Comments on: A Review of American Gangster http://host94.hrwebservices.net/~drockwo/blog/2007/11/12/a-review-of-american-gangster/ Highbrow flix, low brow ramblin's Sat, 21 Nov 2009 06:54:16 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.1 By: 40 http://host94.hrwebservices.net/~drockwo/blog/2007/11/12/a-review-of-american-gangster/#comment-57 40 Wed, 21 Nov 2007 20:36:30 +0000 http://host94.hrwebservices.net/~drockwo/blog/2007/11/12/a-review-of-american-gangster/#comment-57 Words I am responding to this review without having seen the flick. The quote preceding the review is quite poiniant. I personally feel that the use of pop music in film is incredibly tired. The examples shown above were so successful that filmmakers have used them as a blueprint. But most often, this catchy music seems to be used as a substitute for substance. "Just in case you're not enjoying this scene, here's hit we all remember from 196..." However, there are exceptions from time to time, such as the opening of Jim Sheridan's In America's use of "Do You Believe In Magic". Why is this film called American Gangster? Don't most of us think of "America" when we here the word gangster? I know that gangsters exist all over the world, but I don't understand why using the word America in titles is such a selling point. I enjoyed the way this review is professional yet slightly personal like a journal entry. Am I just defining the word blog? I think I'll wait for the dvd to enjoy Denzel's always competent work. Words
I am responding to this review without having seen the flick. The quote preceding the review is quite poiniant. I personally feel that the use of pop music in film is incredibly tired. The examples shown above were so successful that filmmakers have used them as a blueprint. But most often, this catchy music seems to be used as a substitute for substance. “Just in case you’re not enjoying this scene, here’s hit we all remember from 196…” However, there are exceptions from time to time, such as the opening of Jim Sheridan’s In America’s use of “Do You Believe In Magic”.
Why is this film called American Gangster? Don’t most of us think of “America” when we here the word gangster? I know that gangsters exist all over the world, but I don’t understand why using the word America in titles is such a selling point.
I enjoyed the way this review is professional yet slightly personal like a journal entry. Am I just defining the word blog?
I think I’ll wait for the dvd to enjoy Denzel’s always competent work.

]]> By: drockwood http://host94.hrwebservices.net/~drockwo/blog/2007/11/12/a-review-of-american-gangster/#comment-58 drockwood Thu, 22 Nov 2007 06:19:28 +0000 http://host94.hrwebservices.net/~drockwo/blog/2007/11/12/a-review-of-american-gangster/#comment-58 Really good point about the title; "american gangster" is totally redundant. Of course they have gangs everywhere but the gangster picture, like the western, is a decidedly american genre. I think adding "american" to the title is supposed to make it sound profound. Try to see the movie in the cheep seats. Also, it sounds like you would definitely find j.smiths article on chud to be enlightening. thanks for posting Really good point about the title; “american gangster” is totally redundant. Of course they have gangs everywhere but the gangster picture, like the western, is a decidedly american genre. I think adding “american” to the title is supposed to make it sound profound.
Try to see the movie in the cheep seats. Also, it sounds like you would definitely find j.smiths article on chud to be enlightening.

thanks for posting

]]> By: Kyle http://host94.hrwebservices.net/~drockwo/blog/2007/11/12/a-review-of-american-gangster/#comment-68 Kyle Sat, 01 Dec 2007 01:30:42 +0000 http://host94.hrwebservices.net/~drockwo/blog/2007/11/12/a-review-of-american-gangster/#comment-68 Unlike "40" I did see this picture, and I have to say the more I think about it the more disappointed I am. I was hoping this would be either a return to or a rise to the greatness that some believe Ridley Scott once achieved. Unfortunately, this is more mediocre entertainment. MATCHSTICK MEN is way better than this, and it had 2003 Nicolas Cage in it. This movie is lazy. You talked about the soundtrack, and you're absolutely correct. It's fucking lazy. Any director who's worth anything should be aware of the strength of "Across 110th St" in JACKIE BROWN and how that movie now owns that song. Fucking "Can't Trust It"??? Poor character development - I still don't understand why Richie Roberts is a good cop. I understand that he's an average working class guy, as displayed through his Joisey accent, slouched posture beer gut, brown leather jacket, but what the fuck happened to him in the past that sets him apart from every other cop in Jersey? And why all the fuss over his divorce proceedings? More bad character development - Frank Lucas turning. After all his motivational speeches on the importance of family, sticking together, etc., we get 5 minutes of interrogation and BAM! Frank Lucas takes down the entire NJ special narcotics team or whatever the fuck they're called. High five!! It's not all negative though. It does deliver with strong performances from both lead men, a surprising scene with Cuba Gooding Jr returning to form, and great supporting roles from two hugely under-recognized talents, Chiwetel Ejiofor and Josh Brolin. Oh and Ted Levine. Unlike “40″ I did see this picture, and I have to say the more I think about it the more disappointed I am. I was hoping this would be either a return to or a rise to the greatness that some believe Ridley Scott once achieved. Unfortunately, this is more mediocre entertainment. MATCHSTICK MEN is way better than this, and it had 2003 Nicolas Cage in it. This movie is lazy.

You talked about the soundtrack, and you’re absolutely correct. It’s fucking lazy. Any director who’s worth anything should be aware of the strength of “Across 110th St” in JACKIE BROWN and how that movie now owns that song. Fucking “Can’t Trust It”???

Poor character development - I still don’t understand why Richie Roberts is a good cop. I understand that he’s an average working class guy, as displayed through his Joisey accent, slouched posture beer gut, brown leather jacket, but what the fuck happened to him in the past that sets him apart from every other cop in Jersey? And why all the fuss over his divorce proceedings?

More bad character development - Frank Lucas turning. After all his motivational speeches on the importance of family, sticking together, etc., we get 5 minutes of interrogation and BAM! Frank Lucas takes down the entire NJ special narcotics team or whatever the fuck they’re called. High five!!

It’s not all negative though. It does deliver with strong performances from both lead men, a surprising scene with Cuba Gooding Jr returning to form, and great supporting roles from two hugely under-recognized talents, Chiwetel Ejiofor and Josh Brolin.

Oh and Ted Levine.

]]>