|
Post by pacinoyes on Jan 29, 2021 21:51:21 GMT
I'm not going to review this movie here because I just can't, I've seen the film ........ I'll review it later tonight or tomorrow .......whenever I feel like it.
But let's let some other people get the ball rolling because hearing pacinoyes talking about this film, is as appealing to both of us as fingernails on an f'n chalkboard.
But when YOU review it concentrate on that ending if you can............ from the strip club bus stop scene onward.......really like to hear what MAR thinks of that ending.
Endings matter.......right?
|
|
|
Post by thomasjerome on Jan 29, 2021 22:42:27 GMT
I'm a sucker for 90s serial killer films, so hearing all the comparisons - negative or positive - didn't bother me but instead made me slightly excited for this even. I'm also a fan of "The Bone Collector" and would argue it's one of Denzel's most engaging and interesting turns. "Fallen" is okay, I wish I'd like it more but something doesn't work for me but he shines there as well. Now "The Little Things" - it bored the hell out of me. Denzel looks bored, must be his least interesting performance. Malek was laughably bad most of the time and I rarely can stand Jared Leto in anything, this was no exception. John Lee Hancock is such a bland director. The script is very flawed but at least a better director could make it all work better. "Se7en" and "True Detective" influences are undeniable but it lacks any atmosphere they had. As for the ending, it could have work out good or interesting if I'd not stop caring about these characters long before that because again, Hancock just lacks the vision or even understanding on how to work it out. Sure, the ideas of history repeating itself, the obsession, never being fully sure about if you did the right thing or not are interesting but ideas are just ideas if you can't execute them well. Here they're explored poorly. Leto's character came off almost ridiculous to me because the script is full of fan fiction level writing and the director has no idea what to do with. The ending matters but how you get there matters too.
|
|
|
Post by futuretrunks on Jan 30, 2021 2:17:16 GMT
Yeah, this isn't good. The acting isn't a problem at all, from any of the players. It's just weirdly sterile and slow, like if Rectify went into a coma. I turned this off after a little over an hour.
Edit: Still watching. Again, the acting is good. The screenwriting is beyond weird.
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Jan 30, 2021 3:33:12 GMT
Some nice cinematography, a hilariously bonkers Jared Leto performance that could've come from Mars, and half of Thomas Newman's score are all that I can say kept me going through this. This one was a slog, and a frustrating one at that. Washington's fine but this is the sort of character he can play in his sleep, and there's not really all that much to Deke. There are glimmers of what could have been, but he's forced into a box where he has to pretty much provide the gravitas for much of the investigation scenes, because he's acting against a miscast Rami Malek, whose usually offbeat presence clashes with what the role of Jimmy demands as a hotshot detective on the rise. The case wasn't compelling, the stakes were far too low, and the final scene left an insanely sour taste in my mouth because I almost could've forgiven the film for so many of its flaws if it had left it much more up in the air, but Hancock just couldn't resist.
Shame, as I was looking forward to it, but yeah, that's a tough start to 2021's viewing season for me.
|
|
|
Post by DeepArcher on Jan 30, 2021 4:11:53 GMT
Leto was hilariously hammy in this. Malek does an asshole hotshot thing for his first two scenes or whatever and just when I was interested in seeing him go against type, that aspect of the character just ... disappears. I love Denzel in anything but he didn't seem all that interested in even attempting to salvage this movie. It's not bad, I guess, just way too satisfied with doing only the bare minimum and absolutely nothing more.
|
|
|
Post by Pittsnogle_Goggins on Jan 30, 2021 5:04:31 GMT
Pretty underwhelming unfortunately.
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Jan 30, 2021 6:15:11 GMT
Hmm...I think some critics woke up on the wrong side of the bed when reviewing this, because not only is this mostly good, the third act is flat out fucking great. Completely subverts my expectations of a played out sub-genre. I thought the first hour was decent, but felt like a sort of shop worn procedural that I'd seen a million times before and felt like it was going nowhere in particular, so I was getting fully prepared to give this a weak review if it stayed on that course. Then it turns into something else in the second hour, that I found captivating. A gripping story about obsession and corruption of the soul and how it takes hold of these two Cops. It went from an episode of CSI to Vertigo real quick.
Denzel is predictably excellent and the best thing in the movie. He's playing and acting his age. He looks tired and worn out and jaded, but that's obviously the point of the character. Everything he does feels real and lived-in.He's not The Equalizer in this. He's a weird, paunchy, obsessive old loner who sits alone in his apartment and talks to dead girls. It's an interesting performance in the sense that it's mostly anti-Denzel. He's a magnetic presence even when he's not trying to be, and he isn't trying to be here. But tamping down his charisma is a perfect character choice for someone as haunted as Joe Deacon.
Rami Malek had his moments towards the end, and played the obsessive elements of his role very well. I thought he was miscast in other areas though. He just didn't come off as a straight arrow detective with a wife and 2.5 kids in the suburbs. I don't know if Malek will ever be fully convincing as a regular dude. It may be his physicality. The oversize eyes and the constant lip pursing thing he does that makes him look like Zoolander. But his stilted, staccato line delivery also enhances his natural weirdness. It's almost Walken-esque.
Jared Leto was fun. He hammed it up a little, but never crossed the line and his character keeps you guessing. I actually think it might have been even better for the film if Leto and Malek had switched roles. Malek can play weirdos very well, but Leto though he plays weirdos a lot, can do straight arrows more convincingly than Malek.
I dunno. Maybe the spectre of Seven makes it tough for other films in a similar mould to get a fair shake, but I liked this after a slow start, and thought John Lee Hancock did a fine job telling a more meditative and contemplative story than perhaps expected.
8/10
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Jan 30, 2021 9:56:41 GMT
Denzel Washington REALLY REALLY wishes he didn't pass up on doing Se7en in 1995. But he did, tough break, way it goes - but like I always say, you can't correct filmography - especially his - when you're in your 60s buddy..........and THAT's the big regret here - it's this fine actor's regret irl - not anything his "movie character" is going through. I have said that Nicole Kidman - lately anyway - makes a big mistake by not playing the actual scenes but by playing only the emotion of the scenes - which is the actor equivalent of "bluffing" it. Well.....everybody does that here: There is only one genuinely great scene by Washington this time - ONE - and you may not even see it at all - it's the small scene in the appliance store. He is creative, condescending, a prick, genuinely funny (for once!), probing, playful, imaginative, and kind of scary in the places he might eventually go to.......he never gets there again. Malek gives a performance that you almost never see anymore - where not only is his portrayal weak - the editing is so batsh it crazy and off-rhythm it actually makes a major actor in a Hollywood film look WORSE instead of better. When is the last time you saw that?!? There are several scenes in this film that linger on him where he seems to be staring off in the distance waiting for a signal from his alien mothership on what to do next. The ending is such a gloriously laughable farce and a maddeningly specific one too it invites parody: Sure, I'll get in the car! .............Wait dig over here, no just kidding.......... dig over here! - even logistically it seems off - from where 'Zel was and how many things transpire until he actually gets there. The movie has a ton of technical inconsistencies like that and poorly written contrivances like that - it's a very ineptly constructed movie across departments. Dream project .........my ass. 5/10
|
|
|
Post by cheesecake on Jan 30, 2021 14:30:31 GMT
Clichéd mess. Made me crave ta-cos, though.
|
|
|
Post by mhynson27 on Jan 30, 2021 15:04:16 GMT
Hmm...I think some critics woke up on the wrong side of the bed when reviewing this, because not only is this mostly good, the third act is flat out fucking great. Completely subverts my expectations of a played out sub-genre. I thought the first hour was decent, but felt like a sort of shop worn procedural that I'd seen a million times before and felt like it was going nowhere in particular, so I was getting fully prepared to give this a weak review if it stayed on that course. Then it turns into something else in the second hour, that I found captivating. A gripping story about obsession and corruption of the soul and how it takes hold of these two Cops. It went from an episode of CSI to Vertigo real quick. Denzel is predictably excellent and the best thing in the movie. He's playing and acting his age. He looks tired and worn out and jaded, but that's obviously the point of the character. Everything he does feels real and lived-in.He's not The Equalizer in this. He's a weird, paunchy, obsessive old loner who sits alone in his apartment and talks to dead girls. It's an interesting performance in the sense that it's mostly anti-Denzel. He's a magnetic presence even when he's not trying to be, and he isn't trying to be here. But tamping down his charisma is a perfect character choice for someone as haunted as Joe Deacon. Rami Malek had his moments towards the end, and played the obsessive elements of his role very well. I thought he was miscast in other areas though. He just didn't come off as a straight arrow detective with a wife and 2.5 kids in the suburbs. I don't know if Malek will ever be fully convincing as a regular dude. It may be his physicality. The oversize eyes and the constant lip pursing thing he does that makes him look like Zoolander. But his stilted, staccato line delivery also enhances his natural weirdness. It's almost Walken-esque. Jared Leto was fun. He hammed it up a little, but never crossed the line and his character keeps you guessing. I actually think it might have been even better for the film if Leto and Malek had switched roles. Malek can play weirdos very well, but Leto though he plays weirdos a lot, can do straight arrows more convincingly than Malek. I dunno. Maybe the spectre of Seven makes it tough for other films in a similar mould to get a fair shake, but I liked this after a slow start, and thought John Lee Hancock did a fine job telling a more meditative and contemplative story than perhaps expected. 8/10 And everyone on this forum too, right?
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Jan 30, 2021 15:11:19 GMT
Hmm...I think some critics woke up on the wrong side of the bed when reviewing this, because not only is this mostly good, the third act is flat out fucking great. Completely subverts my expectations of a played out sub-genre. I thought the first hour was decent, but felt like a sort of shop worn procedural that I'd seen a million times before and felt like it was going nowhere in particular, so I was getting fully prepared to give this a weak review if it stayed on that course. Then it turns into something else in the second hour, that I found captivating. A gripping story about obsession and corruption of the soul and how it takes hold of these two Cops. It went from an episode of CSI to Vertigo real quick. Denzel is predictably excellent and the best thing in the movie. He's playing and acting his age. He looks tired and worn out and jaded, but that's obviously the point of the character. Everything he does feels real and lived-in.He's not The Equalizer in this. He's a weird, paunchy, obsessive old loner who sits alone in his apartment and talks to dead girls. It's an interesting performance in the sense that it's mostly anti-Denzel. He's a magnetic presence even when he's not trying to be, and he isn't trying to be here. But tamping down his charisma is a perfect character choice for someone as haunted as Joe Deacon. Rami Malek had his moments towards the end, and played the obsessive elements of his role very well. I thought he was miscast in other areas though. He just didn't come off as a straight arrow detective with a wife and 2.5 kids in the suburbs. I don't know if Malek will ever be fully convincing as a regular dude. It may be his physicality. The oversize eyes and the constant lip pursing thing he does that makes him look like Zoolander. But his stilted, staccato line delivery also enhances his natural weirdness. It's almost Walken-esque. Jared Leto was fun. He hammed it up a little, but never crossed the line and his character keeps you guessing. I actually think it might have been even better for the film if Leto and Malek had switched roles. Malek can play weirdos very well, but Leto though he plays weirdos a lot, can do straight arrows more convincingly than Malek. I dunno. Maybe the spectre of Seven makes it tough for other films in a similar mould to get a fair shake, but I liked this after a slow start, and thought John Lee Hancock did a fine job telling a more meditative and contemplative story than perhaps expected. 8/10 And everyone on this forum too, right? Wow, a whole 6 people (so far) on this forum don't like the movie. Whatever shall I do . Guess I need to change my opinion to assimilate with the very small herd.Bababababa....doing my best sheep impression.lol! I follow the beat of my own drum. No one else's. You worry too much about what other people think. You try a teensy bit too hard to do this agent provocateur stuff with me. I find it amusing and sorta pointless at the same time. Carry on
|
|
|
Post by mhynson27 on Jan 30, 2021 15:28:30 GMT
And everyone on this forum too, right? Wow, a whole 6 people (so far) on this forum don't like the movie. Whatever shall I do . Guess I need to change my opinion to assimilate with the very small herd.Bababababa....doing my best sheep impression.lol! I follow the beat of my own drum. No one else's. You worry too much about what other people think. You try a teensy bit too hard to do this agent provocateur stuff with me. I find it amusing and sorta pointless at the same time. Carry on You really need to stop taking everything so seriously and personally man. Twas a joke, lighten up dude!
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Jan 30, 2021 15:36:11 GMT
Wow, a whole 6 people (so far) on this forum don't like the movie. Whatever shall I do . Guess I need to change my opinion to assimilate with the very small herd.Bababababa....doing my best sheep impression.lol! I follow the beat of my own drum. No one else's. You worry too much about what other people think. You try a teensy bit too hard to do this agent provocateur stuff with me. I find it amusing and sorta pointless at the same time. Carry on You really need to stop taking everything so seriously and personally man. Twas a joke, lighten up dude! It's happened a few times already dude. Perhaps our senses of humour don't quite align. Something to keep in mind for future 'jokes'
|
|
Archie
Based
Eraserhead son or Inland Empire daughter?
Posts: 3,544
Likes: 4,241
|
Post by Archie on Jan 30, 2021 16:09:06 GMT
That was really bad. Why is Rami Malek a thing?
|
|
|
Post by futuretrunks on Jan 31, 2021 0:21:45 GMT
Okay, just finished it. I get what Hancock was trying to dip his hand in, but the plotting was pitiful (and for the record, I'm not a fan of Se7en, and think that film's story is garbage even though the visuals are impressive). This needed Shutter Island meets Hannibal (TV) levels of consistent ingenuity and credible psychology. I don't get the people dissing the acting though. Denzel/Rami/Leto were all good IMO. The "twist" is just too farcical. You need someone with far greater dramaturgical gifts and inventiveness to flesh it out.
|
|
sirchuck23
Based
Bad news dawg...you don't mind if I have some of your 300 dollar a glass shit there would ya?
Posts: 2,672
Likes: 4,772
|
Post by sirchuck23 on Jan 31, 2021 0:40:26 GMT
"The past becomes the future, becomes the past, becomes the future"
Initially saw this film on Friday night, then slept on it, and then re-watched it this afternoon and came away feeling satisfied with it as a time capsule, old school serial-killer sub-genre movie that subverts it in its ambiguous ending. A slow-burn movie that over the course of the film reveals how easily detectives can get obsessed with their work in being in the "angel" business for the victims whose violent crimes they're trying to solve and bring justice to.
I see why Denzel Washington was drawn to this role, being a well-known devout Christian, Washington seems to gravitate to these roles of world-weary men who have seen alot of shit over there life and either really have a struggle with their faith, or lost it entirely. Joe "Deke" Deacon is one of those men..a Kern County Deputy Sheriff who used to be one the best detectives with the L.A. Sheriff's Department until a murder investigation he's on slowly eats at him and he becomes obsessed with solving which culminates in one fateful night that alters his life forever. He suffers a major health issue, he loses his wife/family with a divorce, and is sort of disgraced out the LASD which in turn causes him to end up in Kern County. Washington is great in this role, playing Deke as a shy, reserved man whose a loner, tired, and very overweight. Grey-haired with bags under his eyes, this is not a "movie star" turn, but Washington surprisingly looking like a mid 60s year old man who is all encompassed with the past that has ruined his life and those unsolved cases from years ago that causes him to look at visions of his dead case victims all night. In some ways, it has remnants of his Roman J Israel character, but with someone alot more jaded and cynical than even Roman was.
Jared Leto turns in another great and creepy performance of an odd-ball character in Albert Sparma, a repair store employee who works in the neighborhood where the murders have taken place and is the primary suspect for the film. He gives the film a needed jolt of energy when he comes into the story near the halfway mark of the film. He plays it close to the edge but keeps it in control where you're trying to guess if he's just having fun yanking the detectives chain and getting "off" on it or if there is actually smoke there. That questions goes all the way to the divisive ending of the film and the ambiguity of it all.
Sad to say, as a fan of him and his rise over the past few years starting with Mr. Robot, I think Malek was miscast as Detective Jim Baxter as others have pointed out. Watching this film twice, all I could keep thinking was how it would look like with an actor like Chris Evans playing Detective Baxter. There you could see why he's the hotshot young detective rising quickly though the ranks. I'm sure with the trailer and seeing some of Malek's facial expressions and mannerism, you would be forgiven for thinking there could be something more sinister behind him than meets the eye. He has that eerie and odd presence about him. If you could move some of the chess pieces around in this film, Malek as Albert and an actor like Chris Evans in the Baxter role would've enhanced this film even more I think.
Hancock does a fine job directing the film, there's some nice cinematography by John Schwartzman that shows some parts of Los Angeles we haven't seen in one of the most filmed cities in Hollywood history. Hancock creates a great 1990 atmosphere for the time capsule, with the cars, the soundtrack, and shoutout for The Bonfire of the Vanities billboard in one shot in the film. Hancock is a good journeyman director, no particularly stylish, somewhat Eastwood-esque in a way. Would've been interesting if someone like Dan Gilroy would've directed this, would it have popped a little more visually since Gilroy does know a thing about obsessive protagonists and shooting LA at night.
Overall, I was satisfied with this film. It's always going to be a losing battle for serial killer films when compared in a post-Seven world, and every iteration of that sub-genre seen in countless other films, tv mini-series (True Detective), etc. but Hancock did well with making this film about history repeating itself, and how getting in the "angel" business can haunt decent men.
7.5/10
|
|
|
Post by Viced on Jan 31, 2021 0:40:53 GMT
This script would've been stale 31 years ago, lol.
There are a few decent sequences (Leto the highway magician, Denzel breaking into Leto's apartment, some parts of the ending) but overall this rotated between boring, been-there-done-that, and nonsensical. Dialogue is mostly mumbo-jumbo (and indiscernible when it came out of Malek's mouth) too.
Thought Denzel was bored and brought nothing to this outside of the scene with his ex-wife. He didn't look like he belonged in that deputy's uniform either (though I guess that was kind of the point)... but at least that wasn't as ridiculous as Leto wearing the same goddamn work jumpsuit for the entire movie and walking around like a gorilla. But at the same time, Leto's ridiculousness was the only thing that kept me awake. LOL'd bigtime at some of his lines... whether I was supposed to or not.
The ending could've been interesting if it weren't brought on by a laughable shovel to the face (and mostly lame movie before it). But the barrette thing was cool (even if I predicted it).
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Jan 31, 2021 4:51:25 GMT
"The past becomes the future, becomes the past, becomes the future" Initially saw this film on Friday night, then slept on it, and then re-watched it this afternoon and came away feeling satisfied with it as a time capsule, old school serial-killer sub-genre movie that subverts it in its ambiguous ending. A slow-burn movie that over the course of the film reveals how easily detectives can get obsessed with their work in being in the "angel" business for the victims whose violent crimes they're trying to solve and bring justice to. I see why Denzel Washington was drawn to this role, being a well-known devout Christian, Washington seems to gravitate to these roles of world-weary men who have seen alot of shit over there life and either really have a struggle with their faith, or lost it entirely. Joe "Deke" Deacon is one of those men..a Kern County Deputy Sheriff who used to be one the best detectives with the L.A. Sheriff's Department until a murder investigation he's on slowly eats at him and he becomes obsessed with solving which culminates in one fateful night that alters his life forever. He suffers a major health issue, he loses his wife/family with a divorce, and is sort of disgraced out the LASD which in turn causes him to end up in Kern County. Washington is great in this role, playing Deke as a shy, reserved man whose a loner, tired, and very overweight. Grey-haired with bags under his eyes, this is not a "movie star" turn, but Washington surprisingly looking like a mid 60s year old man who is all encompassed with the past that has ruined his life and those unsolved cases from years ago that causes him to look at visions of his dead case victims all night. In some ways, it has remnants of his Roman J Israel character, but with someone alot more jaded and cynical than even Roman was. Jared Leto turns in another great and creepy performance of an odd-ball character in Albert Sparma, a repair store employee who works in the neighborhood where the murders have taken place and is the primary suspect for the film. He gives the film a needed jolt of energy when he comes into the story near the halfway mark of the film. He plays it close to the edge but keeps it in control where you're trying to guess if he's just having fun yanking the detectives chain and getting "off" on it or if there is actually smoke there. That questions goes all the way to the divisive ending of the film and the ambiguity of it all. Sad to say, as a fan of him and his rise over the past few years starting with Mr. Robot, I think Malek was miscast as Detective Jim Baxter as others have pointed out. Watching this film twice, all I could keep thinking was how it would look like with an actor like Chris Evans playing Detective Baxter. There you could see why he's the hotshot young detective rising quickly though the ranks. I'm sure with the trailer and seeing some of Malek's facial expressions and mannerism, you would be forgiven for thinking there could be something more sinister behind him than meets the eye. He has that eerie and odd presence about him. If you could move some of the chess pieces around in this film, Malek as Albert and an actor like Chris Evans in the Baxter role would've enhanced this film even more I think. Hancock does a fine job directing the film, there's some nice cinematography by John Schwartzman that shows some parts of Los Angeles we haven't seen in one of the most filmed cities in Hollywood history. Hancock creates a great 1990 atmosphere for the time capsule, with the cars, the soundtrack, and shoutout for The Bonfire of the Vanities billboard in one shot in the film. Hancock is a good journeyman director, no particularly stylish, somewhat Eastwood-esque in a way. Would've been interesting if someone like Dan Gilroy would've directed this, would it have popped a little more visually since Gilroy does know a thing about obsessive protagonists and shooting LA at night. Overall, I was satisfied with this film. It's always going to be a losing battle for serial killer films when compared in a post-Seven world, and every iteration of that sub-genre seen in countless other films, tv mini-series (True Detective), etc. but Hancock did well with making this film about history repeating itself, and how getting in the "angel" business can haunt decent men. 7.5/10Good review. I've seen critics do this with good movies all the time, so this is unsurprising in a way (though to be fair, a some notable critics have stuck their neck out for the movie). They pile on them for what feels like very superficial reasons, then 10 years later people look back and wonder how did those movies get such mediocre or poor notices in the first place. Birth and Man On Fire spring immediately to mind. Those were movies I defended for years when they were popular to shit on because of those initial weak reviews, yet those film's quality and staying power have led many to reasses them significantly since they were released. Don't know if The Little Things will neccesarily have the staying power of those movies, but I know a good movie when I see one, and this feels like one of the most obvious "oh, this one will be getting fully reassessed in a decade or less" type films I've seen in a minute. The fact that by the end of it, I was thinking of Vertigo ( another film that got weak reviews and had to later be reassessed before being declared a great film) as a similar treatise in the depths of obsession is significant for me. Hancock was really saying something meaningful here that I think will resonate as time goes by. We'll see. Oh, and good call on the Chris Evans recast as Baxter. That really would have been an improvement, imho.
