LOST IN TRANSLATION did for Japanese culture, THE ASSASSINATION OF JESSE JAMES BY COWARD ROBERT FORD does for the Western. In one of the best visceral presentations of the West, its feel, its depiction of bare, spartan rooms, the ambiance sounds of rustling wind and creaky floors, this movie reels with authenticity, a rawness, grittiness even to how shooting scenes are played out. People die harshly. Men talk trash, like real men talk about women sometimes. There are amazing scenes of silent acting that communicate brilliant the mood, the feelings, the senses of the scene. Both Brad Pitt and Casey Afflect easily award nominations bring to the screen a real subtle and intimate, disquieting, and complex characters, . This perhaps overly long, sometimes difficult to follow where even eventually even Sam Sheppard's character just seems to disappear, remains nevertheless an intimate epic movie brings both a fantastic cinematography to the audience with the color, lighting, the shots of both bright sunshine and complete darkness of the nights of the old West. The narrative-voice over is riveting in its also documentary style presentation that adds authenticity to the acting on the screen, a richness and depth of really experiencing each scene. One of the most mesmerizing, layered, and rich film of the year.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443680/reviews-47

ur0972645

title: A New Western Classic review: What LOST IN TRANSLATION did for Japanese culture, THE ASSASSINATION OF JESSE JAMES BY COWARD ROBERT FORD does for the Western. In one of the best visceral presentations of the West, its feel, its depiction of bare, spartan rooms, the ambiance sounds of rustling wind and creaky floors, this movie reels with authenticity, a rawness, grittiness even to how shooting scenes are played out. People die harshly. Men talk trash, like real men talk about women sometimes. There are amazing scenes of silent acting that communicate brilliant the mood, the feelings, the senses of the scene. Both Brad Pitt and Casey Afflect easily award nominations bring to the screen a real subtle and intimate, disquieting, and complex characters, . This perhaps overly long, sometimes difficult to follow where even eventually even Sam Sheppard's character just seems to disappear, remains nevertheless an intimate epic movie brings both a fantastic cinematography to the audience with the color, lighting, the shots of both bright sunshine and complete darkness of the nights of the old West. The narrative-voice over is riveting in its also documentary style presentation that adds authenticity to the acting on the screen, a richness and depth of really experiencing each scene. One of the most mesmerizing, layered, and rich film of the year.

Yuk

tt0443680

I thought that this tripe would never end. The movie was wholly aggravating and I think if I had to hear Casey Affleck snivel one more line, I would have wanted to shoot him too. The show moved at a pace akin to watching ice melt in winter, and nobody had enough acting chops to make you care whether or not they got killed. The cinematography was not bad but if I ever have to look through another distorted window I might have to rob a train, too. This bland fiasco could have been done in three minutes and the impact would not have suffered. By the end of the show I was thinking, "Kill him already, maybe there will be enough time for me to do something more fun like get a root canal. Brad Pitt wasn't bad in this role, and he really knows how to read a line, but movies are for actors not orators. Somebody in Hollywood owes me nine bucks.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443680/reviews-14

ur15886325

title: Yuk review: I thought that this tripe would never end. The movie was wholly aggravating and I think if I had to hear Casey Affleck snivel one more line, I would have wanted to shoot him too. The show moved at a pace akin to watching ice melt in winter, and nobody had enough acting chops to make you care whether or not they got killed. The cinematography was not bad but if I ever have to look through another distorted window I might have to rob a train, too. This bland fiasco could have been done in three minutes and the impact would not have suffered. By the end of the show I was thinking, "Kill him already, maybe there will be enough time for me to do something more fun like get a root canal. Brad Pitt wasn't bad in this role, and he really knows how to read a line, but movies are for actors not orators. Somebody in Hollywood owes me nine bucks.

