Holiday Hangover, Special Guest Reviewer Edition: Midnight In Paris

Midnight In Paris - Direction

*This review is being provided by guest contributor; Nicole Schiavo.  Thanks for the submission Nicole and we look forward to having more guest submissions.*

Direction in this movie, starts from the very top, the direction provided by arguably one of the most influential directors in the business, Woody Allen.  After a string of ill contrived and marginally received flops, "Midnight in Paris" brings Allen back into the (in my opinion well deserved) critically acclaimed; he once again found his direction.

The film features Owen Wilson’s portrayal of Gil, a likable but somewhat flaky writer (I would like to think that Allen, would have played Gil had he been 30 years younger.  Wilson. in my opinion, is a fine replacement) engaged to unlikable Inez, played by Rachel McAdams ("Mean Girls" Regina George all grown up).

 

The story is driven by Gil’s complete lack of direction – in his work as a writer and in his complete lack of navigational skills – getting lost on the city’s narrow time-worn streets, he winds up getting lost down a small unmarked alley and whisked away at midnight by a 1920s-era vehicle.

This magical vehicle (suspend reality here) brings him smack in the middle of 1920s Paris – where Zelda and Scott Fitzgerald mirror the relationship of Gil and Inez (and we all know how well that ended), Gertrude Stein and Hemmingway are writing buddies, and where Salvador Dali is as strange as we have always imagined.

  

Getting tossed back in time lets Gil live out every fantasy that an overly romantic writer could have – why should he want to go back to the “now”?  Ever the romantic, Gil not only relishes this amazing opportunity, he doesn’t question it, ever (Slight gripe, but keep the reality suspended, throw it out the window, this is a fantasy).

In the most literate way, Gil had be to completely lost in Paris in order to regain his sense of direction, in his writing, in his relationships, and more importantly his life.

  

This movie is just pure fun – the cast is great and the setting is romantic, beautiful Paris.  Peel back the layers and hidden a little deeper in the film is the realization that although nostalgia is a great place to visit, you can’t really live there – direct oneself in the now and all its possibilities.

Read More

Holiday Hangover: Zero Dark Thirty (Matt's Take)

Zero Dark Thirty - Resolution

It's fun to follow the career of a director; take my recent reviews on Quentin Tarantino as an example.  Take a director like Kathryn Bigelow.  If you look at her career you can say she's done it all.  Horror movies (Near Dark), crime films (Point Break), neo-futuristic noir (Strange Days) and war (The Hurt Locker).  You can honestly say she's grown-up from genre films to Academy Award-winning fare, and of course it doesn't hurt that at one point you were banging James Cameron, but I digress, as I do so often.

I remember the day 9/11 happened; I was a senior in high school sitting, or probably sleeping, in AP Psychology class.  We had someone run into our classroom and tell our teacher to turn on the TV.  The next thing I see is one of the World Trade Center towers on fire.  It was a little perplexing and it almost seemed like a prank, albeit an extremely odd prank.  Next thing I know a plane runs into the 2nd tower, and shortly after the first tower succumbs to the fire and collapses.  This was my "JFK" moment.  If you were alive when John F. Kennedy was assassinated you remember where you were at that moment, the same goes for the generation that saw the Twin Towers fall and coat Lower Manhattan in a cloud of dust.  A surreal moment in World History.  The following 10 years we were haunted by the al-Qaeda leader, Osama bin Laden, who orchestrated many terror attacks that cost the lives of thousands of people around the world.  It wasn't until May of 2011 that another moment occurred that you may remember; Barack Obama would appear on TV and tell the world that bin Laden had been killed in a compound in Pakistan.  I personally felt relatively unchanged.  Sure, a terrorist leader was dead, but did it make us that much safer?  That is a question you have to ask yourself when you finish watching "Zero Dark Thirty."

Bigelow has cornered the market on dramas that include both the Middle East and our never ending "War on Terror."  Despite some shortcomings, "The Hurt Locker" was a well done film centering on a bomb disposal team and the stress of the job.  "Zero Dark Thirty" lacks the action, and luster, of "Locker" and focuses on the daily grind of select CIA officials as they cut through government red tape, and personal tragedies, to finally target, and eliminate, bin Laden.  If you've watched the trailers and expect a slam-bang, balls-to-the-wall action thriller, you're watching the wrong film.  This film is a grind, but there is resolution.

