MovieChat Forums > Angel Heart (1987) Discussion > this is a mediocre movie...who agrees wi...

this is a mediocre movie...who agrees with me?


i did not find the movie such good,i expected it to be better...

firstly,the scenario is kinda unbelievable,generally it was not boring but in some parts the movie was pushed too far...the directing was not so "electrifying" for a thriller/horror movie...

i gave the movie a 6/10...(maybe i would rate it for 5,5 or smt)

and i was convinced much more from "devils advocate" which had more suspense and seemed to be much more interesting....and pacino scared me much more than de niro as the devil....

anyway.its just my oponion,and i wanted to share it with you,cause yesterday when i finished the movie i just kinda felt un-satisfied....

JOHN

reply

[deleted]

amen pastor john

but i have to say .. harrys threads were extremely cool
throughout if a little down-at-heel and angel heart ...
coming as it did right before rourke pulled off a super
-sleazy henry chinaski in the barbet shroeder / charles
bukowski mayhem of barfly , im sure influenced a lot of
young men back then to shuffle a little and favor light
-weight suits in summer and 50s overcoats in winter ...
__________________
it frequently gets
too -weird- for me
RIP HST 1937..2005

reply

It slowed down in the middle. The script could have been fine tuned a little, but I certainly wouldn't call "Angel Heart" a mediocre film!





If you love and support Michael Jackson 100%, copy & paste this into your signature. We love MJ!

reply

The film was made better than what it was on paper because of its actors.

"I think you and I are destined to do this forever."
Rest In Peace Heath. 1/22/08

reply

Angel Heart & Devil's Advocate are too very different films and both extremely underrated. Pacino & DeNiro were incredible in their roles but to people that think Reeves wasn't good in TDA, must've missed the ENTIRE second half of the film. That scene where he's trying to save Mary Ann and the look on his face as he's wailing and crying uncontrollably. Are you kidding, LOL? That's the BEST I've ever seen from him, besides The Gift. People need to forget Bill & Ted and Johnny Mnenomic, Keanu actually can act, the scene where he yells at Pacino: "Damn it!! WHAT DID YOU DO TO MY WIFE?!" Great performance. For Mickey, his performance was Oscar worthy, it's a damn shame he didn't get one for this. Angel Heart is hands down the absolute best acting I've seen from Rourke, (not counting that cameo in The Pledge)my God, the end scene when he finds out the truth and how DeNiro plays it so calmly and then slowly showing his anger is unbelievable. Also I can't understand how some people think TDA was predictable, did you honestly know beforehand that Lomax's friend was really Milton the whole time? or that the ENTIRE film was a dream? or that he was going to kill himself at the end? or the thing with Craig T. Nelson, I mean, these two films were incredibly well done with exceptional acting, both had great endings. I thought Charlize was very good in there, her acting as she starts to lose it was phenomenal, near the end of the film, I was truly afraid for her when Eddie wasn't around. In AH, I was heartbroken for Angel when I saw the ending, I literally couldn't believe it, that was a huge shock, one thing I will say about the both of these films is that there's so many twists in each of their climaxes.

Why do some of you think Pacino was over the top? He was pretty laid back until the ending and even then it was chilling. Also, Stigmata & End of Days weren't bad either, I believe that they were very underrated films as well, probably not as good as AH or TDA but I think EOD is probably best Arnie's best dramatic role because he's not playing an unstoppable cyborg or a commando, he's playing a human that can be hurt, his acting when he sees his daughter's toy or his acting at the end, wow, I didn't expect that from Arnold to be honest with uou. Now that being said EOD is a very underrated film but I think for some reason, films like that, Angel Heart & Devil's Advocate aren't as well known, I guess probably for the obvious biblical overtones, there's great acting in all of them. I don't see why some fans of AH are downing TDA and fans of TDA are putting down AH. They're two very different films, ten years apart but exceptional in their own ways. This is just my opinion but I think these movies are great, I watched them all the time.

Keanu Reeves in Devil's Advocate (0:01-4:14) (warning there are spoilers here)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qUACmokzOK8&feature=related



"I am the ultimate badass, you do not wanna `*beep*` wit' me!" Hudson in Aliens.

reply

[deleted]

The book is amazing. I read it years ago and I'm looking for a copy.

reply

The Devil's Advocate wasn't a dream. There were alternate realities. Apparently all with the same result?

reply

to the threadstarter:



STFU

reply

I quot ......ANY moron who even suggest that ANGEL HEART is mediorce needs to banned from watching movies

reply

I think it´s better than just mediocre, but certainly not the kinda masterpiece some are making it out to be as the fusion of noir and supernatural horror often feels rather uneasy & artificial. It´s nothing particularly original either despite Parker´s efforts to play the conclusion as if it were some earth shattering revelation and have Rourke resort to some rather unconvincing overacting. A lot of the time one can´t help getting the impression the film´s more concerned with the decorative element, the period stylistics, than he was with the story that was told against these expressionistic lanscapes (although, one must admit, the overkill didn´t nearly reach the ludicrous heights of Shutter Island - a film to which Angel Heart bears a close resemblence. It is, however, no less heavy handed than the Scorsese´s piece of muck when it comes to dropping clues about the "actual" situation at hand). Also, a lot of the shock tactics come across as sensationalistic more than anything else.

But of course it IS pretty to look at - albeit a bit in the kitschy kind of way - and the suspense never really slackens throughout; as old hat the film may seem, one can´t deny it´s outstandingly crafted. De Niro as The Devil was fairly amusing, too, although nowhere near as riotously entertaining as Pacino´s version of The Horned One in (the otherwise awful) Devil´s Advocate. I guess it can be taken semi-seriously at least. 7-7,5/10.




"facts are stupid things" - Ronald Reagan

reply

yeh, I thought the movie was pretty boring and not scary at all too. The Story and acting was ok though, but watching the movie itself bores the hell out of me. (no pun intended)

4/10

reply

The difference for me is that before watching Devils Advocate I knew that Pacino was the Devil and had a pretty decent idea what was going to happen in it just by seeing 1 ad. It was probably going to be watchable but it wasn't going to have me thinking about it the next day or strongly recommending it to mates.

Was only a kid when Angel Heart came out and seen it maybe 93. I had no idea the Devil would make an appearance and was drawn into the complex story and characters thinking it was a regular detective type show. Since then I have watched it many times and bought the original book, something I have never did in that order. I get an automated email reply every now and again, pop back on here and still manage to learn something new.

Was it obvious at the time of release that DeNiro was playing the Devil? It obviously was a massive plus not knowing.

Either way I must disagree and think AH is head and shoulders over DA and can some it up with a quote from the Devil in each film, a hint each time to the lead character as to who he really is.

"You know, some religions think that the egg is the symbol of the soul, did you know that?"

verses

"Speak of the Devil, HA HA HA!"

reply