|
|
Post by Vits on Aug 1, 2018 17:47:52 GMT
MICHAEL CLAYTON opens with an intense flashforward. After it goes back to the present, the central conflict starts... and the plot gets stuck. Characters move from place to place and talk about this conflict, but the plot doesn't really go anywhere. I'm not saying that the movie was bad. The performances and the dialogue prevent it from being boring. The plot starts to move when there are 15-20 minutes left. The climax is very clichéd for a movie that was seemingly trying to transcend, but the ending itself is very creative. 6/10 ------------------------------------- You can read comments of other movies in my blog (in English, in Spanish or in Italian). |
|
|
|
Post by politicidal on Aug 1, 2018 18:07:12 GMT
I thought it was one of Clooney's best movies and featured one of his best performances.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Aug 1, 2018 19:00:45 GMT
I thought it was one of Clooney's best movies and featured one of his best performances. My favorite Clooney film precisely because it's the anti-Clooney film. He isn't cooler than the room, he's somewhat sullen and just beat down by the monotony and moral ambiguity of his job. He just looks mentally exhausted in every scene, it's fantastic. The only time he shows a spark of the Clooney charm is his speech to Tilda Swinton at the end, where his character is deliberately overselling the drama to get a rise out of her on record. Ironically, I feel the OP is complaining about exactly what makes the film great: it's not about anything in particular. It's a story following a corporate fixer muddle through his unremarkable life. He doesn't want to take down the corporation for poisoning people or even for killing Arthur. He just wants to not get blown up. The company's downfall is really just a means to an end (survival) for the main character. The A plot and B plot are only involved peripherally for 90% of the film. Clooney is the protagonist but he isn't the hero or even an anti-hero, really. He's just kind of there. Love that film. OP, try watching it again sometime now that you've seen it once. No expectations or preconceived notions about what the story should be doing and instead focus on what it is. |
|
|
|
Post by Vits on Aug 1, 2018 19:09:14 GMT
OP, try watching it again sometime now that you've seen it once. No expectations or preconceived notions about what the story should be doing and instead focus on what it is. Actually, I first saw it in the theatre. I watched it again because it had been such a long time. I remembered the plot, but I didn't remember if I had liked the movie or not. |
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Aug 1, 2018 19:14:15 GMT
OP, try watching it again sometime now that you've seen it once. No expectations or preconceived notions about what the story should be doing and instead focus on what it is. Actually, I first saw it in the theatre. I watched it again because it had been such a long time. I remembered the plot, but I didn't remember if I had liked the movie or not. Ah, well I guess it's not for everyone. Its lack of structure as a story can be off-putting for some. I think Killing Them Softly was somewhat inspired by the style and tone of this film, even though that film had more of a story and heavy political undertones. |
|
|
|
Post by Vits on Aug 2, 2018 17:13:15 GMT
I think Killing Them Softly was somewhat inspired by the style and tone of this film, even though that film had more of a story and heavy political undertones. If you're interested, here's my comment on the movie. |
|
|
|
Post by rudeboy on Aug 3, 2018 0:52:00 GMT
It's enjoyable with a good performance by Clooney and a splendid one by Swinton. The big flaw, for me, was Tom Wilkinson. He can be an excellent actor at time but here really could have used reigning in. His rants became tiresome, and I never bought for a second that he and Clooney's characters had been close friends all those years. Solid picture though, a nice throwback to 1970s-style thrillers. 6/10
|
|
|
|
Post by Vits on Aug 3, 2018 16:59:20 GMT
The big flaw, for me, was Tom Wilkinson. He can be an excellent actor at time but here really could have used reigning in. His rants became tiresome, and I never bought for a second that he and Clooney's characters had been close friends all those years. That seems like a flaw of the script, not Tom's performance. |
|