"Thirty" follows CIA operative Maya who has just been sent to Pakistan to oversee the CIA's Detainee Program a few years after 9/11.  Told through a series of vignettes, the film navigates through many of the tragic events that lead to the eventual whereabouts of Usama bin Laden from the London bombings in 2005 to the bombing of the Marriott in Islamabad.  The movie isn't as much of a mystery as it is a procedural, similar to something that you might see on "Law & Order: Criminal Intent."  The one difference is that you see the toll a grueling manhunt can take on the human psyche and how the government can be a hindrance when it comes to completing a mission.

People are complaining about two things in this film; the torture scenes and how information was gained for the making of the film.  Look, every country that has been involved in some sort of war theater over the past 100 years has probably been involved in some type of interrogation efforts that weren't in the Geneva Conventions.  It's not just America to blame for abuse of these Conventions, and I don't think "Thirty" took it too far, they just called it like it is.  I'm sure there have been grave abuses during our "War on Terror" but to play Devil's Advocate, the "War on Terror" isn't really a war, it's more of a mantra.  We have not declared war in this country since 1942 when Japan bombed Pearl Harbor and the U.S. entered World War II.  Is this an excuse for torture, of course not, but we can't get upset when we know practices such as waterboarding have been used on terror suspects and detainees.  As far as classified information obtained by the makers of the film, I'll just leave it at that, I don't need anyone knocking on my door after reading this.

What bothered me about "Thirty," weren't the torture scenes or acts of violence carried out by the terrorists, it was the relative lack of character development.  We gain from the film the fact that Maya, played by Jessica Chastain, has been on the hunt for bin Laden since she left high school and it's the only thing that she has worked on while with the CIA.  We know it's personal, to a degree, and that her obsession has led to her leaving a daughter and possibly an entire family, or maybe even losing a family member during 9/11.  As she comes to the end of her search we see her first real emotion, as she cries.  Her tears can mean many things; the fact that bin Laden has finally been killed, the fact she is finally going home, or just maybe the fact that her search is over and she is left with nothing, and nobody will know her sacrifice.  She has to go back into a world that will never know her work, and she has nothing left to work for.  Her life came down to one man, who is now gone.  It's deep stuff, if you take the time to look at it from all perspectives.

Aside from the character development, "Zero Dark Thirty" is an epic retelling of the 10 years after 9/11 and the eventual killing of Usama bin Laden, the boogeyman who had been haunting the lives of Americans since that fateful day in September.  Has Bigelow done it again, and will she capture Oscar gold again?  Only time will tell.

Fun Fact:  SEAL Team Six, a branch of the US Navy, carried out Operation Neptune Spear, the operation which eliminated their target, Usama bin Laden, in May 2011.

Read More

Holiday Hangover: Zero Dark Thirty (DJ's Take)

IMPORTANT

Zero Dark Thirty is not just a film.  To me, it is a bookend to one of the greatest American tragedies in history.  It serves as our first real glimpse into the events leading up to May 2, 2011.  Some may argue that Zero Dark Thirty, as a film, is overrated.  Some may argue that Zero Dark Thirty, as a historical chronicle, is inaccurate.  However, you would be hard pressed to say that Zero Dark Thirty is not IMPORTANT.

Zero Dark Thirty is a dramatic account of the decade long search and capture of Osama bin Laden.  A subject that IMPORTANT was a cinch to rile up a debate on how to properly portray it.  Some might expect a kick-ass, romanticized war epic leading to a balls to the wall Seal assault on that compound in Abbottabad.  Thirty isn't that type of film at all.  It is about the slow, grueling process government officials had to go through in order to finally pull the trigger on bin Laden.  It isn't romantic or fun.  It isn't fast paced or action packed.  And as recent criticisms have suggested, it is controversially disturbing right from the beginning.  But that is the film's point.  The steps our government and military take to accomplish their goals are almost unfathomable for a regular person.  Especially when you account for the small amount of fanfare or celebration they enjoy when a mission is actually accomplished.   The nuances of governmental decision making, puzzle solving, tactical strategies, and yes, torture, are the compelling pieces to this compelling film. 

The moment I heard the announcement of Osama bin Laden's death, I knew a film about it had to be made.  And as more of the details about the mission's circumstances surfaced, I knew how great of a film it could be.  My mind immediately went to hoping Kathryn Bigelow would helm it.  Bigelow had already made and been honored for her stellar film The Hurt Locker.  As chance had it, she was already developing a film about the search for bin Laden before he was killed.  And after watching Zero Dark Thirty, I can't think of anyone who could have handled this film better.  Bigelow just knows how to shoot this material.  Much like the way Scorsese knows how to shoot gangster films or Tim Burton knows how to shoot...um...weird films.  She immerses the audience in this world and doesn't give them room to flinch.  Every scene, every interaction between characters feels like she's pulled the covers off of something we shouldn't be allowed to watch.  The fact that she has already won an Oscar for directing the similarly styled Hurt Locker is the ONLY REASON she isn't a frontrunner again for Zero Dark Thirty. 

Jessica Chastain is a revelation in this film.  Especially for me.  I had only recently been familiar with her work in Lawless and The Help.  However, my unpreparedness worked well for loving the main character of Maya.  She is a stone cold, no nonsense, sh*t kicker that takes everyone by surprise from start to finish.  It is so hard to portray that type of woman in a film and not come off as wooden or boring.  See January Jones for further evidence.  Despite Chastain's cold demeanor, however, you can tell that there is still an angry, emotional wreck underneath.  Chastain allows it to peak out at just the right moments.  Even with a cast of constantly solid actors like Mark Strong, Jason Clarke, James Gandolfini, and Chris Pratt, Chastain shines the brightest.

As the award season approaches, Zero Dark Thirty is starting to pull away as a favorite in many categories.  Despite my praise, I don't think it is the best picture of the year.  This is only due to entertainment reasons.  It isn't paced or put together the way an audience might find traditionally appealing.  Though, Zero Dark Thirty is undoubtedly a must watch.  A film that we will look back on and debate for years as to whether it properly captured such an IMPORTANT time in our nation's history.  Watch it...then tell me I'm wrong.

Read More

Holiday Hangover: Inglourious Basterds

Inglourious Basterds - Tension

I don't think any war in our nation's, or world's, history has been done to death like World War II.  There have been romantic, comedic, heart-wrenching, and just plain bad tellings of "The War to End All Wars."  On the top of my list I have "Saving Private Ryan" and the so-far-under-the-radar "Enemy At The Gates,"  whereas craptastic crap like "BloodRayne" remains at the bottom of the English Channel.  But you know that when a filmmaker like Quentin Tarantino gets a bug up his ass that he wants to make a war film its not going to be like any war film you've ever seen.  Enter, "Inglourious Basterds."

Before I dive into "Basterds," I'll preface;  I was actually going to review all of Tarantino's directorial efforts in order, but the holidays sidetracked me and I ended up skipping right to "Django Unchained," where you can read that review right here.  I'd like to think of "Basterds" as the moment where Tarantino went mainstream, and I mean REAL mainstream.  "Basterds" was his first film to feature a TRUE leading man in Brad Pitt, and he finally was able to reward one of his actors with an Academy Award in Christoph Waltz.  In a way it was also one of his most accessible efforts in theaters where it was the largest release for a Tarantino movie to date, "Kill Bill Vol.1" was a close second.  And it was the first of his films to be available in a Digital, DVD, and Blu-Ray format (since the writing of this review you can pick up the Tarantino XX Blu-Ray Collection that features all of his films in an HD format).

"Inglourious Basterds" follows the exploits of a group of Jewish-born Army Mercenaries and their commanding officer Lt. Aldo Raine as they merrily maraude across Europe killing, scalping, and branding Nazis.  But that is just a small portion of the film, which also follows a French-born Jewish female theater owner planning her revenge against Nazis who are planning to premier a propaganda film entitled "Nation's Pride."  Included in attendance are Joseph Goebbels and Adolf Hitler.  As you can imagine there are twists, typical Tarantino humor, and scenes of fantastic violence.  The difference between "Basterds" and Tarantino's other films is the tension and you can cut it with a knife in several scenes.  The best examples include the Strudel scene and the Bar scene.  What you also start to see, and this might have started after QT finished up his "Kill Bill" saga, is the change in his tone of film.

Tarantino began making and writing films with an edge, a very gritty edge.  He dealt with the wrong side of law in thieves, murderers, sadists, and hit-men   And for the most part, it all seemed to fit in some realm of reality.  When "Bill" was released you began to see a different side; which included more fantastic plot devices and stories that revolved more around revenge and the bloody road that leads to it.  I'm not going to say that Tarantino is getting lazy, its really just a maturation process in his filmmaking, or an evolution if you will.  He's moved from the gritty streets of Los Angeles, to a fantastic Earth 2 of DC proportions.

