Almost Perfect


The director should've hired a cinematographer instead of shooting the thing himself -- perhaps it would've benefited from some clearer framing and more composed shots. This could've honestly been The Pianist of this decade, but the camera-work was a bit boring and shaky at times. The assasination and final shoot-out notwithstanding, of course. Those two sequences were handled with aplomb and had my theater spellbound.

Dorman and Murphy KILLED it. Loved the accents, despite what you erudite pompous droolers spew on here. No, they shouldn't be speaking Czech with subtitled. This is an English movie, with actors who speak English. No, they shouldn't have spoken with American accents -- which American accent? Boston? Philadelphia? The New Orleans YAT dialect? Redondo Beach burnt-out stoner house painter? Seriously! It makes complete sense that they spoke with these accents. You guys need to SHUT THE F456 up like a Rhino's a$$ loose at the zoo.


Good romantic chemistry -- I even felt Cillian's relationship could've been fleshed out some more (hint hint). The Germans were despicable, and the torture scene visceral. I loved this movie.

I'm also a sucker for nazi *beep* in general. I LOVE SEEING NAZIS get killed, and I'm not even Jewish. Or catholic or gypsy. I'm a quarter Armenian which might explain my aversion to genocide (beyond a baseline moral level).

I think the director could've taken more creative license with the assassination scene and killed more innocent bystanders. Would've hurt more.

But yeah. Camerawork needed to be more dynamic, the script could've used a punch-up at parts to keep up the pace (including some humor), but all-in-all a solid world war II nazi flick.

reply

Exactly! Sean should have hired the camera man even Critic given bad reviews because of camera work. No doubt acting wise this movie is brilliant.

reply

I am no expert, of course but I have to agree with your claim on the camera shots. I am a BIG fan of the Director being involved in as much stuff as possible. Depending on the job of course. If the Director is also the creator, thats when I am all about the Director playing a big role aside from sottinf behind the equipment and calling things out to the actors. But some balance must be considered. Cinemetography is some amazing and the Director can achieve that him or herself. From what I saw here, it wasnt that he was doing it himself, it was that he clearly didnt use a trolly or a tripod. Handheld shots are great wjen necessary and when you have a good ebough camera to not show the shakiness. I filmed a scene once holding the camera. I wanted a shot that was too difficult to get with a trolly or tripod. And so I held the camera tightly, to ensure it didnt shake and held it as still as possible. I achieved my goal. It all depends on the Director's vision, style, and mentality to control the camera. I also had a freaking bad a$$ expensive camera. So the shakiness was to its minimum. Now, I would assume they can afford nore expensive equipment then me, so thr shaky-cam mightx've been deliberate. Which, I am NOT a fan of. I hate shaky-cam. Mainly because it does its job in war-like movies like this, but no matter whay kind of movie it is... it doesn't sit well in theaters. The screen is too big and too overwhelming, at least in my opinion. I first experienced the Shaky-Cam when I took my daughter to see The Hunger Games. I thought, I was going to have a seizure in the theater. And for some reason children think its super cool to sit in the way front of the theater, where you have to crank your neck, and try not to blink lol. Kids dont get it until they're old and blind as well as a bad neck cramp. Lol. So anyways, the shaky-can might not be as overwhelming watching the film in your living room. When we bought The Hunger Games on BluRay I realized the shaky-cam didn't bother me as nearly as much, It's the big screeb that just kills you. Lol.

reply