TV movie

tt0443680

Casey Affleck is a very talented actor and he sure gives a very good performance in this film, much better than Pitt, in my humble opinion.Also, Nick Cave was a very nice surprise.But this must be the most boring movie that I've ever seen. Directing sucks big time, from start to end I felt like I was watching a B-class low budget TV movie... and it is long! If this would be on TV I think I would switch the channel. Maybe it will upset some of you, but this Jesse James story is not very exciting for me. Not at all. An outlaw shot by another gang member??. What is interesting about this for crying out loud? It is probably the most boring story after Beowulf.Sorry. Really disappointing movie with bad directing, bad script and bad music.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443680/reviews-125

ur2705305

title: TV movie review: Casey Affleck is a very talented actor and he sure gives a very good performance in this film, much better than Pitt, in my humble opinion.Also, Nick Cave was a very nice surprise.But this must be the most boring movie that I've ever seen. Directing sucks big time, from start to end I felt like I was watching a B-class low budget TV movie... and it is long! If this would be on TV I think I would switch the channel. Maybe it will upset some of you, but this Jesse James story is not very exciting for me. Not at all. An outlaw shot by another gang member??. What is interesting about this for crying out loud? It is probably the most boring story after Beowulf.Sorry. Really disappointing movie with bad directing, bad script and bad music.

Overblown, overlong; great role for Casey Affleck

tt0443680

New Zealander Andrew Dominik's 'Chopper'(2000) had Eric Bana very effective in the biopic of a famous Australian criminal. This overblown, overlong, pseudo-arty rehash (with intermittent fake-antique "refracted" camera-work) of Jesse James's last days has been admired and hated. Brad Pitt got the Venice Film Festival's Best Actor award. In fact Pitt lacks the presence needed here to make his role interesting. Casey Affleck, with his embarrassing faux-naïve eagerness, is the one who holds the screen. With this and the upcoming movie brother Ben has debut-directed with him as the star ('Gone, Baby, Gone' from a novel by 'Mystic River' author Denis Lehane), he may be moving up to major roles, so that's the most noteworthy thing abut this otherwise misfired effort. Sam Rockwell, Sam Shepherd and others are wasted in scenes and conversations that ramble on and never make much sense. The Seventies-style quirkiness isn't backed up by solid ideas, and at over two and a half hours, this is a long, tedious slog to sit through.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443680/reviews-15

ur1501216

title: Overblown, overlong; great role for Casey Affleck review: New Zealander Andrew Dominik's 'Chopper'(2000) had Eric Bana very effective in the biopic of a famous Australian criminal. This overblown, overlong, pseudo-arty rehash (with intermittent fake-antique "refracted" camera-work) of Jesse James's last days has been admired and hated. Brad Pitt got the Venice Film Festival's Best Actor award. In fact Pitt lacks the presence needed here to make his role interesting. Casey Affleck, with his embarrassing faux-naïve eagerness, is the one who holds the screen. With this and the upcoming movie brother Ben has debut-directed with him as the star ('Gone, Baby, Gone' from a novel by 'Mystic River' author Denis Lehane), he may be moving up to major roles, so that's the most noteworthy thing abut this otherwise misfired effort. Sam Rockwell, Sam Shepherd and others are wasted in scenes and conversations that ramble on and never make much sense. The Seventies-style quirkiness isn't backed up by solid ideas, and at over two and a half hours, this is a long, tedious slog to sit through.

Good things, it has...

