I saw true art last night, and it was named "25th Hour"

[*BOOMCHAA!*]

Amazing.
Wow.
Anybody seen it?

 

[Hallelujah Here She Comes]

No, but I really want to.
So helpful, I am.

 

[u2er]

I wanna see it too.

 

[IWasBored]

i want to see it

i should go see that tomorrow or on monday...monday i can go in the afternoon and only pay $3.75 and see it with all the old people who can't hear...

if i went and saw it tonight, i might run into my sister at the mall, and i DON'T want that to happen

 

[u2popmofo]

Who's in that? I think one of my roommates saw it when I went home a month or so ago.

 

[*BOOMCHAA!*]

Edward Norton, and the chief from Super Troopers.

 

[gvox]

I saw it a few weeks back, and I was disappointed.

I think Spike Lee (and I've been a fan) is on his last breath with this film.

This is probably his first film with non-ethnic principals and very little real racial thematic element, and I feel he blew it.

The rant in the washroom was way over the top and really didn't contribute anything to the movie.

I also felt that showing the excessive shots during the intro of the WTC-less NY skyline and then the subsequent completely irrelevant shots of Ground Zero crews sifting thru ash for the remains of survivors (complete with cheesy ultra dramatic music) was gratuitous and uncalled for, bordering on disrespect.

Also, I felt the movie dragged on way too long.

Therefore while the movie could have been Oscar material had it left out these glaring problems, it gets my thumbs down.

Good story though, and overall Ed Norton is amazing. Too bad Lee had to screw it up.

He may not survive this one.

 

[tiny dancer]

Amazing.
Wow.
Anybody seen it?

I have not , but I'm going to.

 

[deep]

I saw it and thought it was excellent. I would reccomend it.


Gabriel,

I hear what you?re saying. Spike can?t win. Either his films are too black or not black enough..

The police were black. And the criminals were white. I liked the reverse type casting.

I liked the whole film. Don?t forget Seymore-Plillip.

Isn?t Spike from NYC? The father in the film was a fireman so the WTC shots seemed ok to me.

 

[MissVelvetDress_75]

my friend's roommate was telling me about this movie tonight. he loved it!

 

[IWasBored]

i read an article in the newspaper about a month ago that was discussing the movie in terms of it staring NYC, and using examples from 25th hour and GONY to draw conclusions about why NYC should get an oscar for best actor...or something like that...

i'll see if i can find the article...anyone from boston in here that might have seen this article? it was in the globe...

 

[gvox]

I saw it and thought it was excellent. I would reccomend it.


Gabriel,

I hear what you?re saying. Spike can?t win. Either his films are too black or not black enough..

The police were black. And the criminals were white. I liked the reverse type casting.

I liked the whole film. Don?t forget Seymore-Plillip.

Isn?t Spike from NYC? The father in the film was a fireman so the WTC shots seemed ok to me.

Interesting Deep, and now that you've pointed that out I tend to agree with you.

Seymore-Philip would be the teacher? Good role, admittedly.

The reverse type casting was kinda cool.

I admit I found it hard to look at those images, especially of the close up of the sifting work. Sometimes raw imagery is necesssary tho so I suppose it had its place.

Guess what really set me off was the rant. It seemed out of place and unnecessary. Really what I meant was that Spike couldve really made a real statement by having made a movie that deliberately DIDNT feature any overt racial tones (the reverse type casting would still be there, but more implied and hence far more classy). The rant just seemed like a "Spike Lee" moment, where none was necessary or even fitting.

All in all tho it was a good movie, I just think it was directed poorly. A director dices and cuts, and the rant scene to me was a definate candidate.

AND, a good movie elicits good conversation and different takes, so I guess that makes it a 'good movie' candidate.

Ok...the end....well I guess we can't talk about the end until everyone ELSE sees it!!

 

[deep]

Gabriel,

I appreciate your take on the rant scene. I am not sure what I think about it.

I see 30-40 movies a year. I live in a market where there are many different films offered. I do my research before I go. I am less demanding than most.

One reason I think people should see this film is the popular misconception that doing time is a cakewalk.
I don?t believe it is the country club life that phony politicians say it is to get the masses riled up.

This film never suggests that criminals should not be locked up. There was not one scene in prison. But it conveyed the reality well.

Thank you for taking time to think about what I wrote. I recommend the film.

 

[joyfulgirl]

I also liked the reverse type casting. And I thought the opening shots (post 9/11 visuals) were incredibly tasteful. I haven't been back to NYC since 9/11 (I used to live there) but my friends say you can't escape it, it's just there, it's a different NYC. I don't see any way a Spike Lee film could ignore it. It would have been weird not to have it there.

I'm still not sure what I think about the bathroom rant either. It kind of bugged me.

But mostly I am still carrying a grudge against Spike because he snubbed me on the street in midtown years ago. I flashed him a sweet smile and he just glared at me like "get outta my way stoopid white girl." Or that's where I went with it anyway.


(Actually, I got over that. I just needed to name drop.)

 

[joyfulgirl]

Oh, and Philip Seymour-Hoffman!!

 

[Johnny Swallow]

I finally saw it today and was really impressed. This movie didn't get the attention it deserved. I thought that it showcased Norton's usual brilliance but that the stand out performance belonged to Barry Pepper. They all did a fabulous job of making the audience sympathetic toward characters that are rotten on the inside. As far as the 9/11 material goes, I didn't think of it as excessive. Post 9/11 life needs to be faced because it is reality. And I thought that the bathroom rant was totally fitting of the character. He was a man at the end of his rope, his pactience, his free life. Who hasn't felt so frustrated that they just wanted to tell off the whole world? It gave more insight to the man in my view. The fact that it did drag in a few places is my biggest complaint.

Overall a very good movie.

 

[joyfulgirl]

Nice review, Swallow. I like your take on the bathroom rant scene. And I agree that Barry Pepper was incredible. I knew guys just like that when I had temp job in NYC on a trading floor. Actually, all the performances were amazing.

 

[dizzy]

And I thought that the bathroom rant was totally fitting of the character. He was a man at the end of his rope, his pactience, his free life. Who hasn't felt so frustrated that they just wanted to tell off the whole world? It gave more insight to the man in my view. The fact that it did drag in a few places is my biggest complaint.

I definitely agree. Although the movie was dragging at times, the bathroom rant for me, was the highlight of the movie. His acting was really good. I even checked this part out in the book.

 

[gvox]

I see your point on the bathroom scene Swallow..

I too felt it dragged a bit...so I was thinking of areas that *could* have been cut..and felt that might have been one..

I just wondered about the end of his rope tho...see I had a different take on him as a person, and Im not sure if anyone's touched on this yet.

See, I wrote a screenplay some years back (never did anything with it, I called it Sound Decisions) about 4 characters all from different backgrounds, the white semi-priviledged one who decided that he wanted the bad boy lifestyle...dammit Spike!! LOL

In like manner, Norton's character didn't grow up necessarily underpriviledged or hard done by (from what I recall), for one by simple virtue of his skin color and social status, and it's not like he hung out with low life's that forced him into his 'career'. His friends all went on to have respectable careers. I think Lee's subtle point is that while some get into dealing because they see no way out of a hopeless situation, here was someone who made a calculated decision to do it, and hence no one was feeling overly sorry for him when he went down.

I felt that was a huge point in the movie, and that at every turn, even up to the end, he was presented with choices and ways out of the worst end result that normally befalls dealers who are less fortunate.

His final saving grace was in the decision not to kill his betrayer.

But in the end, what decision does he make?

Is it safe to discuss the end yet? I don't want to spoil it..