got_edge said:
For a moment, I thought you were talking about Susie Q.
Brick 5/10
What?!
you're too kind. that was a terrible movie. it tried way too hard to be confusing about a relatively simple plot. kid goes looking for the person who killed his ex-girlfriend, and he finds him and the answer without any cool plot twists along the way. the crap about "oooh, what is this brick?" or "pregnant? whose baby?!?!?" (didn't she sleep with every male character in that movie?) wasn't enough to hold my interest. there are ways to do that sort of dialogue and make it work. i get that they were trying to use a certain style while breaking away from the archetypical characters such as semi-crooked detectives and con men by making the characters high school students. just no. this was boring. the total lack of extras, classes, ordinary things you'd see around a high school, whatever surrealism they were aiming for by putting a regular table lamp in the pin's car, none of it worked. or it did work, but only to add to the movie's pretentiousness.
but iwb, you say, you like david mamet!
american buffalo had what, three characters in it? they all talk at each other and they all talk at the same time! mamet has the con men, the semi-crooked detectives. everyone is lying most of the time, and the plot is confusing because no one tells you anything (or because what they did tell you, you're slowly finding out was a lie). the dialogue is a part of it, not just a device used to make a boring plot look cool.
besides (i mentioned it elsewhere), whoever wrote brick really didn't seem so convinced that they'd pulled it off, otherwise they wouldn't have felt the need to include that scene at the end where whatshisface and whatsherface re-cap and explain everything that you just saw.
1/10