tt0443680

I can't be kind with this film; it's been a very disappointing experience. As the world may know (or can find out with this and other movies), Robert Ford killed Jesse James, the famous outlaw from the West. Well, Andrew Dominik's "The Assassination of Jesse James by the coward Robert Ford" (already a bit pretentious, even if it comes from Ron Hansen novel's original title) is a long journey to the 'how', 'when' and 'why' of the fact, giving that we know the who. I'm sorry if I'm being a little repetitive; sometimes movie characteristics stick with me for a while after watching them. The music of "The Assassination…" is repetitive, as its structure and its beautifully shot sequences, sceneries, lights and use of colors, empty rooms, fast- moving clouds: the movie is just marvelously shot. Dominik's adapted script starts the film off with the kindness of telling us who the main character (played by Brad Pitt) is, as we witness a blurry screen. That's the set-up for the structure, with a pleasant narration that not only becomes unpleasant with duration time, but at times also unnecessary. What are images for if someone's telling you everything you're watching? What good does a complete description provide for an actor if the viewer will be carefully watching if the character behaves exactly as what he or she heard? Brad Pitt suffers from this in this film that Dominik wants to be a focused study on two people, but gets distracted with the 'bigger picture' and worn down by the narration and an excessive exercise of style. Roger Deakins' photography is undoubtedly the movie's highest point, but it looks like the director never knew when to say "stop", and Deakins, an expert on camera tricks (here greatly helped by Curtiss Clayton and Dylan Tichenor's classic and well chosen cuts to black; which work every time and are not excessive, so they create a balance), kept going. I don't want you to misinterpret me about Pitt, though. His work here is very good; patient and contemplative, however unexpectedly confident and threatening in the stronger scenes. Even when his Jesse is the one who speaks the less, his speaking becomes meaningful. This is not Russell Crowe's elaborated study of silence in "3:10 to Yuma". Actually, "The Assassination…" is nothing like "3:10 to Yuma": in Mangold's film there's a redemption that's understood by the viewer after witnessing a series of events; here the movie tries to redeem a character leaving no space for the viewer's personal judgment. In a similar way, we sense the feelings and personalities of "3:10 to Yuma's" characters in one specific scene; while Dominik's movie almost obligates us to comprehend its two main creatures before, during and after the main events, when the truth is that we may not have figured it out. Luckily, Casey Affleck's best performance to date helps us a lot, because the actor worries about creating someone we can empathize with. He presents a contradiction in his Robert Ford, who used to worship and love someone he ends up killing. The best scenes in the film are the little ones; the ones where you don't think anything relevant can happen. When Robert is watching Jesse's wife Zee (Mary-Louise Parker, one of the many underused actors in the film) through the window, he turns around and realizes Jesse's been watching him for some time. "You'll break many hearts", he tells Robert. Try to unveil the whole meaning of that phrase. Of course there's plenty of good things in "The Assassination". Like Sam Rockwell's interpretation who, away from Pitt's stillness and Affleck's constant ticks, constructs a normal human being who worries about his family and friends, and does it with the naturalness that's characterized him even in his most eccentric roles. He's better than the other two and, seriously, he should be working more.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443680/reviews-148

ur4751428

title: Good things, it has... review: I can't be kind with this film; it's been a very disappointing experience. As the world may know (or can find out with this and other movies), Robert Ford killed Jesse James, the famous outlaw from the West. Well, Andrew Dominik's "The Assassination of Jesse James by the coward Robert Ford" (already a bit pretentious, even if it comes from Ron Hansen novel's original title) is a long journey to the 'how', 'when' and 'why' of the fact, giving that we know the who. I'm sorry if I'm being a little repetitive; sometimes movie characteristics stick with me for a while after watching them. The music of "The Assassination…" is repetitive, as its structure and its beautifully shot sequences, sceneries, lights and use of colors, empty rooms, fast- moving clouds: the movie is just marvelously shot. Dominik's adapted script starts the film off with the kindness of telling us who the main character (played by Brad Pitt) is, as we witness a blurry screen. That's the set-up for the structure, with a pleasant narration that not only becomes unpleasant with duration time, but at times also unnecessary. What are images for if someone's telling you everything you're watching? What good does a complete description provide for an actor if the viewer will be carefully watching if the character behaves exactly as what he or she heard? Brad Pitt suffers from this in this film that Dominik wants to be a focused study on two people, but gets distracted with the 'bigger picture' and worn down by the narration and an excessive exercise of style. Roger Deakins' photography is undoubtedly the movie's highest point, but it looks like the director never knew when to say "stop", and Deakins, an expert on camera tricks (here greatly helped by Curtiss Clayton and Dylan Tichenor's classic and well chosen cuts to black; which work every time and are not excessive, so they create a balance), kept going. I don't want you to misinterpret me about Pitt, though. His work here is very good; patient and contemplative, however unexpectedly confident and threatening in the stronger scenes. Even when his Jesse is the one who speaks the less, his speaking becomes meaningful. This is not Russell Crowe's elaborated study of silence in "3:10 to Yuma". Actually, "The Assassination…" is nothing like "3:10 to Yuma": in Mangold's film there's a redemption that's understood by the viewer after witnessing a series of events; here the movie tries to redeem a character leaving no space for the viewer's personal judgment. In a similar way, we sense the feelings and personalities of "3:10 to Yuma's" characters in one specific scene; while Dominik's movie almost obligates us to comprehend its two main creatures before, during and after the main events, when the truth is that we may not have figured it out. Luckily, Casey Affleck's best performance to date helps us a lot, because the actor worries about creating someone we can empathize with. He presents a contradiction in his Robert Ford, who used to worship and love someone he ends up killing. The best scenes in the film are the little ones; the ones where you don't think anything relevant can happen. When Robert is watching Jesse's wife Zee (Mary-Louise Parker, one of the many underused actors in the film) through the window, he turns around and realizes Jesse's been watching him for some time. "You'll break many hearts", he tells Robert. Try to unveil the whole meaning of that phrase. Of course there's plenty of good things in "The Assassination". Like Sam Rockwell's interpretation who, away from Pitt's stillness and Affleck's constant ticks, constructs a normal human being who worries about his family and friends, and does it with the naturalness that's characterized him even in his most eccentric roles. He's better than the other two and, seriously, he should be working more.

Great movie, great actors, simply perfect

tt0443680

This is really a great movie, one of the best of the year. Not much of a typical western, its more like a psychological thriller with some moments of drama. A very interesting story about Jesse James, his last year alive, about Robert Ford, His obsession with Jesse James and his reasons to kill him. A very convincing and well developed plot. Beautiful photography, the landscapes shown in the movie are simply amazing. The music is also very good, every score fits to the perfection to the mood of every scene. The direction by Andrew Dominik is incredible, he delivers a slow rhythm yet enjoyable movie. It has a cast of wonderful actors beginning with Casey Affleck that is constantly evolving in his performances, Brad Pitt that is already a custom to watch him in perfect acting roles, Sam Rockwell excellent in his supporting role and Sam Sheppard with a brief but convincing appearance. To conclude, this is a great masterpiece, a must see movie and an Oscar nomination worthy.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443680/reviews-70

ur6208088

title: Great movie, great actors, simply perfect review: This is really a great movie, one of the best of the year. Not much of a typical western, its more like a psychological thriller with some moments of drama. A very interesting story about Jesse James, his last year alive, about Robert Ford, His obsession with Jesse James and his reasons to kill him. A very convincing and well developed plot. Beautiful photography, the landscapes shown in the movie are simply amazing. The music is also very good, every score fits to the perfection to the mood of every scene. The direction by Andrew Dominik is incredible, he delivers a slow rhythm yet enjoyable movie. It has a cast of wonderful actors beginning with Casey Affleck that is constantly evolving in his performances, Brad Pitt that is already a custom to watch him in perfect acting roles, Sam Rockwell excellent in his supporting role and Sam Sheppard with a brief but convincing appearance. To conclude, this is a great masterpiece, a must see movie and an Oscar nomination worthy.

Ken Burns goes Hollywood!

tt0443680

A lot of this movie felt like a Ken Burns documentary to me (the objective narration, the amazing account of authentic detail).Many viewers might see this movie with hopes of watching a great modern western, but instead we are left with a visually encapsulating narrative that leaves us feeling both sympathy and admiration for both Jesse James and Robert Ford.Casey Affleck is truly stunning as the morally injured Robert Ford.Brad Pitt is like fine wine (keeps getting better with age). His portrayal of Jesse James is something that resembles ancient mythology. He is a heroic character, yet he is so deeply haunted by his ruthlessness that he becomes something entirely different than what is expected on screen.Both Brad Pitt and Casey Affleck are something to behold in this poetic and tragic retelling of history.Although this movie is very long and somewhat slowly paced, it is one of the few movies this year that makes you care for every single character, no matter how insignificant their roles are.The cinematography by Roger Deakins is nothing short of stunning, and the portrayals of Robert Ford and Jesse James by the two lead actors is enough to enthrall you to the very last minute of this epic, new-age western.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443680/reviews-65

ur11992484

title: Ken Burns goes Hollywood! review: A lot of this movie felt like a Ken Burns documentary to me (the objective narration, the amazing account of authentic detail).Many viewers might see this movie with hopes of watching a great modern western, but instead we are left with a visually encapsulating narrative that leaves us feeling both sympathy and admiration for both Jesse James and Robert Ford.Casey Affleck is truly stunning as the morally injured Robert Ford.Brad Pitt is like fine wine (keeps getting better with age). His portrayal of Jesse James is something that resembles ancient mythology. He is a heroic character, yet he is so deeply haunted by his ruthlessness that he becomes something entirely different than what is expected on screen.Both Brad Pitt and Casey Affleck are something to behold in this poetic and tragic retelling of history.Although this movie is very long and somewhat slowly paced, it is one of the few movies this year that makes you care for every single character, no matter how insignificant their roles are.The cinematography by Roger Deakins is nothing short of stunning, and the portrayals of Robert Ford and Jesse James by the two lead actors is enough to enthrall you to the very last minute of this epic, new-age western.