|
|
sirchuck23
Based
Bad news dawg...you don't mind if I have some of your 300 dollar a glass shit there would ya?
Posts: 2,672
Likes: 4,772
|
Post by sirchuck23 on Jan 31, 2021 5:11:22 GMT
"The past becomes the future, becomes the past, becomes the future" Initially saw this film on Friday night, then slept on it, and then re-watched it this afternoon and came away feeling satisfied with it as a time capsule, old school serial-killer sub-genre movie that subverts it in its ambiguous ending. A slow-burn movie that over the course of the film reveals how easily detectives can get obsessed with their work in being in the "angel" business for the victims whose violent crimes they're trying to solve and bring justice to. I see why Denzel Washington was drawn to this role, being a well-known devout Christian, Washington seems to gravitate to these roles of world-weary men who have seen alot of shit over there life and either really have a struggle with their faith, or lost it entirely. Joe "Deke" Deacon is one of those men..a Kern County Deputy Sheriff who used to be one the best detectives with the L.A. Sheriff's Department until a murder investigation he's on slowly eats at him and he becomes obsessed with solving which culminates in one fateful night that alters his life forever. He suffers a major health issue, he loses his wife/family with a divorce, and is sort of disgraced out the LASD which in turn causes him to end up in Kern County. Washington is great in this role, playing Deke as a shy, reserved man whose a loner, tired, and very overweight. Grey-haired with bags under his eyes, this is not a "movie star" turn, but Washington surprisingly looking like a mid 60s year old man who is all encompassed with the past that has ruined his life and those unsolved cases from years ago that causes him to look at visions of his dead case victims all night. In some ways, it has remnants of his Roman J Israel character, but with someone alot more jaded and cynical than even Roman was. Jared Leto turns in another great and creepy performance of an odd-ball character in Albert Sparma, a repair store employee who works in the neighborhood where the murders have taken place and is the primary suspect for the film. He gives the film a needed jolt of energy when he comes into the story near the halfway mark of the film. He plays it close to the edge but keeps it in control where you're trying to guess if he's just having fun yanking the detectives chain and getting "off" on it or if there is actually smoke there. That questions goes all the way to the divisive ending of the film and the ambiguity of it all. Sad to say, as a fan of him and his rise over the past few years starting with Mr. Robot, I think Malek was miscast as Detective Jim Baxter as others have pointed out. Watching this film twice, all I could keep thinking was how it would look like with an actor like Chris Evans playing Detective Baxter. There you could see why he's the hotshot young detective rising quickly though the ranks. I'm sure with the trailer and seeing some of Malek's facial expressions and mannerism, you would be forgiven for thinking there could be something more sinister behind him than meets the eye. He has that eerie and odd presence about him. If you could move some of the chess pieces around in this film, Malek as Albert and an actor like Chris Evans in the Baxter role would've enhanced this film even more I think. Hancock does a fine job directing the film, there's some nice cinematography by John Schwartzman that shows some parts of Los Angeles we haven't seen in one of the most filmed cities in Hollywood history. Hancock creates a great 1990 atmosphere for the time capsule, with the cars, the soundtrack, and shoutout for The Bonfire of the Vanities billboard in one shot in the film. Hancock is a good journeyman director, no particularly stylish, somewhat Eastwood-esque in a way. Would've been interesting if someone like Dan Gilroy would've directed this, would it have popped a little more visually since Gilroy does know a thing about obsessive protagonists and shooting LA at night. Overall, I was satisfied with this film. It's always going to be a losing battle for serial killer films when compared in a post-Seven world, and every iteration of that sub-genre seen in countless other films, tv mini-series (True Detective), etc. but Hancock did well with making this film about history repeating itself, and how getting in the "angel" business can haunt decent men. 7.5/10Good review. I've seen critics do this with good movies all the time, so this is unsurprising in a way (though to be fair, a some notable critics have stuck their neck out for the movie). They pile on them for what feels like very superficial reasons, then 10 years later people look back and wonder how did those movies get such mediocre or poor notices in the first place. Birth and Man On Fire spring immediately to mind. Those