he made 25th hour since then though.
i thought that was excellent.
Spike Lee's "Inside Man" (Review)
Moderator: drizzle
-
The Ivy League Nigga
- Posts: 2701
- Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2005 10:37 pm
- Location: L.A.
This movie was pretty good. But on the same note... everything Ebert says is true, but I don't think it detracts from it being a good film.
The videogame scene was perfect, classic Spike Lee commentary.
And did anyone else catch "The Bomb" from Clockers making a cameo?
Oh and peace to Matty Labitique (sp?) He did his thing!
The videogame scene was perfect, classic Spike Lee commentary.
And did anyone else catch "The Bomb" from Clockers making a cameo?
Oh and peace to Matty Labitique (sp?) He did his thing!
-
slimebucato
- Posts: 7829
- Joined: Mon May 24, 2004 2:10 am
- Location: Winter Park, FL
- Contact:
spoilers, shouldn't have to do this but if you are dumb enough to read this thread then beware
Also, as for Ebert's point on the old man's age, I don't think he has to be in his 90's. He said he was doing business during WW2 and we could assume he is 17 or 18 during this time. so being 17-18 in 1944-45 makes him 21 about the time he put that paper into his bank vault in 1948. If we assume this movie is taking place in 2006, then that would only make him 82. I guess they could of gotten someone older to play Chase, but I don't think the credibility gap is that big.
I didn't think the acting in this movie was anything special. Clive Owen's character pretty much carried the movie.
Also, as for Ebert's point on the old man's age, I don't think he has to be in his 90's. He said he was doing business during WW2 and we could assume he is 17 or 18 during this time. so being 17-18 in 1944-45 makes him 21 about the time he put that paper into his bank vault in 1948. If we assume this movie is taking place in 2006, then that would only make him 82. I guess they could of gotten someone older to play Chase, but I don't think the credibility gap is that big.
I didn't think the acting in this movie was anything special. Clive Owen's character pretty much carried the movie.
-
blastmaster
- King Duggan
- Posts: 29461
- Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2004 2:51 pm
- Location: Hang Gliding Off Motherfuckin Versace Sky Scrapers
-
The ILLatino
- Posts: 8536
- Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2004 2:15 pm
- Location: El Puente, VA
Peeped this last night. It was a dope flick, but like Ebert, I expected Jodie Foster to be more than a person in the flick that Denzel's character sons. There were a lot of good scenes, and the ending was definitely unexpected.
Jodie Foster was HOT as hell, I couldn't help staring at her in every scene and her legs looked magnificent.
Jodie Foster was HOT as hell, I couldn't help staring at her in every scene and her legs looked magnificent.
http://www.twitter.com/the_illatino
RIP Josh
RIP Josh
Galvatron78 wrote:I wanna put my head up Irina's skirt and say a Das Efx verse.
I saw this last night too and I got to admit that I was disappointed. The movie was good up until the end. It never tied together for me. Not that I feel that the movie needs to explain everything, but it didn't even tell a full story to me.
My Issues/Question:
What was Clive Owen's character's motive for robbing the bank?
What the fuck does Jodie Foster's character do?
What purpose does Denzel's girlfriend serve?
There seemed to be a lot of subplots that I expected to develop, but didn't. Like the initial officer on the scene that called in the robbery. I felt he would have a bigger role in the movie, but no big deal. Then there was the missing money that Denzel's character was accused of stealing. It should have played a bigger role if it was going to be introduced, I mean yes Foster's character used it to force his hand, but that was a minor issue.
I just felt like this movie climaxed when Denzel attacked Owen's character, but I didn't know it until the movie ended.
It was still a good movie though, loved the scene with the video game - that scene alone makes it a good movie.
My Issues/Question:
What was Clive Owen's character's motive for robbing the bank?
What the fuck does Jodie Foster's character do?
What purpose does Denzel's girlfriend serve?
There seemed to be a lot of subplots that I expected to develop, but didn't. Like the initial officer on the scene that called in the robbery. I felt he would have a bigger role in the movie, but no big deal. Then there was the missing money that Denzel's character was accused of stealing. It should have played a bigger role if it was going to be introduced, I mean yes Foster's character used it to force his hand, but that was a minor issue.
I just felt like this movie climaxed when Denzel attacked Owen's character, but I didn't know it until the movie ended.
