|
|
|
What a bunch of "Ace"-holes |
|
|
|
Written by MICHAEL JAMES ALLEN
|
|
Tuesday, 30 January 2007 |
What a mess. If Tony Scott and a grenade had a love child, it would be this movie. In “Smokin’ Aces,” writer/director Joe Carnahan (“Narc”) makes a grave miscalculation. It’s very clear that he wants this film to be a full-on frenetic assault, a movie that will feel fresh and reinvent the action genre.
| | |
"Smokin’ Aces"
|
Entertainment
Art
Written and directed by Joe Carnahan
Starring Jeremy Piven, Ben Affleck, and Ryan Reynolds
Rated R for strong language, violence, and strong
sexual content
Released January 26, 2007
|
| | |
I
admire his desire for originality, but original does
not always equal successful. While I hold the belief
that too many Hollywood movies are stale retreads of
the same stories, there are certain cinematic
conventions—such as, oh, I don’t know, identifiable
characters or a coherent plot—that are always used for
a reason. Carnahan, however, seems to be functioning
off the idea that just because he’s doing something
new it, therefore, must be good. Let me make this
plainly clear: “Smokin’ Aces” is not good.
The movie is stuffed like a Thanksgiving turducken
with countless characters, most of them hitmen, all
after Vegas entertainer, Buddy “Aces” Israel (Jeremy
Piven, looking coked-up, and strung-out, and not
adding much depth beyond that). Buddy, you see, has
become a mob snitch for the FBI, and a million dollar
bounty shall be rewarded to the first low-life who can
deliver his heart to mob boss Primo Sparazza (Joseph
Ruskin). Meanwhile, FBI agents Messner (Ryan Reynolds)
and Carruthers (Ray Liotta) are charged with the task
of finding Buddy and making sure he stays alive. This
culminates in an all-out orgy of violence and action
as the assassins try to one-up each other, and the FBI
tries to one-up the assassins. Or at least, that’s
what happens in theory.
The biggest problem with “Smokin’ Aces” is that there
is really nobody to root for. The characters are
amazingly unlikable freaks, and while that could make
for some interesting antiheros, the film is so crowded
that most of them fail to make an impression. These
characters are played by well-known actors but most of
them can't elevate the material, and the few who do
(such as Ben Affleck as a bail bondsman, and Jason
Bateman as a perverted lawyer) are given criminally
little screen time. This culminates in a film that’s
hard to relate to. You never know who to hitch your
allegiance to, and when characters die (and a whole
lot of them do) you’re never sure whether you should
be cheering or mourning.
Another glaring problem is that, for a movie that is
so violent and gore-filled, the action is surprisingly
dull. The film gives off the impression that things
are building up and will pay-off with a third Act
filled with wall-to-wall action. It lives up to this
promise, but suffers from confusing staging and
frivolous excess. Guns for the sake of guns and blood
for the sake of blood do not exciting action make.
Sadly, “Smokin’ Aces” does not realize this, and
that—mixed with bizarre shifts in tone, and a “shock
ending” that neither shocks nor ends anything—are what
ultimately cause it to fail.
I admire that Joe Carnahan tried to do something new
here, but failure is still failure, and you can’t
judge a movie off of good intentions. “Smokin’ Aces”
is the type of movie that makes you want to take a
shower afterwards… Anything to clean off all the blood
and guts. |
Great Review Written by Guest on 2007-01-31 09:00:58 Your review articulates my first suspicions about this movie very well. Even though the previews are drenched in cool lighting and with even cooler stars, it still looks thin. Thanks for the honesty and wit.... |
Powered by AkoComment 2.0! |
Other Recent Articles by MICHAEL JAMES ALLEN:The Top Ten Movies of 2007An Interview with Diablo Cody and Ellen Page of “Juno”An Interview with “The Savages” director, Tamara JenkinsBang! Kapow! BOOM! ‘Nuff said.2 stars for “3:10”
|
|
|
|
|
|
|