Showing posts with label luis guzmán. Show all posts
Showing posts with label luis guzmán. Show all posts

Sunday, 14 May 2023

Netflix And Chill: Traffic (2000)

Based on a TV series that I sadly never saw (yet), Traffic is another excellent ensemble film from Steven Soderbergh that allows him to play to his strengths aka his ability to marry the right cast to an intelligent script and present everything in a way that is both grounded and also cine-literate and full of memorable moments.

In case you couldn't guess from the title, Traffic is all about the drug trade, showing how it affects a number of key figures in both America and Mexico. Danger and death are never too far from people on the front line (played by the likes of Benicio Del Toro, Don Cheadle, and Luis Guzmán), getting a proper handle on the situation may prove too difficult for someone making moves politically (Michael Douglas), and those high up the "food chain" (such as characters played by Thomas Milian and Steven Bauer) might prove impossible to bring back down to within reaching distance of the not-so-long arms of the law.

Everyone I have just mentioned does a great job here, but the highlights are undoubtedly, for me, Del Toro, Douglas, and Catherine Zeta-Jones (playing the wife of a businessman arrested for drug dealing). Cheadle and Guzmán work brilliantly together, and they have a number of scenes with the brilliant Miguel Ferrer, who surprises nobody by turning up onscreen to spend some time being . . . brilliant. Erika Christensen has the job of showing how drugs can easily take hold of the kids, helped along by her unfortunate association with a young sleazebag played by Topher Grace. Some characters may figure more prominently than others, but everyone plays their part in showing the risks and rewards, and the outward ripple effect, of the drug supply chain.

Soderbergh has a savvy script by Stephen Gaghan to work with, and he treats it well. It may seem like an obvious gimmick to give the differing story strands a basic kind of colour coding, but it certainly helps to keep viewers orientated as we jump from one scenario to another, looking out for important developments and points of interconnection (not necessarily in the standard narratives or character moments, but more often in the methodology and the shaping of spiderwebbing plans).

Despite all of the positives on display here, Traffic could have easily failed if it had at any point started to feel like some piece of scaremongering or propaganda. Thanks to Gaghan and Soderbergh, it never does. There's one hard truth at the heart of this, and it's not one that everyone will appreciate. The war on drugs was never won, and probably never will be. A profitable drug economy is like a viral video of some majorly embarrassing incident. No matter how much people hope it will disappear, it's only going to spread and worm into the global consciousness of anyone who gets wind of it.

One or two scenes in the third act notwithstanding, bits of melodrama that feel unnecessary and a bit overdone, this is a strong contender for Soderbergh's finest film, and those brief moments aren't enough to stop it from being something I consider pretty perfect. I'd even say that it's a film vying for a very high position in the respective filmographies of every main cast member. Smart, thrilling, equal parts thought-provoking and entertaining, Traffic is a film that everyone should watch at least once. And I'm sure many will make time for repeat viewings.

10/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing.
It also costs nothing to like/subscribe to the YouTube channel attached to the podcast I am part of - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCErkxBO0xds5qd_rhjFgDmA
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews

Monday, 1 May 2023

Mubi Monday: The Limey (1999)

A very familiar tale of a tough crook visiting somewhere to avenge the death of a young loved one (it's impossible to watch The Limey without feeling that it's under the large shadow cast by Get Carter for most of the runtime), this stands out from many other modern gangster movies for three main reasons. There's the script by Lem Dobbs, the direction by Steven Soderbergh, and, arguably the most important component, a central role for Terence Stamp that allows the film-makers to reference his past via a few well-chosen film clips from the earlier years of his filmography.

Stamp plays Wilson, an Englishman who turns up in L.A. to find the man he figures is responsible for the death of his daughter (Melissa George, shown in flashback, in a non-speaking role). He befriends Ed (Luis Guzmán) and Elaine (Lesley Ann Warren), two people who knew his daughter while she was living in that area, and starts to doggedly pursue a man named Valentine (Peter Fonda). It's pretty clear to him that Valentine caused the death of his daughter, but Valentine is always being protected, by a number of armed goons, as well as his right hand man/head of security (Avery, played by Barry Newman). It soon becomes clear that there may not be enough protection available to him though, Wilson is moving ever closer to him like an unstoppable force.

Although I used to own this movie a few years ago, I never got myself in the mood to sit down and watch the thing. As controversial a statement as it may be, I have never been the biggest fan of Stamp (his wonderfully menacing, and yet also slightly camp, turn as General Zod aside). I haven't actually seen many of his films though, including Poor Cow (which is the film used here to show Stamp in his youth). I should probably make time for Billy Budd,  The Collector, and something like The Mind Of Mr. Soames (especially after enjoying his mesmerising turn in Theorem, which I coincidentally caught on the same day I watched this). Anyway, as everyone else already knows, Stamp certainly has something that makes him very watchable onscreen, and he's a superb choice for the lead role here, even if his performance seems to border on the parody at times, in terms of his full-on cockney speaking style that some other characters struggle to decipher.

