RSS

Category Archives: Ebert’s Bad Reviews

52. Once Upon a Time in the West (1968)

Roger’s Rating :

Should be :

I guess Roger thought that this movie was just too long. He said in his review ” Sergio Leone’s Once Upon a Time in the West is a painstaking distillation of the style he made famous in the original three Clint Eastwood Westerns. There’s the same eerie music; the same sweaty, ugly faces; the same rhythm of waiting and violence; the same attention to small details of Western life.
There is also, unfortunately, Leone’s inability to call it quits. The movie stretches on for nearly three hours, with intermission, and provides two false alarms before it finally ends. In between, we’re given a plot complex enough for Antonioni, involving killers, land rights, railroads, long-delayed revenge, mistaken identity, love triangles, double-crosses and shoot-outs. We’re well into the second hour of the movie before the plot becomes quite clear.”
Roger also didn’t like Claudia Cardianale’s performance too much. He said she “was a good choice for the woman, but Leone directs her too passively; in Cartouche, she demonstrated a blood-and-thunder abandon that’s lacking here. ”
This is a movie that is rated 8.8 on IMDB and a 98% rating on Rotten Tomatoes. Probably a little bit better than a 2 1/2 star movie.
 
Comments Off on 52. Once Upon a Time in the West (1968)

Posted by on December 27, 2010 in Ebert's Bad Reviews

 

Tags:

41. Kiss Kiss, Bang Bang (2005)


Roger’s Rating :

Should be :

In his At The Movies review Roger gave this movie a Thumbs Down saying “it was a little too cute for its own good.” He also said the style of the movie worked in Domino, but didn’t work here(?). In his written review he said “Kiss Kiss, Bang Bang┬ácontains a lot of comedy and invention, but doesn’t much benefit from its clever style. The characters and plot are so promising that maybe Black should have backed off and told the story deadpan, instead of mugging so shamelessly for laughs.”
Once again, Roger doesn’t like a movie that has more style than substance. He just doesn’t seem to get it that sometimes people can sit back and just enjoy what they are watching without having to be carried along by a structured narrative.
He closes his review by saying “But did I need to see it twice? Not really. Do you need to see it once? Not exactly.” Wow! I’m really stunned by this one.
This was one of my favorite movies of the first decade of the 2000’s. I loved Val Kilmer’s self-assured, openly gay character Gay Perry. I thought the movie was fresh, clever, funny and extremely entertaining. It has a 7.9 rating on IMDB and an 83% rating on Rotten Tomatoes, so I am not alone.
 
Comments Off on 41. Kiss Kiss, Bang Bang (2005)

Posted by on February 14, 2010 in Ebert's Bad Reviews