It was still a good movie though, loved the scene with the video game - that scene alone makes it a good movie.
Do you like titties?
Ches!
Loved it, and would love to eat Clive Owen with a spoon...
** Spoiler Alert **
My only part I didn't get was how he knew that specific box contained what it did. I knew he had bank employees working with him, but it seemed like it was supposed to be buried so deeply that no one knew what was in it.
Please enlighten me if I'm just oblivious. Thanks!
** Spoiler Alert **
My only part I didn't get was how he knew that specific box contained what it did. I knew he had bank employees working with him, but it seemed like it was supposed to be buried so deeply that no one knew what was in it.
Please enlighten me if I'm just oblivious. Thanks!
(18:05:41) NerdyBroad: libido cancels logic everytime
I thought it was a great movie...Strong direction and great performances all around.CaseJuan wrote:My Issues/Question:
What was Clive Owen's character's motive for robbing the bank?
He "Did it for the money" but he also wanted to bring down the dirt on Case. So, he got rich and busted the old war crime shit out on the old man.
What the fuck does Jodie Foster's character do?
She is basically damage control, she was there to make sure nothing got out of hand...She obviously is involved with all kidns of shady shit with all kinds of dirt on people. I don't know what her job classificatio nwould be, but she's basically a powerful, manipulative bitch who can get the job done when needed.
What purpose does Denzel's girlfriend serve?
Nothing, except, I guess to show that Denzel has a bunch of other shit going on to distract him from the case at hand. "Big Willy and The twins" LOL...I personally thought it was kind of pointless, but did give us a glimpse into his personal life.
In addition to my italicized comments, the name of this movie is Inside Man. When the fact that Denzel's character was accused of stealing money, I felt it was an appropriate assumption that he or someone on his team may be (at least) accused of being an accomplice to this heist. But instead it simply refers to how he didn't get caught. Like I said before it was a good movie, but it left me wanting more - and not in a good way.HopeLess wrote:I thought it was a great movie...Strong direction and great performances all around.CaseJuan wrote:My Issues/Question:
What was Clive Owen's character's motive for robbing the bank?
He "Did it for the money" but he also wanted to bring down the dirt on Case. So, he got rich and busted the old war crime shit out on the old man.
No. That's not good enough for me. The money was never the focus of the movie and there's no explanation to what his motivation is against Case. How does Owen's character know that the Nazi paperwork is in this deposit box? How does he know about Case anyway?
What the fuck does Jodie Foster's character do?
She is basically damage control, she was there to make sure nothing got out of hand...She obviously is involved with all kidns of shady shit with all kinds of dirt on people. I don't know what her job classificatio nwould be, but she's basically a powerful, manipulative bitch who can get the job done when needed.
I know her role in the movie, but her character seems unrealistic without a job title/status or mob affiliation. I mean if that bitch had dirt on everybody like that and was as arrogant and cocky as she is, wouldn't somebody kill her? What's to stop them? The cops don't like her. The mayor doesn't like her. Even the criminals didn't like her. I felt that her arrogant behavior needed to be justified.
What purpose does Denzel's girlfriend serve?
Nothing, except, I guess to show that Denzel has a bunch of other shit going on to distract him from the case at hand. "Big Willy and The twins" LOL...I personally thought it was kind of pointless, but did give us a glimpse into his personal life.
That's just it, why do we get/need a glimpse of his personal life? Why introduce the stolen money? None of this shit played a role in the movie. And why didn't the movie end around Clive Owen's character?
Do you like titties?
Ches!
-
blastmaster
- King Duggan
- Posts: 29461
- Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2004 2:51 pm
- Location: Hang Gliding Off Motherfuckin Versace Sky Scrapers
-
The Ivy League Nigga
- Posts: 2701
- Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2005 10:37 pm
- Location: L.A.
-
Funk Docta Bombay
- Head Cynic In Charge
- Posts: 14543
- Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2004 1:23 pm
- Location: Fuck You, Fuck You, You're cool, and fuck you I'm out.
- Contact:
-
Funk Docta Bombay
- Head Cynic In Charge
- Posts: 14543
- Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2004 1:23 pm
- Location: Fuck You, Fuck You, You're cool, and fuck you I'm out.
- Contact:
I gotta say that I loved the flick. Awesome heist movie and one of the better things I've seen recently along with Matchpoint.
this is true though.blastmaster wrote:"Inside Man" is a horrible title for the movie, I agree. It is either there to throw you off if you keep it in mind during the movie, or it refers to the fact that Clive Owen's character stayed 'inside' the bank. Either way its not good.
It's implied that the Jewish Rabai in his team would have supplied that, I think. (No Popabitch)beans79 wrote:My only part I didn't get was how he knew that specific box contained what it did.
-
blastmaster
- King Duggan
- Posts: 29461
- Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2004 2:51 pm
- Location: Hang Gliding Off Motherfuckin Versace Sky Scrapers
Now that I think about it, if the cops could get access to the list of box owners, and see that one was nameless, so could Clive.Funk Docta Bombay wrote:I gotta say that I loved the flick. Awesome heist movie and one of the better things I've seen recently along with Matchpoint.
this is true though.blastmaster wrote:"Inside Man" is a horrible title for the movie, I agree. It is either there to throw you off if you keep it in mind during the movie, or it refers to the fact that Clive Owen's character stayed 'inside' the bank. Either way its not good.
It's implied that the Jewish Rabai in his team would have supplied that, I think. (No Popabitch)beans79 wrote:My only part I didn't get was how he knew that specific box contained what it did.
-
drizzle
- Awesome Vatican Assassin
- Posts: 55482
- Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2005 2:55 pm
- Location: where people throw ducks at balloons and nothing is as it seems
there was a ton of references to 70's movies as well: dog day afternoon (obv), serpico, dirty harry, french connection, etccynosure wrote:Sals pizza also made a cameoThe Ivy League Nigga wrote:
And did anyone else catch "The Bomb" from Clockers making a cameo?
good flick
http://www.steadybloggin.com - some of these are my thoughts yo
-
Chuck Earns Cheese
- Posts: 1303
- Joined: Wed Jun 29, 2005 1:04 am
- Location: HNL
Re: Spike Lee's "Inside Man" (Review)
[quote="Brougham33"]
Trailer:http://www.apple.com/trailers/universal/insideman/
Review:
Grade: A
Spike Lee's new crime drama, Inside Man, is nothing short of brilliant. It's also one of the two or three best films he has made in his twenty-year career, along with Do the Right Thing and He Got Game.
At once celebrating, deconstructing and surpassing the heist films and police corruption movies of the 1970s, Lee joins forced with producer Brian Grazer to craft a pressure-cooker thriller. After making many social commentary films, such as Do the Right Thing, Malcolm X, Jungle Fever, The 25th Hour, Lee seems reenergized by the opportunity to helm an interlocking puzzle, in which no piece is what it seems to be.
It's a pleasant surprise to realize that the multi-layered and both character and plot-driven screenplay, in which no detail is unimportant, and no clue is a throwaway, was written by a newcomer, Russell Gewirtz.
This is Lee's fourth teaming with Denzel Washington, following Mo' Better Blues, Malcolm X, and He Got Game, a track record that speaks for itself. Washington plays Keith Frazier, a newly promoted detective, who must rise above a corruption scandal. Clive Owen is Dalton Russell, a brilliant criminal who upends what we think we know about a bank robbery. Jodie Foster is cast as Madeline White, a mysterious Manhattan power broker who gets accomplished exactly what her clients pay top dollar for.
In Inside Man, Washington, Owen, and Foster explore the lure of power, the ugliness of greed, and the mystery of a seemingly perfect robbery that leaves no traces. In this skillfully written and tightly directed thriller, the powerhouse actors play tough New Yorkers, who must outwit one another in order to protect competing interests. The three key players collide in a potboiler that teases the audience with tricks of camera and twists of plot.
Gewirtz has crafted a fresh, intriguing take on the genre of the bank robbery heist that surpasses in narrative complexity, multi-layered characterization, and both political and moral ambiguity the best samplers of the popular genre, including Sidney Lumet's 1974 masterpiece, Dog Day Afternoon, to which Inside Man alludes to directly.
The film is framed by Russell's voice-over narration, which begins and ends the story. Addressing the viewers directly, Owen encourages them "to pay strict attention to what I say, because I choose my words carefully, and I never repeat myself." His dictum holds true as we chase the various players across darkened rooms and corridors of power to see, who will be scammed by whom, and who will wind up on top.
It starts out simply enough, when four people dressed in painters' outfits march into the bust lobby of Manhattan Trust Bank, a cornerstone Wall Street branch of a worldwide financial institution. Within seconds, the costumed robbers place the bank under a surgically planned siege, and the 50 or so patrons and staff become unwitting pawns in an air-light heist.
The first reel is familiar from heist movies, though, just when you say to yourself, this is a remake or variation of Dog Day Afternoon, with Own playing the Pacino part, the movie shifts direction and tone and you realize you're in a totally different milieu.
NYPD hostage negotiators, Detectives Keith Frazier (Washington) and Bill Mitchell (Chiwetel Ejiofor, recently seen in Dirty Pretty Things) are dispatched to the scene with orders to establish contact with the ringleader Russell, and ensure safe release of the hostages.
Working with Emergency Services Unit (ESU) Captain John Darius (Willem Dafoe), the team is hopeful that the situation can be peacefully diffused and that control of the bank and release of those inside can be secured in short order.
To say that things don't progress as planned is an understatement. Russell proves an unexpectedly canny opponent, clever, calm, and in total command. He's a puppet master (in more senses than one), with a meticulous plan to disorient and confuse not only the hostages but also the authorities.
Meanwhile, outside, the crowd of New Yorkers grows as the situation becomes increasingly tense. Frazier's superiors become more concerned about his ability to keep the standoff from spiraling out of control
Trailer:http://www.apple.com/trailers/universal/insideman/
Review:
Grade: A
Spike Lee's new crime drama, Inside Man, is nothing short of brilliant. It's also one of the two or three best films he has made in his twenty-year career, along with Do the Right Thing and He Got Game.
At once celebrating, deconstructing and surpassing the heist films and police corruption movies of the 1970s, Lee joins forced with producer Brian Grazer to craft a pressure-cooker thriller. After making many social commentary films, such as Do the Right Thing, Malcolm X, Jungle Fever, The 25th Hour, Lee seems reenergized by the opportunity to helm an interlocking puzzle, in which no piece is what it seems to be.
It's a pleasant surprise to realize that the multi-layered and both character and plot-driven screenplay, in which no detail is unimportant, and no clue is a throwaway, was written by a newcomer, Russell Gewirtz.
This is Lee's fourth teaming with Denzel Washington, following Mo' Better Blues, Malcolm X, and He Got Game, a track record that speaks for itself. Washington plays Keith Frazier, a newly promoted detective, who must rise above a corruption scandal. Clive Owen is Dalton Russell, a brilliant criminal who upends what we think we know about a bank robbery. Jodie Foster is cast as Madeline White, a mysterious Manhattan power broker who gets accomplished exactly what her clients pay top dollar for.
In Inside Man, Washington, Owen, and Foster explore the lure of power, the ugliness of greed, and the mystery of a seemingly perfect robbery that leaves no traces. In this skillfully written and tightly directed thriller, the powerhouse actors play tough New Yorkers, who must outwit one another in order to protect competing interests. The three key players collide in a potboiler that teases the audience with tricks of camera and twists of plot.
Gewirtz has crafted a fresh, intriguing take on the genre of the bank robbery heist that surpasses in narrative complexity, multi-layered characterization, and both political and moral ambiguity the best samplers of the popular genre, including Sidney Lumet's 1974 masterpiece, Dog Day Afternoon, to which Inside Man alludes to directly.
The film is framed by Russell's voice-over narration, which begins and ends the story. Addressing the viewers directly, Owen encourages them "to pay strict attention to what I say, because I choose my words carefully, and I never repeat myself." His dictum holds true as we chase the various players across darkened rooms and corridors of power to see, who will be scammed by whom, and who will wind up on top.
It starts out simply enough, when four people dressed in painters' outfits march into the bust lobby of Manhattan Trust Bank, a cornerstone Wall Street branch of a worldwide financial institution. Within seconds, the costumed robbers place the bank under a surgically planned siege, and the 50 or so patrons and staff become unwitting pawns in an air-light heist.
The first reel is familiar from heist movies, though, just when you say to yourself, this is a remake or variation of Dog Day Afternoon, with Own playing the Pacino part, the movie shifts direction and tone and you realize you're in a totally different milieu.
NYPD hostage negotiators, Detectives Keith Frazier (Washington) and Bill Mitchell (Chiwetel Ejiofor, recently seen in Dirty Pretty Things) are dispatched to the scene with orders to establish contact with the ringleader Russell, and ensure safe release of the hostages.