were movies I defended for years when they were popular to shit on because of those initial weak reviews, yet those film's quality and staying power have led many to reasses them significantly since they were released. Don't know if The Little Things will neccesarily have the staying power of those movies, but I know a good movie when I see one, and this feels like one of the most obvious "oh, this one will be getting fully reassessed in a decade or less" type films I've seen in a minute. The fact that by the end of it, I was thinking of Vertigo ( another film that got weak reviews and had to later be reassessed before being declared a great film) as a similar treatise in the depths of obsession is significant for me. Hancock was really saying something meaningful here that I think will resonate as time goes by. We'll see. Oh, and good call on the Chris Evans recast as Baxter. That really would have been an improvement, imho. Indeed, unfortunately since every one of these serial killer movies get compared to Se7en and what Fincher did with that, a lot of these films are going to be behind the 8-ball. True Detective Season 1 worked because it was using the sub-genre to talk about a whole slate of themes from human nature, to the universe, God, cults and cult rituals, symbolisms, the whole deal. Couldn’t really recapture that magic for Season 2 or 3. Plus the ending of something like Se7en kind of ruined because now audiences expect a big payoff like that and The Little Things in a way was the exact opposite which is why I can see a lot of people being disappointed by it. What I took from it was how that job and the obsession could lead someone down a rabbit hole to doing a reprehensible action. You see that with the Baxter character. That’s what I took from that anyway after a couple of watches. Will be curious to see how it’s looked at in the coming years. Critics were a lot harsher on Man on Fire and that grew to become one of Denzel’s seminal films and performances. So it’ll be interesting.
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Jan 31, 2021 5:18:44 GMT
Good review. I've seen critics do this with good movies all the time, so this is unsurprising in a way (though to be fair, a some notable critics have stuck their neck out for the movie). They pile on them for what feels like very superficial reasons, then 10 years later people look back and wonder how did those movies get such mediocre or poor notices in the first place. Birth and Man On Fire spring immediately to mind. Those were movies I defended for years when they were popular to shit on because of those initial weak reviews, yet those film's quality and staying power have led many to reasses them significantly since they were released. Don't know if The Little Things will neccesarily have the staying power of those movies, but I know a good movie when I see one, and this feels like one of the most obvious "oh, this one will be getting fully reassessed in a decade or less" type films I've seen in a minute. The fact that by the end of it, I was thinking of Vertigo ( another film that got weak reviews and had to later be reassessed before being declared a great film) as a similar treatise in the depths of obsession is significant for me. Hancock was really saying something meaningful here that I think will resonate as time goes by. We'll see. Oh, and good call on the Chris Evans recast as Baxter. That really would have been an improvement, imho. Indeed, unfortunately since every one of these serial killer movies get compared to Se7en and what Fincher did with that, a lot of these films are going to be behind the 8-ball. True Detective Season 1 worked because it was using the sub-genre to talk about a whole slate of themes from human nature, to the universe, God, cults and cult rituals, symbolisms, the whole deal. Couldn’t really recapture that magic for Season 2 or 3. Plus the ending of something like Se7en kind of ruined because now audiences expect a big payoff like that and The Little Things in a way was the exact opposite which is why I can see a lot of people being disappointed by it. What I took from it was how that job and the obsession could lead someone down a rabbit hole to doing a reprehensible action. You see that with the Baxter character. That’s what I took from that anyway after a couple of watches. Will be curious to see how it’s looked at in the coming years. Critics were a lot harsher on Man on Fire and that grew to become one of Denzel’s seminal films and performances. So it’ll be interesting. Yeah...what's interesting (for me anyway) is the whole serial killer thing is a Macguffin. This movie doesn't give a flying fuck about serial killers, but it's the hook that gets you into the film's real concern about obsession and the roads it can take you down.
|
|
sirchuck23
Based
Bad news dawg...you don't mind if I have some of your 300 dollar a glass shit there would ya?
