Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Willie Oleson" data-source="post: 348180" data-attributes="member: 8">[ATTACH=full]42198[/ATTACH]It would be easier to describe what doesn&#039;t happen in this story, and perhaps the 90s decade was the perfect compromise for a film that needs sufficient technology in order to avoid looking &quot;dated&quot; and at the same time avoids being dominated by too much technology that kills the atmosphere stone-dead.Scenes that involve a phone booth are inherently suspenseful because there&#039;s almost never a good&nbsp;&nbsp; reason to use them.At first I thought it was an unfortunate decision to have Al Pacino play opposite Robert De Niro (or vice versa) because, well, I tend to confuse them. Similar features, equal Hollywood status.But as the story progressed it kinda felt as if it was meant to be, because with a charismatic antagonist played by Robert De Niro the story becomes two stories.It&#039;s not completely without emotional manipulation as the narrative acknowledges that the criminals in this story are very good (at being bad) and I guess that&#039;s when the villain becomes sort of an anti-hero.Will they continue to be good or are they going to fail - and that question applies to both Pacino and De Niro.All I&#039;m going to say is that it takes some contrivance to wrap things up - but even that looks very, very good. I also loved the moody, neo-eighties soundtrack.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Willie Oleson, post: 348180, member: 8"] [ATTACH type="full"]42198[/ATTACH] It would be easier to describe what [I]doesn't[/I] happen in this story, and perhaps the 90s decade was the perfect compromise for a film that needs sufficient technology in order to avoid looking "dated" and at the same time avoids being dominated by too much technology that kills the atmosphere stone-dead. Scenes that involve a phone booth are inherently suspenseful because there's almost never a [I]good[/I] reason to use them. At first I thought it was an unfortunate decision to have Al Pacino play opposite Robert De Niro (or vice versa) because, well, I tend to confuse them. Similar features, equal Hollywood status. But as the story progressed it kinda felt as if it was meant to be, because with a charismatic antagonist played by Robert De Niro the story becomes two stories. It's not completely without emotional manipulation as the narrative acknowledges that the criminals in this story are very [I]good [/I] (at being bad) and I guess that's when the villain becomes sort of an anti-hero. Will they continue to be good or are they going to fail - and that question applies to both Pacino and De Niro. All I'm going to say is that it takes some contrivance to wrap things up - but even that looks very, very good. I also loved the moody, neo-eighties soundtrack. [/QUOTE]

Verification

What month follows July?