The editing was off, the plot lumbered ahead only through the will of Sean Connery's accent and Catherine Zeta-Jones spandex-clad anatomy. I remember watching "Entrapment," another John Amiel film, and thinking it was, in a word, awful. The comic relief generally works ("I'm going to need Xena tapes and lots of Hot Pockets"), and the plot is no more ridiculous than, say, "The Day After Tomorrow" (though it is slightly LESS ridiculous- at least this movie attempts to offer a cause for the problem, however unlikely). Hilary Swank and Aaron Eckhart will definitely have Oscars someday, and most of the other actors who make it on the ship are of similar caliber. How can you tell when a director is bad? I mean, assuming the director is given $50 million or so, competent actors, and a halfway-decent script, what would the film look like if he/she REALLY didn't know what he/she was doing? I think that film would look a lot like "The Core." From the preview stage, this movie was on my "might see it but not pay for it" list, so I just now caught it on cable.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |