I return from nearly two weeks of silence with apologies. My end of term examinations are going on at the moment, which is leaving me completely burnt out. For better or worse I’m back and if you've read any of my earlier reviews you’ll know that I can whine on about how a film sucked or I can heap praise on films I loved. Well I could whine on for quite some time about how midway through Primal Fear you feel in your gut that this is a good movie, but it could have been much better.
Movies in Hollywood in the old days would be describable in seven words, something which hasn't changed over the years; in fact that was part of the pitch to producers. For example the 7 word treatment of Avatar is “Pocahontas with big blue aliens and humans”. For Primal Fear it is “Courtroom drama involving murderer and egomaniac lawyer”. For most of the movie it just plays just as that, a good courtroom drama, but nothing very special, especially for a person living on the 21st century. The story itself is simple. The murder of an Archbishop, a beloved member of the community, is the biggest story in the city. A hotshot lawyer, played by the smooth talking, silver haired Richard Gere, becomes the defense counsel for the alleged murderer, played by a very young and younger looking Edward Norton.
Now I will give you the reasons I found this movie good and not great or bad but just good, and since I’m still in exam mode I’m going to do it bullet points:
•Richard Gere gave a good performance, so did Laura Linney (the female lead). Frances McDormand (Fargo) also gives a standard-good-actress performance.
•Edward Norton delivers a fantastic bit of acting which I think launched him to fame. This is one of the people in the industry who should have won an Oscar by now. His act and more specifically his character keeps the show going.
•The script was pretty good. The direction and the editing were good. There were some electrifying scenes somewhere in the middle and right at the end of the film, but to balance it out the director must have deliberately kept a few scenes slow and crappy. For example: the crappy (I have no high brow English for you, I used it all up while bullshitting in my written exams) scenes between the two lead lawyers who just happen to have a romantic history behind them.
In summation nothing particularly stands out in this movie except Edward Norton and the last five minutes of the movie. Over the years movies have developed something called the big reveal which has been brilliantly executed in the past in films like The Usual Suspects, The Prestige and The Illusionist. The reveal takes place in the last few minutes and usually blows your mind. And in that aspect I would rate Primal Fear ten out of ten for a marvelous reveal.
IMDB rating: 7.6/10
My rating: 7.5/10
Every time I try to be critical, people say I'm whining. Great Lord Ebert protect me from these creatures.
Movies in Hollywood in the old days would be describable in seven words, something which hasn't changed over the years; in fact that was part of the pitch to producers. For example the 7 word treatment of Avatar is “Pocahontas with big blue aliens and humans”. For Primal Fear it is “Courtroom drama involving murderer and egomaniac lawyer”. For most of the movie it just plays just as that, a good courtroom drama, but nothing very special, especially for a person living on the 21st century. The story itself is simple. The murder of an Archbishop, a beloved member of the community, is the biggest story in the city. A hotshot lawyer, played by the smooth talking, silver haired Richard Gere, becomes the defense counsel for the alleged murderer, played by a very young and younger looking Edward Norton.
Richard Gere: proving that lawyers are always profitable, even if you're only playing them.
Now I will give you the reasons I found this movie good and not great or bad but just good, and since I’m still in exam mode I’m going to do it bullet points:
•Richard Gere gave a good performance, so did Laura Linney (the female lead). Frances McDormand (Fargo) also gives a standard-good-actress performance.
•Edward Norton delivers a fantastic bit of acting which I think launched him to fame. This is one of the people in the industry who should have won an Oscar by now. His act and more specifically his character keeps the show going.
•The script was pretty good. The direction and the editing were good. There were some electrifying scenes somewhere in the middle and right at the end of the film, but to balance it out the director must have deliberately kept a few scenes slow and crappy. For example: the crappy (I have no high brow English for you, I used it all up while bullshitting in my written exams) scenes between the two lead lawyers who just happen to have a romantic history behind them.
"Don't make me angry. I give away my parts to Mark Ruffalo when I'm angry."
In summation nothing particularly stands out in this movie except Edward Norton and the last five minutes of the movie. Over the years movies have developed something called the big reveal which has been brilliantly executed in the past in films like The Usual Suspects, The Prestige and The Illusionist. The reveal takes place in the last few minutes and usually blows your mind. And in that aspect I would rate Primal Fear ten out of ten for a marvelous reveal.
IMDB rating: 7.6/10
My rating: 7.5/10
No comments:
Post a Comment