Contemporary film generally sucks because it's near pure fluff. This is a prime example of that "Hollow" feeling.
Here's my breakdown:
STORY: Narrated stories are often poorly told stories, and I suspect because the writer is "writing in" his / her own self trying to guide us through. It rarely works, and most often is more distracting than assisting, and it often smacks of a story that simply lacks quality. Clearly, that is the case here.
These characters are so clean, tidy, and cliched to the nth degree ... it's just a hollow, empty story.
ACTING: I would have preferred no-name actors to this star-studded cavalcade of high-paid cliches.
ENTERTAINMENT: Low value
TEMPO: Fine
CINEMATOGRAPHY: OK, but it's so clean that it feels fake
MUSIC / SOUND: OK
DIRECTING / WRITING: Director: (Here I go repeating myself again ... ) Directing is a skill, but writing is a separate skill. Doing both in a film requires exceptional skills, and those qualities are rare. Hanson does not possess both.
Out of Hanson's 20 films (directing) I see nothing that could be recommended. This exemplifies why.
Writers: On the other hand, Helgeland wrote "Man on Fire" (2004) which I thought was a reasonably good story.
He also wrote some other work that was OK, just not that great.
Is it a good film? No, it's empty
Should you watch this once? No
Rating: 3.0.
Here's my breakdown:
STORY: Narrated stories are often poorly told stories, and I suspect because the writer is "writing in" his / her own self trying to guide us through. It rarely works, and most often is more distracting than assisting, and it often smacks of a story that simply lacks quality. Clearly, that is the case here.
These characters are so clean, tidy, and cliched to the nth degree ... it's just a hollow, empty story.
ACTING: I would have preferred no-name actors to this star-studded cavalcade of high-paid cliches.
ENTERTAINMENT: Low value
TEMPO: Fine
CINEMATOGRAPHY: OK, but it's so clean that it feels fake
MUSIC / SOUND: OK
DIRECTING / WRITING: Director: (Here I go repeating myself again ... ) Directing is a skill, but writing is a separate skill. Doing both in a film requires exceptional skills, and those qualities are rare. Hanson does not possess both.
Out of Hanson's 20 films (directing) I see nothing that could be recommended. This exemplifies why.
Writers: On the other hand, Helgeland wrote "Man on Fire" (2004) which I thought was a reasonably good story.
He also wrote some other work that was OK, just not that great.
Is it a good film? No, it's empty
Should you watch this once? No
Rating: 3.0.