oh well....

tt0443680

let me start off with the good stuff. this is a breath-taking realistic portrayal of the wild west. the gun sounds are authentic, without any Hollywood soundboard idiot messing it up, there's no gun flashes, instead you get smoke (like in reality kids) the sets are all wonderfully realistic, and beautifully crafted, the actors are crafting masterful characterizations. yet... it all seems to have fallen apart on the cutting board. i came to IMDb, and people write how Robert ford was demoralized by the train robbery. i didn't see that. seemed like it was Jesse James himself who took a disliking on the kid, had him mop the floors for him, and then kicked him out of the gang. or something along those lines. it was very muddled. i'm not an American and haven't watched any Jesse James movies though. and i don't know the story either. anyways, the first half of the movie started off nice, then got all muddled and started tearing off in all directions, keeping you trying to tie all the loose story ends together while simultaneously listening to what Mr. storyteller is saying, before just crashing off into nothing special, and finally, and thankfully ending. then the second hour started, and it seemed, finally some real story started unfolding. still a bit muddled, but a lot more coherent storytelling that actually tried to go somewhere, you can almost feel the spine-tingling tension building up to the climax. its almost like two separate movies actually.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443680/reviews-212

ur8492923

title: oh well.... review: let me start off with the good stuff. this is a breath-taking realistic portrayal of the wild west. the gun sounds are authentic, without any Hollywood soundboard idiot messing it up, there's no gun flashes, instead you get smoke (like in reality kids) the sets are all wonderfully realistic, and beautifully crafted, the actors are crafting masterful characterizations. yet... it all seems to have fallen apart on the cutting board. i came to IMDb, and people write how Robert ford was demoralized by the train robbery. i didn't see that. seemed like it was Jesse James himself who took a disliking on the kid, had him mop the floors for him, and then kicked him out of the gang. or something along those lines. it was very muddled. i'm not an American and haven't watched any Jesse James movies though. and i don't know the story either. anyways, the first half of the movie started off nice, then got all muddled and started tearing off in all directions, keeping you trying to tie all the loose story ends together while simultaneously listening to what Mr. storyteller is saying, before just crashing off into nothing special, and finally, and thankfully ending. then the second hour started, and it seemed, finally some real story started unfolding. still a bit muddled, but a lot more coherent storytelling that actually tried to go somewhere, you can almost feel the spine-tingling tension building up to the climax. its almost like two separate movies actually.

Brilliant character study on hero worship.

tt0443680

Based on the novel by Ron Hansen, The Assassination Of Jesse James By The Coward Robert Ford is a thoughtful, and intelligent movie, looking in the celebrity and hero worship in the so-called Wild West.Robert Ford, played brilliantly by Casey Affleck becomes a member of the gang run by Jesse James (a mesmerizing performance from Brad Pitt) and his brother Frank. As time goes by, Ford becomes a friend of Jesse, who seems to enjoy the worship given to him by Ford. However as time passes, Ford sees the changes in Jesse who is becoming unstable, and has apparently being gunning down members of his own gang. When offered a deal by the law, Ford sees a way out, but has he the courage to do what needs to be done?Directed and written for the screen by Andrew Dominik, the movie takes it's time telling it's story. Although western set, it's not a proper western, in that there is virtually no gunfights and set pieces in the movie. Instead this movie is all about character, and what drives them.Although the main plot detail is giving away within the title, it's also a clever touch. On the face of it, that is what happens. However, as the movie shows, there is much more to the story than simply the gunning down (or assassination) of Jesse James. In fact one of the things the movie shows is what happens after this event, in relation to Robert Ford, and the effect it has on him.The performances from the entire cast are superb, but as mentioned this movie belongs to both Pitt and Affleck. Pitt has shown over the years he can be good with the right material and he's brilliant here.But this is Affleck's movie.Better known, to me anyway, for supporting turns in the likes of the Ocean's 11/12/13 trilogy, here he shows just how good an actor he can be given the right material. With this movie, I think he's perhaps moved his career onto great things.The movie is brilliantly shot by Roger Deakins, showing here, as he did in No Country For Old Men that he is one of the best, if not the best cinematographer working in movies today.Andrew Dominik directs well, allowing the characters and story to breathe. If I had a criticism, then I'd say it is perhaps slightly too long.But that is a minor flaw. This is a fantastic movie, and along with No Country For Old Men has got 2008 off to a fantastic year at the movies.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443680/reviews-112

ur0680065

title: Brilliant character study on hero worship. review: Based on the novel by Ron Hansen, The Assassination Of Jesse James By The Coward Robert Ford is a thoughtful, and intelligent movie, looking in the celebrity and hero worship in the so-called Wild West.Robert Ford, played brilliantly by Casey Affleck becomes a member of the gang run by Jesse James (a mesmerizing performance from Brad Pitt) and his brother Frank. As time goes by, Ford becomes a friend of Jesse, who seems to enjoy the worship given to him by Ford. However as time passes, Ford sees the changes in Jesse who is becoming unstable, and has apparently being gunning down members of his own gang. When offered a deal by the law, Ford sees a way out, but has he the courage to do what needs to be done?Directed and written for the screen by Andrew Dominik, the movie takes it's time telling it's story. Although western set, it's not a proper western, in that there is virtually no gunfights and set pieces in the movie. Instead this movie is all about character, and what drives them.Although the main plot detail is giving away within the title, it's also a clever touch. On the face of it, that is what happens. However, as the movie shows, there is much more to the story than simply the gunning down (or assassination) of Jesse James. In fact one of the things the movie shows is what happens after this event, in relation to Robert Ford, and the effect it has on him.The performances from the entire cast are superb, but as mentioned this movie belongs to both Pitt and Affleck. Pitt has shown over the years he can be good with the right material and he's brilliant here.But this is Affleck's movie.Better known, to me anyway, for supporting turns in the likes of the Ocean's 11/12/13 trilogy, here he shows just how good an actor he can be given the right material. With this movie, I think he's perhaps moved his career onto great things.The movie is brilliantly shot by Roger Deakins, showing here, as he did in No Country For Old Men that he is one of the best, if not the best cinematographer working in movies today.Andrew Dominik directs well, allowing the characters and story to breathe. If I had a criticism, then I'd say it is perhaps slightly too long.But that is a minor flaw. This is a fantastic movie, and along with No Country For Old Men has got 2008 off to a fantastic year at the movies.

The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford

tt0443680

This movie is one of the most touching and beautiful movies I've ever seen. Now... this movie is marked as "western", but don't expect to watch a action - packed classic western with "good, bad and ugly" outlaws with shotguns and revolvers shooting each other. The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford is a "elegic western", a story about last living days of notorious robber and murderer Jesse James and his friendly relationship with young and idealistic Robert Ford, who in the end killed Jesse (shot him in the back) and became the most famous "coward" in the history of wild west.About Robert Ford: I don't look at him as a coward. This movie is trying to show the same thing; that Ford was just a confused young man, who adore Jesse James, but on the other hand he discovered his true nature as a paranoid killer, who doesn't have any remorse whatsoever. I'm sure a lot of people would do the same thing in Fords shoes and pull the trigger. And this movie clearly shows that; that Ford killed Jesse, but on the other hand Ford never really wanted to kill him, he regretted his decision to the rest of his life.Everything in this movie is perfect; excellent acting (Affleck is in my opinion much much better than Brad Pitt, who is playing the same guy the same way over and over again), superb photography, excellent script and very touching music. This is not an old fashion western, but very deep, emotional and tragic movie about the last days of an American hero, which Jesse James become after his death.For me,The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford is one of the best movies in 2007.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443680/reviews-235

ur16991786

title: The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford review: This movie is one of the most touching and beautiful movies I've ever seen. Now... this movie is marked as "western", but don't expect to watch a action - packed classic western with "good, bad and ugly" outlaws with shotguns and revolvers shooting each other. The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford is a "elegic western", a story about last living days of notorious robber and murderer Jesse James and his friendly relationship with young and idealistic Robert Ford, who in the end killed Jesse (shot him in the back) and became the most famous "coward" in the history of wild west.About Robert Ford: I don't look at him as a coward. This movie is trying to show the same thing; that Ford was just a confused young man, who adore Jesse James, but on the other hand he discovered his true nature as a paranoid killer, who doesn't have any remorse whatsoever. I'm sure a lot of people would do the same thing in Fords shoes and pull the trigger. And this movie clearly shows that; that Ford killed Jesse, but on the other hand Ford never really wanted to kill him, he regretted his decision to the rest of his life.Everything in this movie is perfect; excellent acting (Affleck is in my opinion much much better than Brad Pitt, who is playing the same guy the same way over and over again), superb photography, excellent script and very touching music. This is not an old fashion western, but very deep, emotional and tragic movie about the last days of an American hero, which Jesse James become after his death.For me,The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford is one of the best movies in 2007.

The Zen of Celebrity

tt0443680

Greetings again from the darkness. The star of this film is Super-Cinematographer Roger Deakins. This guy is a true artist with a camera and thanks to the excruciatingly slow pace here, we get plenty of opportunities to admire his craft. I am not just talking about the stunning snow scenery, but pay attention to the way Mr. Deakins photographs faces and the movements of the actors. It is truly a technical marvel of film-making.As you might guess, when the best thing about the film is the cinematography, it may not deliver the goods from a dramatic standpoint. I won't call this a snoozer, but if the pace were any slower it could have been just as effective as an old fashioned slide show.The film is really not about Jesse James and it really isn't too much about the coward Bob Ford. It really is about one desperate attempt to get famous ... to reach celebrity status. As the old saying goes, be careful what you ask for. Brad Pitt does a nice job capturing the existential side of the famed bank robber, but the film really belongs to Casey Affleck, in his first true lead role. I must admit, Affleck's mumbling and fake naivety wear thin very quickly. Sure he may be the best actor among the Affleck brothers, but is that really saying much? New Zealand director Andrew Dominik put together quite a supporting cast but really doesn't now what to do with it. There is so much wasted talent ... in particular, Sam Shepard and Zooey Deschanel, whose roles appeared to be thrown in at the last minute. Faring better are James Carville in a surprisingly effective role as the Governor, Paul Schneider as a creepy Wood, Nick Cave in a weird scene as a saloon singer, Sam Rockwell as Ford's older brother and the always effective and interesting Michael Parks, who is to "GD" what Samuel L. Jackson is to "MF".As a work of art, this is definitely one to see. From a dramatic standpoint, it is quite a let down.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443680/reviews-24

ur0806494

title: The Zen of Celebrity review: Greetings again from the darkness. The star of this film is Super-Cinematographer Roger Deakins. This guy is a true artist with a camera and thanks to the excruciatingly slow pace here, we get plenty of opportunities to admire his craft. I am not just talking about the stunning snow scenery, but pay attention to the way Mr. Deakins photographs faces and the movements of the actors. It is truly a technical marvel of film-making.As you might guess, when the best thing about the film is the cinematography, it may not deliver the goods from a dramatic standpoint. I won't call this a snoozer, but if the pace were any slower it could have been just as effective as an old fashioned slide show.The film is really not about Jesse James and it really isn't too much about the coward Bob Ford. It really is about one desperate attempt to get famous ... to reach celebrity status. As the old saying goes, be careful what you ask for. Brad Pitt does a nice job capturing the existential side of the famed bank robber, but the film really belongs to Casey Affleck, in his first true lead role. I must admit, Affleck's mumbling and fake naivety wear thin very quickly. Sure he may be the best actor among the Affleck brothers, but is that really saying much? New Zealand director Andrew Dominik put together quite a supporting cast but really doesn't now what to do with it. There is so much wasted talent ... in particular, Sam Shepard and Zooey Deschanel, whose roles appeared to be thrown in at the last minute. Faring better are James Carville in a surprisingly effective role as the Governor, Paul Schneider as a creepy Wood, Nick Cave in a weird scene as a saloon singer, Sam Rockwell as Ford's older brother and the always effective and interesting Michael Parks, who is to "GD" what Samuel L. Jackson is to "MF".As a work of art, this is definitely one to see. From a dramatic standpoint, it is quite a let down.