The Big Lebowski (1998)

4/5

The first time I saw The Big Lebowski, I was a bit underwhelmed. I had heard the superlatives thrust about in zealous reviews, but at that time I was unfamiliar with the Coens and I didn't know "what it was that they did." Now I know, and I am truly impressed by their work here. Their inimitable style--from the precisely-crafted dialogue to the beautifully-envisioned compositions--is in full force in this movie. Unforgettable characters have emerged from forgettable roles. Simple phrases have become generational mottos. This is a movie that will remain in the collective cultural memory for a long time to come.

The humor finds itself in what the characters do and do not say and how they say it; it finds itself in their actions but more importantly in their motivations; it finds itself in the times, the places, and the moods of these individuals we slowly grow to appreciate if not love (thanks to narration by a "stranger"). While it is not particularly rare for me to laugh during a movie, it is hard for me to remember laughing so loudly, forcefully, and obnoxiously before this one.

Even so, the animated dream sequences are dated. I really don't like special effects that don't hold up over time. But there is a far more significant underlying problem I have with the film. As when I saw it the first time, I have trouble finding a point to it--something I can apply to my daily life more than simply quoting hilarious lines and/or putting them in my movie quotes quizzes. Maybe this movie is just entertainment, but I think the Coens should do more than that. I certainly know they can. But the question is whether or not I got anything more out of it than hearty laughs and good memories; and what is the answer? Does anyone have an answer in the affirmative, because I very much would like to love this movie more than I already do, and that is one major hurdle it must jump. Still, I would pop this movie in the DVD player in a heartbeat if I ever needed a quick laugh. And it's definitely worth watching if you haven't seen it already.

IMDb link: http://imdb.com/title/tt0118715/

American Gangster (2007)

3/5

American Gangster tells the story of Frank Lucas, the biggest, baddest, blackest gangster in 60's-era America, and Detective Richie Roberts, the honest cop chosen by the Feds to stop the growing drug problem. There were some things I liked and some things I didn't like about this 2.5 hour movie. So let me break it down to you by half hour episodes. In the first 30 minutes, we are introduced to the trite, hackneyed police corruption plot we've seen a million times before combined with the archetypal family man gangster. In the second 30 minutes, we are introduced to superfluous characters and side stories that take up too much time. The third 30 minutes contain periods of ferocity and tension punctuating the rather senselessly boring nothing that takes up the majority of the movie. The fourth 30 minutes we finally see a bit more excitement and character development. It starts to be more than random information being slowly revealed to us. We are actually engaged by the characters and their actions for once. The fifth 30 minutes are incredible. A truly powerful climax and a high-note to end the movie on. It almost makes up for the rest of the movie. Almost.

The movie is more than technically proficient, but less than necessary when it comes to storytelling. Why are we watching any of this? The one word to describe this movie would be excess. It's as if they had a solid story, and then decided to add junk on the sides. Ridley Scott should decide which story he wants to tell and tell it. He goes for the gangster building up his empire and the cop investigating the rising drug problem. They eventually intersect, so why not just start the story there? People keep asking, who is this guy? How does he do what he does? But we don't feel the same sense of wonder and awe that the rest of the characters do because we know who he his and we know how he sells better heroin for less money. The first hour and a half should have been cut, replaced by 15-30 minutes of more revealing storytelling from either Crowe or Washington's perspective. That would make this a much tighter, much better movie. Instead, it's a limp, overlong, unsuccessful attempt at an epic gangster movie in the vein of The Godfather.

IMDb link: http://imdb.com/title/tt0765429/

Miller's Crossing (1990)

4.9/5

Miller's Crossing is exquisitely detailed, exceedingly complex, and fully realized from start to finish. Darkly comic, this crime movie set in the Prohibition-era 30's tries to be a film noir in dialogue and a gangster movie a la The Godfather in content. Instead of fitting well into either category, it ends up being a fresh blend of both. Filled with double crosses, hidden agendas, and snappy dialogue, the plot can get quite confusing at times, but never out of reach for the attentive viewer. It envelops you in its own world, where every word has meaning if you know how to hear it right. The atmosphere is so real you're breathing the same air they are. My favorite aspect of this movie, and what keeps me coming back for more, is the abundance of subtle nuances left in the background for the especially watchful to pick up on. While the movie does explain the main story, it leaves a lot of important side stories and relationships open for the audience to chew over and realize on their own, which makes it much more engaging and memorable for those watching.

Onto the technical specifics. The acting was unerringly precise from all parties. The editing was terrific, milking every shot and scene for all they're worth while still maintaining mood and environment. The script itself is so rich and multi-layered in plot alone that it could stand up to analysis from a dozen different angles and produce different results each time. The dialogue is pithy and smart, as only the Coens know how to make it, although it does sometimes feel a bit "written." And it requires a very sensitive ear and very active mind to pick up on everything.

I remembered it being prettier, and was a little disappointed seeing it again and noticing rather bland colors and flat shots. While brilliant in composition and framing, the actual execution itself was not up to my expectations. The sound design as well made it a bit difficult to hear what the characters were saying, although perhaps the accents and word choice added to that problem. The dialogue doesn't quite succeed as a 40's noir, but the fervent and dedicated attempt more than make up for it. The music felt extremely out of place, specifically the choice of the main theme and also the times at which it would crop up, almost as if by accident. Also, some of the violence was a bit too exaggerated and almost laughable, although I'm pretty sure it's intentional. Very highly recommended, for any Coen brothers fan, Byrne fan, or gangster/noir fan. I will leave you with my two favorite lines from the movie.

"Nobody knows anybody. Not that well."

--"Look in your heart, look in your heart!"
--"What heart?"

IMDb link: http://imdb.com/title/tt0100150/

The Crow (1994)

2/5

I had high hopes for this movie. I like Alex Proyas (Dark City and I, Robot) and I wanted to see how Bruce Lee's son turned out. Unfortunately, the movie was terrible. The acting on all parts was so contrived, it was painful to hear the actors talk. In fact, I cherished the moments of action, not because they were good (there were in fact not good), but because it meant there was no more bad acting. At least for the time being. The dialogue was utterly lacking--it was merely a means to tell the story without images. The music, which may have been good stand-alone, was heinous when used in the movie. And the thing with the guitar didn't work at all.

Even though most of it is terrible, there are some absolutely amazing shots in this movie. Some shots are so cool, so pretty, and so well-carried out that's it shocking to see them in the same movie as the crappy dialogue, acting, and music. The pacing worked really well; it was never boring per se, just bad. Also, the movie was surprisingly gritty, graphic, and violent, which actually worked really well for the environment it attempted to show. Overall, not recommended.

IMDb link: http://imdb.com/title/tt0109506/