Look at any war genre film from the 1960s and 70s, and "Basterds" has its fingers all over it.  From the original "Inglorious Bastards" to "The Dirty Dozen" and maybe in throw in a little "Wild Bunch" and you have "Basterds" in a nutshell.  What Tarantino really brings out is the fact that a so-called "foreign" film can be accessible to any audience.  There are a ton of subtitles across this nearly three hour epic, but the actors who read the dialogue do it so well, and with such fluidity, that you get seduced by their delivery, no matter if its in German, French, or Italian.  I brought up Christoph Waltz winning an Oscar for his portrayal of Col. Hans Landa, aka, The Jew Hunter, and part of that victory must have come from his ability to act and deliver dialogue in English, German, French, and Italian with gusto, hilarity, and conviction.  Every time he appears on screen you are transfixed on his slimy SS Officer.  You both hate and love Landa, and there aren't many characters in the history of film you can say that for.

Is "Inglorious Basterds" a good movie, of course it is.  While some viewers saw it as a little boring, uneven, and maybe even a romantic take on Nazis and World War II France, there is still plenty to take away from "Basterds."  Also, I would put money on the fact that the ending of "Basterds" is one of the most satisfying in any Tarantino film to date, even "Django Unchained."  If you haven't already, or maybe if you've even seen it a few times, check out "Inglourious Basterds," it's tons of fun, and started a new chapter in the career of Quentin Tarantino.

Fun Fact:  Eli Roth, who appears as Sgt. Donny Donowitz, aka The Bear Jew, in "Basterds" directed the scenes from the film-within-a-film, "Nation's Pride."

Read More

Happy Holidays: Django Unchained

Django Unchained - Conversation

I've been hearing this a lot lately;  "Tarantino is back.....classic Tarantino," blah, blah, blah.  My question is; "What would you call classic Tarantino?"  Yes, he's known for his witty dialogue, mind-bending plot twists, and recently, alternative takes on important periods in U.S. and European history.  But I reiterate; "What would you call classic Tarantino?"  My answer:  There's no such thing!  People like to come off as smarter than they are, myself included, but of course I'm reviewing movies so I need to come off as a little bit of an expert, aka, dickhead.  Tarantino is Tarantino, you can't say any of his work is "classic Tarantino" because every film he makes is entirely original and nothing like the previous film he made.  Here's a practical example of two other directors to prove my point:  Take Ridley Scott.  He is known for his sci-fi epics, "Alien" and "Blade Runner."  After those two films he went in entirely different directions, please see "Gladiator" and "Matchstick Men" as examples.  Classic Scott would be sci-fi, and he went back to that with 'Prometheus" with mixed results.  Another director would be William Friedkin, known for taut thrillers and exciting crime work, please see "The French Connection" for a excellent example.  Friedkin left those movies for a while but returned with "Killer Joe" a taut thriller that keeps you on your toes with plenty of violence.  "Joe" would be classic Friedkin.  Digressing, enough talk about "Classic Tarantino." Yes, you can say a movie of his is a classic but enough saying "Classic Tarantino."  I feel it's something that someone says whose only seen "Kill Bill" and "Inglorious Basterds."  Sorry, I had to get that off my chest, but this brings me to Tarantino's newest "classic" the Southern-fried Spaghetti Western "Django Unchained."

"Django" is a modern day "Birth of a Nation," only with more guns, more talking, and the white man getting his comeuppance.  It's intriguing, noteworthy, timely, violent, offensive, and thought-provoking.  Not since 1997's "Amistad" has the issue of slavery been covered in such an unflattering light.  Whereas Steven Spielberg directed "Amistad" with his usual gravitas that includes a two-and-a-half hour history lesson, Tarantino directs with HIS usual gravitas that includes memorable characters, witty dialogue, graphic, sudden violence, but this time, with more maturity.  I might add that Tarantino had the added challenge of directing his first movie without the assistance of late-editor, Sally Menke, who passed away shortly after the premier of "Inglorious Basterds" in 2010.

Tarantino uses both the original 1960s "Django" film, starring Franco Nero, (who he also gives credit to during the opening credits for "Django") and the much-maligned (and probably still is) film "Mandingo" as a template for his newest blood-soaked revenge opus.  We follow Django, played with much restraint by Jamie Foxx, as he and Dr. King Schultz, a dentist turned bounty hunter played by Christoph Waltz, set out from Texas to Tennessee and into the dark heart of Mississippi to collect bounties and save Django's wife, Broomhilda, from the evil clutches of plantation owner Calvin Candie, played with conviction and maniacal delight by Leonardo DiCaprio.  Once again, the plot is easy to follow and unlike much Tarantino fare, is streamlined and doesn't deviate into his non-linear storytelling aside from a few flashbacks of both Django and Broomhilda.  In typical Tarantino fashion, he is also able to find humor in dark subject matter which ranges from KKK riders who are having disguise issues to cameos by the likes of Don Johnson playing a slave-owning Colonel Sanders, and Tarantino himself as an Australian slaver.

If you're a fan of Sergio Leone, or any Western, you'll love the vast landscapes that Tarantino uses to great effect and moments of tension between characters.  It's much like "Basterds" where the tension usually pays off with a grand crescendo of violence, blood, and dead bodies.  Contrary to what people might say about the violence in "Django," its nowhere as bad as some of the other stuff that is out there, but I think it's the context in which the violence is portrayed that might get some people's goats.  Aside from the physical violence, which runs the gamut of black on black, white on black, and black on white, there is also the assault of the dreaded "N-word." dum-dum-dum......the word that people still try and skate around as much as they can.  However, I don't have a problem with Tarantino's use of the word, especially in "Django." Spike Lee might have an issue with it, but when you haven't made a movie that matters since "Inside Man," I'd be a grumpy, short, black guy too.  The word pretty much takes on a character in-and-of itself.  It flows freely throughout the film, but you know what, it flowed freely in 1858, and it still flows freely today.  No matter your creed or race, everyone has said the word, either out loud or under their breathe.  George Carlin gave us the "Seven Words That You Can't Say," and thank goodness he didn't put this on the list.

Maybe it's my white guilt, but yes, I have black friends.  Does that give me the excuse to use the "N-word?" No, it doesn't.  There really isn't a need to use the word at all, but we still use it, even in casual conversation. While I was watching "Django," in a packed theater, I knew the dialogue was going to be chalk full of "the word that shall not be named," so i was waiting to hear some noise when stars like DiCaprio and Samuel L. Jackson starting dropping the "N-bomb" like it was going out of style.  But, alas, not a peep.  Perhaps people were prepared to hear that type of language, and if you've seen "Jackie Brown" you know that Tarantino loves using it in a casual sense.  The reason this word is effective, and makes sense in "Django," is the context.  Yes, slavers and plantation owners used this word freely (of course I don't know that for sure, but what would you expect racist slave owners to say in the 1850s).  Tarantino's dialogue has always been known to be both direct, and a zeitgeist for the time and place the story is taking place in.  He takes ugly language and somehow makes it beautiful and poetic.

The one problem I did have with "Django" was ironically enough the music.  Usually the music that QT picks is almost as important as his dialogue and characters, but this time around it seems like a cash-in.  There's original music from John Legend and Rick Ross (the first time in a Tarantino film that music was actually written for his films), and while you're not going to include music from the 1850s, why include the 808-thumping sounds of Ross.  In a film full of good ideas, this was by far the most awkward and perplexing.  It almost felt like a cheap MTV-type movie gimmick, see the trailer for "Gangster Squad" as a prime example.     

As most of Tarantino's films, there will be a lot of conversation about the violence, language, and how he takes portions of genre films that he loved and makes them his own.  But I find "Django" his most polarizing film.  You already have the line in the sand where many people think that he is tearing the scab off the topic of slavery and uncovering the ugly, but true, side to life in the South for African-Americans in the 1850s.  Others are saying the violence is too much in a post-Newtown world, while I'm saying, relax!  Sorry social crusaders, it's a movie, or maybe this time, it's a little more than a movie.  Maybe it's time to have a conversation about our ugly past.  Since the founding of our nation we have been gun-toting, slave-buying, violent jingoists.  As a society we crave violence in our films, video games, and news.  But the moment something tragic occurs it's time to tone it back.  Enough toning back, we have to face our past demons and prepare for new ones that are sure to come.  While "Django Unchained" might not be Tarantino's best film, it's an example of filmmaking where someone decides that we can't keep looking at our past through rose-colored glasses.  There were some despicable things, and people, in the work-up to the Civil War, and whether you like his style or not, no one spins a story quite like Quentin Tarantino who re-writes history again, sort of, with "Django Unchained."

