It's not so much that this film is good or bad (oh, it's bad), but that it seems to be constructed with no consideration of those terms. I have to imagine that RZA and Eli Roth wrote the film like this:
"Y'know what would be cool? THIS!"
"Yeah, and then follow that with THIS!"
"And it would be awesome if we had THIS, too!"
"Oh hell yeah, and THIS cool thing right after THAT!"
Literally, The Man With The Iron…
If Martin McDonagh becomes a more prolific filmmaker- and hopefully, he will in the coming years- he will rightly be held as one of the greats of this era of cinema. Were his earlier IN BRUGES just a one-off, that'd be something, but with SEVEN PSYCHOPATHS, he confirms that early promise as an audacious, transgressive force to be reckoned with. McDonagh creates stories that both adhere to expectations of genre and blow those conventions up.
Colin Farrell plays a Hollywood…
I'm posting this note because of the recent Onion AV Club "Best of the 90s" film list.
How could they omit THE SILENCE OF THE LAMBS? It absolutely boggles my mind. I would like to hear a takedown of the film, seriously. To my way of thinking, it's one of the few utterly unimpeachable films made in the last few decades. It's brilliant, acclaimed, important, historic. And I think it's just great to rewatch, compelling and entertaining. Maybe HANNIBAL and RED DRAGON have been seen to diminish its reputation, but I can't abide that.
THE SILENCE OF THE LAMBS is an all time great.
Alfonso Cuaron is likely best known for Y TU MAMA TAMBIEN or his entry in the Harry Potter series, but here is easily his most towering accomplishment thus far. Featuring a great performance by Clive Owen, a richly textured exploration of its sci-fi concept, and a staggering, breathless single take sequence at the climax, this is top tier filmmaking in every area. Absolutely essential viewing.