Tag: Sandra Bullock

Gun Shy (2000) <With Spoilers>

Rating 15
Length 1h 41
Release 6.10.2000
Director Eric Blakeney
About A seemingly calm and collected DEA agent is a nervous wreck on the inside. As he struggles to demolish a cartel, an incident lands him in the psychiatrist’s chair and, consequently, in group therapy.

The Good

  • The thing that really makes this film work, is the relationships Liam Neeson’s Charlie makes during his undercover work. I say that loosely given that I’m not sure Charlie is ever playing anything other than himself.
    He has obvious chemistry with Sandra Bullock, but the best relationship by far is the one between Neeson and Oliver Platt. Oh my god, the final act, you will feel for both of them. You’ll understand the decisions they each make.
  • Speaking of Oliver Platt, he’s incredible in this. I’m not so sure I’ve seen him in a “bad guy” role before and it really worked. To then have the film unpick the character and discover the root of his unhappiness. If you gave me a film just about Fulvio and Charlie, I’d have been very happy.
  • I was happily surprised to discover Mitch Pileggi had a much larger role in this than I anticipated. While the start of the film may have you thinking he’s in a type-cast role, but no one in this film is who they really seem.
    I must admit though, I had my suspicions, Pileggi himself speaks of his Italian heritage in interviews, so he feels like a bit of a red herring given the involvement of the Mafia. I reveal this, not to be a spoilsport, but because I can’t let this review sit without taking about the reveal. Not the one to the audience, but the reveal to Charlie. There’s a way that Pileggi can set his face whenever he’s in the position of a bad guy (Son’s of Anarchy, Shocker and Supernatural spring to mind) and it works well here.

The Bad

  • It’s a bit wacky. Like, you really do have to roll with it and remember that it was a product of the 2000s; the same era that brought us Mulholland Drive, Get Shorty and Analyze This. If you can stick with it until it really gets going, there’s a payoff.
  • For an Irishman, Liam Neeson’s accent in this is appalling. It’s so unbelievably inconsistent that I’m certain the line about him being Irish was put in during reshoots.

The Ugly

  • The plot threads are just not quite all there. It’s almost two or three very different movies in one. There’s attempts to connect the elements but they don’t all quite marry up the way that would lift this film up a little more.
    The biggest problem for me, is how little Sandra Bullock’s character is integrated into the rest of the narrative. There’s even a clear set up that goes nowhere.

Final Thoughts

You know, it wasn’t the best film in the world. I wanted three different movies out of it. I wanted a Neeson/Platt movie, a Neeson/ Bullock movie and I wanted a movie just with the group therapy guys. Instead, I got this bag of Revels when I really just wanted the Maltesers out of it.

The Lake House (2006)

Rating: PG
Length: 1h 45
Release: 23.6.2006
Dir: Alejandro Agresti
About: Love blooms when Kate, a doctor, exchanges letters with Alex, an architect who is fed up with his life. Unknown to them, they lead lives two years apart.

The Good

  • Who doesn’t want to see Sandra Bullock and Keanu Reeves reconnect onscreen? If that’s what you’re after, I’m not sure it matters about the plot or quality of the film, so long as that chemistry between the two is still there.
  • It’s essentially Jumpin’ Jack Flash, but with letters and time travel instead of the internet and global espionage.

The Bad

  • I don’t like the characters of Kate and Alex. They’re both really boring.
  • The film feels very clinical and sterilised of all emotion. perhaps it is the separation of the two main characters and their isolation within their time periods. The interaction they each have with other people feels artificial and for exposition only.

The Ugly

  • The time travel aspect is just shit and doesn’t make sense. At the heart of it is a massive paradox that, as a fan of all things sci-fi, I can’t ignore. The magic of time travel falls flat and also seems too integral to the plot. I know, I know, suspend belief and all that shit, but I have too many questions about what I saw leading up to the changes in the timeline and they’re not answered.
  • Who gave that shockingly back haircut to Sandra Bullock?! It does nothing for her and, while very circa ’06, has not aged well at all.
  • You manage to get two people together who have chemistry and they physically share a screen within the same time zone for less than five minutes?! What the actual fuck?! I want to see them together!

Final Thoughts

I think I’ll just rewatch Speed in future. Love Bullock and Reeves, but this was underwhelming.

Speed (1994)

Rating: 15
Length: 1h 56
Release: 30.9.1994
Dir: Jan de Bont
About: A disgruntled, dangerous man plants a bomb in an elevator. When his mission fails, he plants a bomb in a local bus and threatens to set it off unless his demand is met.