Fun Fact:  The story of Broomhilda, or Brynhildr, is an old German legend that involves a Norse Valkyrie.  She was later popularized by Richard Wagner's "Ring" cycle opera series.

Read More

The Simplistic Reviews Podcast: December 2012

You've all been clamoring for it, well here it is.  The Simplistic Reviews Podcast for December 2012!  In this sophomore edition we dig into the holiday season with what made us happy in the cinema during 2012.  From "The Dark Knight Rises" to the re-release of "Pulp Fiction" we touch it all, and not in that inappropriate way....okay, just over the pants, but give us a break.

We also give AMC, Nerds, "The Vow", and British -Voiced Nazis a hard time in our newest segment, "Sincerely."

All this and more on The Simplistic Reviews Podcast for December 2012.

Click on the link below to download the podcast and enjoy folks!

FOR MATURE AUDIENCES ONLY.

 

Show Notes:

 Click HERE to listen to podcast

Check us out on Facebook, Twitter, and Pinterest

Read More

Crappy Holidays: Killing Them Softly

FRUSTRATING

Hey, have you ever watched a film that has great characters, great performances, great dialogue, and creative visuals, but still ends up being a totally FRUSTRATING mess?  If not and if that is your cup of tea, go ahead and watch Killing Them Softly.  A crime noir film by Andrew Dominik based on the George V. Higgins novel Cogan's Trade.  I haven't been this FRUSTRATED after seeing a film in a while.  FRUSTRATED because it is a good film that seems to do everything in it's power to be a bad one. 

The film stars Brad Pitt as a 'Fixer' of problems for an organized crime organization.  When two petty criminals hold up an illegal card game, Pitt is brought in to make sure the right people pay and clean up the damage.  It is a simple premise that is drawn out by terribly slow pacing.  Killing Them Softly plays out more like a play than a novel.  With little to no surprises to be had throughout, you will find yourself wondering why it took so long to get to their payoff.  However, the largest criticism of the film, for me, is it's methods in attempting to deliver a message. 

This film is about the realistic methods of capitalism in our society today.  How we actually fight and claw to make a dollar in this world, and what consequences we suffer for our efforts.  However, Aaron Sorkin himself would blush at the heavy-handed way this allegory is forced down our throats.  From beginning to end, while the plot of the story tries to play out, we are audibly and sometimes visually interrupted by speeches from Barack Obama and George W. Bush talking about American society, the American dream, and the separations between the rich and the poor.  No, really.  A gangster film that doubles as a documentary for MSNBC.  The clumsy way they place these clips in the film completely took me out of the movie.  I might be stereotyping here, but I didn't think many mafia thugs listen to NPR right before tuning up a guy.  They don't make their message the elephant in the room.  They make it the animated flying elephant in the room, complete with magic feather and racially insensitive talking crows to boot.  It is a distraction, not a backdrop that hurts the picture through its unsubtly.

I threw up my hands many times while watching Killing Them Softly because it is very good when it isn't preaching to you.  Performance wise, Pitt is excellent.  James Gandolfini delivers one of the better performances you'll ever see him do.  Richard Jenkins puts me at ease, performance wise, like a confident pilot on the intercom of a turbulent flight.  His scenes with Pitt are great, but belong in a better movie.  Scoot McNairy and Ben Mendelsohn round out a cast that all seem to have brought their A game.  Unfortunately, I feel that they're all wasted on a film that I could only recommend to 1980s republicans and wannabe cinematographers. 

Director Andrew Dominik's visual style is one of the most underrated in Hollywood.  He can make you exclaim "That was cool!" with a scene as simple as someone getting out of a car.  His camera trickery, however, never gets too overbearing.  He brings a richness to the dreary city environments and an intimacy to every setup.  The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford put him on the map.  However, I'd love to see him do something even more ambitious than an indie and get him more exposure.  This film definitely won't help matters.

Killing Them Softly proves that even the perfect arrangement of film circumstances can still produce a lackluster movie.  A result that FRUSTRATES the person anticipating the the film for months and the oblivious audience member equally.  Watch it...reevaluate your political outlook on society...pay me...then tell me I'm wrong.

Read More