As well as Stamp, you get superb supporting turns from Guzmán, Warren, and Newman, as well as one superb scene for the brilliant Bill Duke. George is shown in dreamy visions, and I always like to see her onscreen (although it would have been nice to have more of her, despite her probably being saved from trying to attempt a cockney accent). Amelia Heinle is also a welcome presence, playing Adhara (a new female companion spending time with Valentine). The weak link is Fonda, who is arguably often picked for film roles based on his name and legacy ahead of his actual acting talent. He's just not very good, and that's all the more obvious when he's in conversation with the excellent Newman, who is the first one to realise how dangerous Stamp's character is.

The script by Lem Dobbs is quite relaxed and free-flowing, complemented by Soderbergh's usual low-key approach to the material. Cross-cutting, fantasy sequences, and jittery chronology abound, and there's plenty of sequences that have characters speaking over imagery that either adds some emotional resonance to what is being said or delivers some extra information, either about the history of the characters or the planned revenge. And I don't think I need to mention how good the Cliff Martinez score is.

The Limey lacks something though. Or, I should say, that I thought The Limey lacked something. Until the very last scenes. And that's when it all clicked into place. This isn't just a blend of cinema style and grim nihilism, and it's not just a slice of cool for an elderly Stamp to show how easily he can still strut his stuff. It's actually a look at what can happen when an ever-moving individual full of a drive for revenge realises that the target he is pursuing may show him a refracted reflection of his own past. That's when I was completely won over by it. Having fairly enjoyed most of the journey, the final destination was the undoubted highlight.

8/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing.
It also costs nothing to like/subscribe to the YouTube channel attached to the podcast I am part of - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCErkxBO0xds5qd_rhjFgDmA
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews

Friday, 27 August 2021

The Adventures Of Pluto Nash (2002)

Famous for being a massive flop when it was released, The Adventures Of Pluto Nash is a film that you cannot help going into with low expectations. If you ever decided to watch it. So it's perhaps inevitable that it exceeds those expectations, but only does so by being generally watchable throughout. Not good. Watchable.

Eddie Murphy starts as Pluto Nash, an ex-prisoner who ends up owning the hottest nightclub on the moon. Having already been relatively famous for his criminal life, Nash is now a very big fish in the small pond that he swims around. He has a robot bodyguard, Bruno (Randy Quaid), and a buyer who really wants to buy his club for a lot of money. He also ends up with an employee named Dina Lake (Rosario Dawson) who ends up on the run with Nash when the lively nightclub is blown up. Someone really wants that club, and they also want Nash dead.

The last film written by Neil Cuthbert, I'd assume the phone stopped ringing after this was released, this is a comedy that isn't very funny, a sci-fi film that doesn't do enough for sci-fi fans, and a family film that won't satisfy any family who sits down to watch it. There's not enough of anything to make it of interest to any one demographic, and I struggle to think about who it was aimed at. There are no satisfying action beats, the jokes that feel more like adult humour feel out of place, and even the final sequence feels like something that just limps along to the end credits.

Director Ron Underwood does nothing to help, although I suspect that he was hampered by his star (Murphy seems to have a tendency to not listen to those who don't want to do things his way). He is at least helped by a supporting cast full of welcome faces, but that's about the only main positive. Don't even start me on the soundtrack, which put my back up from the very beginning with a horrible rendition of "Blue Moon".

Despite not being on top form, Murphy isn't terrible in the lead role. Make his character a bit more worthy of the attention that he receives and you could have a fun person you want to spend time with. A fast-talking hustler who made it big? Yes. And that's how the character is meant to be, but it doesn't really come across that way, certainly not after the first scenes. Dawson is a fine addition, because Dawson is a fine addition to most movies that she's involved with. It may be far from the best thing that Randy Quaid has ever done, but he has some mildly amusing moments throughout. Elsewhere, Jay Mohr is a club crooner, and annoying for almost every minute that he's onscreen, Joe Pantoliano and Victor Varnado are the main villains (both working for a mysterious boss figure), Peter Boyle and Pam Grier have a couple of good scenes, Illeana Douglas is a lot of fun as a doctor with shady ethics, and there are roles for Luis Guzmán, James Rebhorn, Burt Young, Miguel A. Núñez Jr, and John Cleese.

In much the same way that most films people rush to call the latest "best thing ever" don't actually end up being the best thing ever, most films that people rush to call the "worst of all time" aren't usually anywhere near as bad as the very worst of all time. The Adventures Of Pluto Nash isn't good, and it's not one I'd recommend anyone to watch, but it's not irredeemably bad. It's just bad, and mostly dull. The latter is quite an impressive feat, considering all of the stuff thrown around onscreen.

3/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing.
It also costs nothing to like/subscribe to the YouTube channel attached to the podcast I am part of - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCErkxBO0xds5qd_rhjFgDmA
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews