i'm not saying bad...i'm crying ineptitude!!!

Rating: 3/10 (10 April 2006)

so, clearly by my rating and title, you can tell i didn't see this film in a favourable light. most of the reasons listed prior fall into place, with a few additions besides (not only is ledger unintelligable, he doesn't even really have it in the eyes. at least jake had it in the eyes...but his eyes always do. and even that wasn't enough in this case!). but the thing that really gets me is the "concession" of most haters... magnificent cinematography? which film, exactly, are you speaking of? the feature, or any one of the previews you saw before it? ang lee is a director who knows how to tell a story with images. he is also a director who knows how to move a camera to best tell it. so my question is....did the 2nd unit guy make this movie, and ang just sort of hung out with the krafts services? static frames can be effective and affecting. in the hands of, say, David lynch, the static shot can be a thing of beauty or terror or both. ang...what the hell? i know you had a dolly, a crane, or at least a swivel-headed tripod. you spent money on them. why did you not use them at all? okay okay...i know. i can hear you all now..."but dario, what about the subtext to those static shots? what about the symbolism?" you mean the many loving shots of the sheep, suggesting that they are just two in a herd, unable to break away from the herd mentality? yeah. subtle. not at all heavy handed and preachy... plus...helps to have characters who we care about. i can dig on letting the images tell me who that character is, i can let their facial expressions and actions speak for them...but one thing i need to be able to do that is a character who does something, emotes anything, once in a while. once even during the first hour and a half would be nice! look, if the flick can open even one bigot's mind to the possibility that homosexuality should not be the defining characteristic by which an individual is judged, good on all involved. get people talking, thinking...good for society on whole. though i fail to see how anything so mind-numbingly dull and inept as this Oscar-worthy mess could stimulate anything but sleep. oh yeah...the score. leave the two-note repetitions to kubrick, ang...
anyone notice how my review just kind of petered out there without any significant "closure"? how it just kind of meandered and tried to build to something, got off on a little tangent, and then just quit? thats my impersonation of any given scene in this film. perhaps they ought've commandeered a title from bukowski..."strokes to nowhere".