Working with Emergency Services Unit (ESU) Captain John Darius (Willem Dafoe), the team is hopeful that the situation can be peacefully diffused and that control of the bank and release of those inside can be secured in short order.
To say that things don't progress as planned is an understatement. Russell proves an unexpectedly canny opponent, clever, calm, and in total command. He's a puppet master (in more senses than one), with a meticulous plan to disorient and confuse not only the hostages but also the authorities.
Meanwhile, outside, the crowd of New Yorkers grows as the situation becomes increasingly tense. Frazier's superiors become more concerned about his ability to keep the standoff from spiraling out of control
Here it goes again:Trademark wrote:cynosure wrote:Sals pizza also made a cameoThe Ivy League Nigga wrote:
And did anyone else catch "The Bomb" from Clockers making a cameo?
I saw that as well. Where is Icesickle? Has Armond White not given him his opinion on this film yet?
I WANT IT DARK, NO SUGAR!
-
Patches O'Houlihan
- Posts: 1327
- Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2004 11:09 pm
- Location: Miami
Good flick. Som great shots.
The shot of the little kid and clive own sitting on the stacks of money through the bank shot was brilliant.
However, the whole idea of the hostages all dressing up as the bank robbers and everyone escaping through the front door was a big cliche. Although, the was Clive Owen escapes was brilliant.
It was obvious that the character yall are speaking about was in his mid 80's. He even said "as a young man".
I definately enjoyed the flick, though.
The shot of the little kid and clive own sitting on the stacks of money through the bank shot was brilliant.
However, the whole idea of the hostages all dressing up as the bank robbers and everyone escaping through the front door was a big cliche. Although, the was Clive Owen escapes was brilliant.
It was obvious that the character yall are speaking about was in his mid 80's. He even said "as a young man".
I definately enjoyed the flick, though.
THIS POST IS CHOCK FULL OF SPOILERS
pretty good movie
i wish it were 15 minutes longer though.
as far as plot holes, i don't give a shit to bicker over the fact that the old guy didn't look old enough, and i frankly don't give a shit that jodie foster's "job title" isn't given...who the fuck cares? i don't give a shit who stole the money denzel was accused about (though for the second i thought about it out of curiosity, i tabbed his crackhead girlfriend's brother as the culprit), i dont' give a shit about any of these "plot holes"
i care about: THEMES
what is the major theme of this movie? justice? vengeance?
maybe a little bit of justice, but i feel the reason spike lee is such a great director is that he can always accurately portray the dualism of human beings...on one end we are heroes, valiantly entering banks unarmed to save hostages...on the other end, we propose to our wives with diamond rings that came at the cost of the holocaust...on one end, we are humanitarians who give major contributions to society, charity maybe...on the other, we are ex-nazis covering up horrific pasts...
i really enjoyed this movie and will watch it again
pretty good movie
i wish it were 15 minutes longer though.
as far as plot holes, i don't give a shit to bicker over the fact that the old guy didn't look old enough, and i frankly don't give a shit that jodie foster's "job title" isn't given...who the fuck cares? i don't give a shit who stole the money denzel was accused about (though for the second i thought about it out of curiosity, i tabbed his crackhead girlfriend's brother as the culprit), i dont' give a shit about any of these "plot holes"
i care about: THEMES
what is the major theme of this movie? justice? vengeance?
maybe a little bit of justice, but i feel the reason spike lee is such a great director is that he can always accurately portray the dualism of human beings...on one end we are heroes, valiantly entering banks unarmed to save hostages...on the other end, we propose to our wives with diamond rings that came at the cost of the holocaust...on one end, we are humanitarians who give major contributions to society, charity maybe...on the other, we are ex-nazis covering up horrific pasts...
i really enjoyed this movie and will watch it again
Nets 2022
360 wrote:Good flick. Som great shots.
The shot of the little kid and clive own sitting on the stacks of money through the bank shot was brilliant.
However, the whole idea of the hostages all dressing up as the bank robbers and everyone escaping through the front door was a big cliche. Although, the was Clive Owen escapes was brilliant.
It was obvious that the character yall are speaking about was in his mid 80's. He even said "as a young man".
I definately enjoyed the flick, though.
just wondering what other films involve bank robbers dressing everyone up the same and all going out the front door?
-
josh resurrected
- Posts: 8
- Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2006 1:15 pm
