I'll watch anything Liam Neeson is in, and I'm not afraid to say if something he worked on, is bad.
However, I love period pieces, and I'm fascinated by Hollywood in the 1930's and 1940's.
The acting was good. Liam Neeson was good. Diane Kruger was good. Jessica Lange was very charming.
Interesting story. Hollywood is full of secrets and sins, and this could be just the tip of the iceberg of what Hollywood is capable of, and what it has done.
> I'm not afraid to say if something he worked on, is bad.
Yeah, but you don't get compensated for it. ;-)
Any movie that has to rely on using used characters that are generations old for buzz is not going to be good. Saw some clips of this as well as Neeson talking about it ... just more filler.
All works of art, or claimed works of art are the same, eh? Well, we can disagree on that. Sad that you would think so. Some things have meaning or messages that are universal or subversive, and other things are BS filler to me.
What is your favorite Liam Neeson movie? I wanna watch this just because he is in it as well. My favorite movie of his is The Grey, but there are several I enjoy as well. I would choose A Walk Among the Tombstones because of the private eye aspect and some characters in it, but the disturbing nature of the villains is too much for me at times.
If this is a private eye movie of Liam Neeson I can say im in!
I just saw it, and I agree Heisenberg. It's a 3/5 star film. Not bad. Not great. Just middling.
A lot of cliches and a few plot angles that I didn't care for (i.e. SPOILER: the kidnap-rape-murder of the disappeared man's half-sister, and the turgid reference to the femme fatale's daddy's suicide/the 'black dog, plus Danny Huston playing yet another telegraphed big bad businessman type; honestly, the biggest surprise is when he *isn't* cast as the bad guy in something), as well as a good few cliches that I expected and I'm pleased they ended up avoiding (at one stage I thought we were going to get another tired sob story about Clare Cavendish being groomed/molested by the Ambassador as a child, but instead it simply turned out *she* was the one coming on to *him* since she had a fetish for older men). The reference to the Maltese Falcon and the Ark of the Covenant, although technically valid, was arguably an anachronistic nod to films that postdated 1939, and referring to a Black man as 'well-spoken' is a bit icky (however well-intentioned).
And you're 100% right about Neeson. Without having to do very much, he's incredibly watchable in *everything* he does, especially in this, where he was the one character who wasn't speaking in riddles (though, to be fair, there was a few hardboiled dialogue gems among the other characters), and Jordan's a pro, and almost always makes polished, good-looking films with decent production values, even though there are times when one wishes he'd push himself a little more (as he did during the 80s/90s, with The Company of Wolves, Mona Lisa, The Crying Game, The Interview with a Vampire, Michael Collins, and even the underrated High Spirits and We're No Angels).
I cannot stand Danny Huston. "Here's the bad guy". I thought exactly what you said, it would be a surprise if he is not the bad guy this time. And he is always playing the same fucking bad guy in the same fucking way.
Had a hard time getting through it. It's a wonderfully made movie, felt very period correct, with lots of great acting from all involved. And yet I found the whole thing rather charmless and un-engaging. And I think the problem was Neeson. He just didn't have any chemistry with the rest of the cast. This whole movie is mostly him talking one on one with a revolving door of different folks as he works the case and it just really falls flat. He don't have whatever that Humphrey Bogart energy was to carry a picture like this. I also feel the movie needed a f ton more cigarette smoking. EVERYBODY was chainsmoking back then.
Humphrey Bogart is obviously on another planet compared to Neeson.
But I think they wanted to go this direction, with a more realistic and no nonsense Marlowe than Bogart's gritty, dirty and charming one.
Also, what can you do? Neeson is Neeson, he has his strenght and weakness. Gotta work with what you've got.