The Good

  • I love the music. While it doesn’t have the iconic status of Jaws, Jurassic Park or … anything by John Williams, it still packs punch and pulls the audience into a scene. And it starts with those impeccably 90’s opening titles. You know you’re going into something. There will be no easing into a situation, the audience hits the ground running and that score makes sure that your body knows that.
  • As I said, the audience go straight in and meet the bad guy before anyone else. No holding back. Well, except for who he actually is and what he wants. Dennis Hopper has everything you need for this sort of villain, the main thing being a distinctive voice. While the audience do get to see him a lot of his communication is done solely through audio, so the voice has to be right.
  • The film has so many instances and dialogue that may not seem like much, but do have call backs either almost instantly, or later in the film. It helps develop the thread running through the film.
  • The cast is awesome. There’s not a single person I’d replace. It goes without saying that Reeves and Bullock are perfect in their lead roles so I’m going to gush about two others.
    Firstly, there’s Alan Ruck. Its not the biggest of parts, but he has some excellent interactions within the main act. My favourite moment comes when he’s relaying Jack’s description of the bomb. He can’t bring himself to say what Jack had, so instead utters “oh, darn.” which gives us quite a lot about the character.
  • There is also my favourite character, Harry. Played by the wonderful Jeff Daniels. The chemistry he has with Reeves equates to what we would now call a bromance and I’m sold. There’s a moment in the first act when both Jack and Harry need to descend to the access point of the lift and its in that moment one takes to the cables like they’re a fireman’s pole, the other uses the ladder. This indication that Harry doesn’t jump in and, as a result, isn’t as reckless as Jack has a rather sad payoff towards the end of the film. None of which I think is possible without Jeff Daniels in the role.
    While he isn’t as prominent after the first act, he is crucial to the plot and the mindset of the character of Jack. You do feel his absence from Jack’s side, but he’s still very much working with him. Right up until the point Harry doesn’t look at where he’s going. That close up we’re given gets me every single time.
  • The film does gauge how long its focus should be on the bus. Just as I find myself drifting, the stakes are changed and the goalpost is moved; giving the audience a bit of an adrenaline jolt.

The Bad

  • The ‘Annie reveal’ in the final act doesn’t sit right with me. It’s edited in a way that makes me think I’m meant to, even for a spilt second, think that she is in some way involved. However, there needs to be some more editing for that to work, given that we see her interaction with Payne and therefore know she’d never met him before. I know there was original plans to have it revealed that Harry was working with Payne, perhaps this edit is what remains of a plan to have *someone* double cross Jack.

The Ugly

  • The final act Vs the bus jump. For me, one of them has to go. While the bus jump gives us that great visual, I’m not sure what else you can put in the final act that would give us the resolution we need. Perhaps have it that there’s another set of cars on the track at the next station?! Doesn’t seem as good as “the track’s not finished yet.”
    As it stands its two overly identical situations and it almost gives the audience fatigue. The set up is the same, the way out of the situation is the same and the success only varies slightly.

Final Thoughts

I love this movie. I only watched it a few days ago and I already want to watch it again. Boiling it down to “Die Hard on a bus” doesn’t do this film nearly enough justice as it’s execution goes beyond that.

Bird Box – 15

Length- 2 Hr 4

About- When a mysterious force decimates the population, only one thing is certain — if you see it, you die. The survivors must now avoid coming face to face with an entity that takes the form of their worst fears. Searching for hope and a new beginning, a woman and her children embark on a dangerous journey through the woods and down a river to find the one place that may offer sanctuary. To make it, they’ll have to cover their eyes from the evil that chases them — and complete the trip blindfolded.

The Good

Sandra Bullock is able to hold her own in Bird Box. She’s long been considered leading lady material, but it’s taken her time to break out from the romantic comedy role or plucky positivity hound. The sour and angry demeanour that once seemed so alien and forced in some of her performances fits her like a glove. She is scary and heartbreakingly detached from the children in her care and I don’t think that was something I would have seen as a convincing role from Bullock even 5 years ago.

Let’s face it, this film is A Quiet Place with a different bodily sense being the focus. That in itself isn’t significant or would encourage those who’ve seen the John Krasinski directed film to watch this approach. However, what I will say this has, that A Quiet Place perhaps lacks is the body count. A Quiet Place feels stifled by its limited cast, while Bird Box allows you to explore the aftermath as a society, rather than a family.

It’s a curious story, which an ending that is much more hopeful than I was expecting. I’ve heard talk of A Quiet Place gaining a sequel, which is odd as I don’t think there was enough to it, or characters sympathetic enough for me to wish for more. Bird Box, on the other hand, is well set up for a sequel.

The Bad

It is a little too derivative. Something that I feel is more to do with timing than anything else. It’s A Quiet Place meets Mom & Dad; both films that were released earlier this year. Mom & Dad is in itself a sudo remake of the 1976 Who Can Kill a Child? Sometimes, with films like these it doesn’t matter which is better, just which one got there first.

It was a sensible thing to have it released on Netflix rather than a theatrical release. I’m not sure people would have dropped the money on a film that, on paper, seems to be A Quiet Place bandwagon jump.

The Ugly

Its a violent affair and it all comes at once. I’m not a squimish person, but I found a number of scenes just a little tough to handle. At the root of this, is perhaps the fact that when faced with this sort of situation, the mob mentality in our own society would result in this sort of violence.

Final Thoughts

It’s a decent watch and I’m always grateful to see Sandy Bullock on the screen but I can’t see it jumping to people’s most loved films. However, if I’m watching films of this ilk; I’d rather watch Who Can Kill a Child? again.