I've thought that after last's week experience, maybe I should find something better this time. The result is going back way to 1980 :) considering this is the most high rated movie I've had as an option to see these days. Well, what can I say after watching it ...
It's not a bad movie for sure, but I really think that I would have preferred something else ... Let me start with the subject before getting to the other stuff. We have here a mafia thriller that probably can be labeled as a British "Scarface" in a short form - meaning it doesn't start with the beginnings of the main character. Where the main character is Harold Shand, underworld crime boss in the 80's London, who just got back from New York accompanied by two men from the mafia across the ocean. Instead of having the time for successfully closing the important negotiation with his new partners he lands back home in the middle of something close to a war against him. First problem: nobody in the London "corporation" he leads knows who is the enemy that messes up the "quiet" life from the last 10 years = they seem to be the target of a bomb something like every 5 hours. The second problem: the lack of control on the whole mess doesn't give the best impression to the new US partners and the whole deal seems to be in peril to fail before it starts. The solution, which is also the main action line of the movie, is to find out fast who is the unseen enemy. I prefer not to say more, because already from some point onwards you are actually able to see in what direction the movie goes.
Besides the fact that the outcome is relatively predictable, I can't say that I observed other major issues. The only thing that personally I didn't like (well, maybe I've gone too soft lately, who knows ...) is that you have some scenes that go beyond a certain level getting a bit hard to watch. But ... if you consider "Scarface", "Goodfellas" or "Casino" that are pretty much in the same row with this movie, you can't say that it is something out of common for this genre or niche = each of these has its hard to swallow moments. Getting to the good parts, although this is an UK production with a considerably lower budget than the ones mentioned above, you can't feel this. To compensate, you get a sufficient amount of effects + the cinematography is quite nice. About the score, this may sound a bit outdated (so 80's), but for me was delightful - I really loved it. Anyway, what's the most important part to mention is the cast. This includes lots of important names from the British cinema, even if some of these have minor roles (e.g.: this is Pierce Brosnan's first movie .. without any spoken lines :) ). I'm not a big fan of Bob Hoskins who has the lead role here (accompanied by a 35 year old Hellen Mirren), but the way he handles his part is a sufficient reason to see the movie. I was telling something above about scenes that might be hard to watch ... the final one is a completely atypical scene and for me I think it's unique in how many movies I've ever seen (and I've seen a lot ...). Without disclosing too much it's a long scene, static - without any action, non-violent, but with all these it can be considered quite a hard scene especially psychologically speaking, more than from the simple visual perspective ... and the thing is that almost all this effect is given by the acting.
What can I say to wrap up this entry, is that I personally have a movie category about which I can say that I didn't like ( or better said enjoy ) when I've watched them, but nevertheless these are good movies. To be more precise, the feeling I got it's not so comforting to consider seeing these again sometimes, but as cinema work they deserve all the consideration. And "The Long Good Friday" for sure fits in this category ...
Rating: 4 out of 5
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment