All right let's get this out of the way. This is not a great picture. In fact I will bet 98 percent of the public would find it absolutely repulsive. Make that 99 percent. Hell, even I didn't understand it the first time I saw it. But what I realized the second time was brilliant method acting. And that ladies and gents is what makes this film shine. There is no solid plot, no supporting characters, and no reason to feel anything but disgust for Harvey Keitel. However, you find me another actor who could have dug as low as Keitel did or take as many chances and I will bet you that it will take more than the time to cook a frozen cardboard pizza. It is hard to view a soiled life like Keitel was leading without being on the road yourself which wouldn't be pretty. The backdrop of a baseball series and Keitel losing chunks of money made it even crazier. Again I have to say absolutely great acting. Keitel has so many good scenes that this may be a career role for him. I give him a multitude of credit for taking the chance to play a totally unlovable character. Watch this movie at your own risk and know going in that this is an outlier in the sense of normal movie making. Don't bother grabbing a flashlight or even a spotlight and trying to find a plot. There isn't one. Just sit back and watch Keitel spiral down like a squirrel who missed the branch.
Reviews
2 Reviews
Braveheart
(1995)
Fiery!!
4 June 2000
Clint Eastwood needs to take lessons from Mel Gibson who did a great job with this semi-epic rumble. Braveheart is a movie that is filled with great emotion. In fact I find it difficult to believe a person could watch this movie and not feel anything for the main character William Wallace. Sure the plot is your basic revenge for love destroyed good guy bad villain standard but that is not what makes this movie tick. Great landscapes, score driven, and violently picturesque battles and added with a touch of romance make Braveheart scream down the film highway. And once again it is the supporting cast that I feel overshadow Gibson's performance. Especially Patrick McGoohan as the ruthless Longshanks. In my opinion this is the part that makes or breaks this movie and it definitely made it. If you are going to have a villain in a movie not only do they have to achieve that hated look their actions need to match. Longshanks behaved how like a King trying to enforce his rule should. He was smart, cunning, and rarely did he lose his temper unless it was needed. If this sounds familiar then watch the Godfather and Michael Corleone. The comparisons between their actions are very similar. Wallace's fellow Scots and soldiers were also well chosen and added characters that made Wallace even stand out more. I am impressed with the way Gibson chose his shots. From the ground shot with the sword appearing fifteen feet on the screen to the shot at the end with the cloth he understands that when there is a defining moment in the script you need to do something even more to emphasize it. Make it stand out in the audiences head. This is where Eastwood sorely lacks as a director. His films have potential to be more than he puts into them. Especially Midnight in the Garden of Good and Evil that just screamed from every page of the screenplay for a director to drive it like a Ferrari on an open road. Gibson rightfully deserved the Oscar and he understands how difficult and restless the directing experience is. But he is also unwilling to take a great script and let it go to waste and for that I give him his do. Braveheart is a grand movie that will be a classic for years to come. It invokes volcanic emotions and returns to a time when men fought for love and freedom with fearless passion.
Tell Your Friends