Posts: 2,672
Likes: 4,772
|
Post by sirchuck23 on Jan 31, 2021 5:24:14 GMT
Indeed, unfortunately since every one of these serial killer movies get compared to Se7en and what Fincher did with that, a lot of these films are going to be behind the 8-ball. True Detective Season 1 worked because it was using the sub-genre to talk about a whole slate of themes from human nature, to the universe, God, cults and cult rituals, symbolisms, the whole deal. Couldn’t really recapture that magic for Season 2 or 3. Plus the ending of something like Se7en kind of ruined because now audiences expect a big payoff like that and The Little Things in a way was the exact opposite which is why I can see a lot of people being disappointed by it. What I took from it was how that job and the obsession could lead someone down a rabbit hole to doing a reprehensible action. You see that with the Baxter character. That’s what I took from that anyway after a couple of watches. Will be curious to see how it’s looked at in the coming years. Critics were a lot harsher on Man on Fire and that grew to become one of Denzel’s seminal films and performances. So it’ll be interesting. Yeah...what's interesting (for me anyway) is the whole serial killer thing is a Macguffin. This movie doesn't give a flying fuck about serial killers, but it's the hook that gets you into the film's real concern about obsession and the roads it can take you down. Exactly..which is why Deke did what he did in the final act. He saw himself in Baxter going down that same road he went and didn’t want that for him. Brings into context more the scene of Baxter having Deke over at his house for breakfast and meeting his wife and kids. Didn’t want for him to lose that.
|
|
|
Post by therealcomicman117 on Jan 31, 2021 6:22:17 GMT
Very mixed in general on the movie, although I probably enjoyed aspects about it more than most. I like the look of the movie, and Denzel is solidly great as ever, he has some terrific bits of eye moment acting throughout, and I even enjoyed Leto's hammy acting, but I think the films biggest strength is also its biggest liability. The script very much feels like it's out of time, with nary a modern pass made to it. It might have been more effective had it been made in the 90's, when serial killer thrillers of that ilk were a thing.
I will say however, I am a bit curious to revisit the film later. There are some interesting aspects involving how they approach the killer, I'm just not sure if the final product works entirely.
|
|
|
Post by jakesully on Jan 31, 2021 17:44:15 GMT
Maybe its because I am a sucker for serial killer films but I was pretty entertained by this one. Wish it featured more Leto though.
Its no where near in the same ball park as Se7en, Zodiac or Silence of the Lambs imo but it was good entertainment for me at least.
solid 7/10
|
|
|
Post by Pittsnogle_Goggins on Jan 31, 2021 20:25:07 GMT
|
|
|
Post by JangoB on Jan 31, 2021 23:58:49 GMT
Well, nice to realize that I woke up on the right side of the bed ( ), because I enjoyed the movie. It's nowhere near the greater examples of the crime procedural genre but I think it's an undoubtedly solid one. Denzel is wonderful in the main role, and I'm very happy that in between all the scenes of him driving there were enough moments where he got to bite into his character and do his thing, upon which he, in my opinion, fully delivered. Malek was okay - his offbeat nature seems to have at least brought something different to what could've been played as a typical goody-two-shoes kind of character. And I'm very surprised to say that I liked Jared Leto here. I fully expected him to totally sink the ship as I find him and his try-hard acting incredibly annoying, but I found myself really enjoying what he brought to the table here. I think he created a fun and memorable creep. But Denzel schools them both, of course. Apart from just finding the movie engaging, I did very much appreciate where it led. One expects these movies to end with some kind of a twist, or with a killer reveal or something, but this one's twist is that it shifts focus from an investigation itself to the characters' inner abyss. As I liked the movie, to me the real twist of it was that by the end the mystery remaining unsolved just didn't matter to me because by then I was caught up in the darkness that invaded the characters' souls. The way the final beats invite us to rethink our positions on the leading characters, reassess them and realize that the demons within them are as dark as the mystery itself was rather interesting to me. But again, for all of that to work one has to be on board with the film in general up to that point. I can't see this ending winning folks over if by then the movie did nothing for them. I personally did quite enjoy how it pulled the rug of sympathies from under those characters. I think it's cool that the twist here is not some gotcha shocker but instead is fully character-based.
|
|