The remake of Ocean's 11 is undoubtedly a success, and I would say it is a fine movie too. This is the original, just as packed with stars, if not even more, than the new. So how does it stand up?
Well, so-so. It doesn't have the same convoluted multi-layer plot as the new, but that isn't really expected. 1960 were a less high-tech age so both casinos and robbers were more low-tech. Granted that, the robbery itself is OK as it is, a disciplined, super-synchronized multi-hit.
The women are in every way more pleasant than in the new. In the new, Julia Roberts has disturbing traces of bad facial surgery, while this movie has both the (often considerable) beauty and talent of no less than four more or less leading ladies: Angie Dickinson, Patrice Wymore, Shirley MacLaine and, not least, Ilka Chase (as Mrs Restes, Jimmy's mother). Unfortunately, Dickinson's and Wymore's parts are pretty superfluous, leading nowhere, and MacLaine's part is just a funny (although relatively long) cameo, which leaves Mrs Restes as the only female part that in truly integrated in the story and thereby also the one who has the most acting to do. Still, MacLaine's "tipsy girl" is the one you will remember the most.
But what I am trying to say is that I found Roberts to be a burden for the new movie, since she is supposed to be the super beautiful woman that the hero wants, while she would have been better cast in some totally different part. (As the villain, for example!) In this movie, however, the women really are super beautiful... but nobody really cares. Hey, that's Angie Dickinson and Shirley MacLaine, looking their best! So both movies comes down wrong on the point of beautiful women.
From a modern point of view, both movies make the sin of treating women more or less as decorations, but this one does have Mrs Restes which helps in that respect.
I must note that Akim Tamiroff (Acebos) is as much a burden for this movie. He is constantly overacting, and doing that in a static way, repeating the same whining over and over. Other actors are acting relatively well although few make much impression. (I guess Romero and Chase are the strongest ones.)
The movie starts a bit slow, but so does the remake. No big difference there. Both work to establish the characters, building up.
I like how Duke Santos (Cesar Romero) manages to track down the gang, and I think that is why the ending makes sense; the gang improvises a quick solution when the heat gets worse. The ending is totally different in the two movies. I don't want to spoil them, but I can say that I don't find the one here to be "wrong". Both are good.
So, overall, an enjoyable but not overly impressing movie, and yes, I do like the remake better. But this wasn't worthless.
Well, so-so. It doesn't have the same convoluted multi-layer plot as the new, but that isn't really expected. 1960 were a less high-tech age so both casinos and robbers were more low-tech. Granted that, the robbery itself is OK as it is, a disciplined, super-synchronized multi-hit.
The women are in every way more pleasant than in the new. In the new, Julia Roberts has disturbing traces of bad facial surgery, while this movie has both the (often considerable) beauty and talent of no less than four more or less leading ladies: Angie Dickinson, Patrice Wymore, Shirley MacLaine and, not least, Ilka Chase (as Mrs Restes, Jimmy's mother). Unfortunately, Dickinson's and Wymore's parts are pretty superfluous, leading nowhere, and MacLaine's part is just a funny (although relatively long) cameo, which leaves Mrs Restes as the only female part that in truly integrated in the story and thereby also the one who has the most acting to do. Still, MacLaine's "tipsy girl" is the one you will remember the most.
But what I am trying to say is that I found Roberts to be a burden for the new movie, since she is supposed to be the super beautiful woman that the hero wants, while she would have been better cast in some totally different part. (As the villain, for example!) In this movie, however, the women really are super beautiful... but nobody really cares. Hey, that's Angie Dickinson and Shirley MacLaine, looking their best! So both movies comes down wrong on the point of beautiful women.
From a modern point of view, both movies make the sin of treating women more or less as decorations, but this one does have Mrs Restes which helps in that respect.
I must note that Akim Tamiroff (Acebos) is as much a burden for this movie. He is constantly overacting, and doing that in a static way, repeating the same whining over and over. Other actors are acting relatively well although few make much impression. (I guess Romero and Chase are the strongest ones.)
The movie starts a bit slow, but so does the remake. No big difference there. Both work to establish the characters, building up.
I like how Duke Santos (Cesar Romero) manages to track down the gang, and I think that is why the ending makes sense; the gang improvises a quick solution when the heat gets worse. The ending is totally different in the two movies. I don't want to spoil them, but I can say that I don't find the one here to be "wrong". Both are good.
So, overall, an enjoyable but not overly impressing movie, and yes, I do like the remake better. But this wasn't worthless.