Here I go, slowly chipping away at the back log. It'll be firewood soon. Keep checking back.
Collateral
Review by Jon Waterman
***1/2
Vincent, a hired assassin, needs to complete a new job in Los Angeles. He has several stops with a strict timetable. In comes Max. Max is the premier cab driver in the city. He knows all the best routes and takes more pride in what he does than anyone else you can find. When the two come together, it’s like a match made in…well, I don’t know what. Vincent traps Max into driving him around all night long. This can’t be good, can it?
This, like “28 Days Later…,” is a good example of how digital video can be used effectively. I can see both the practical and stylistic reasons behind shooting with the format. On the one hand, it allows quicker shooting with less set up time while shooting with big name actors Tom Cruise (Vincent) and Jaime Foxx (Max) in the middle of city. However, the streets are isolated and you can easily assume they would be closed off to begin with. So, even though there is a potentially practical motivation, that brings us to the more solid style portion of my argument.
Michael Mann is a calculating, thorough director. Often times in order to make sure something is right, he’ll operate the camera himself. His choice here was deliberate and worked well. With the digital video, you have different options for night shooting. He’s able to get the close-ups he wants and needs while still maintaining a relatively good amount of detail in the background. The lights of the cityscape take over the frame, which creates a somewhat more natural look while the green, blue and orange tints that come with this approach add more grit and an underlying superficiality. Lastly, the video tries to compensate for the dark spots by making it lighter, which gives off a more pronounced grainy look to once again give a subtler less than perfect, raw feel.
Along with the intelligent, well-crafted camera work comes an intelligent, well-crafted script (by Stuart Beattie). His characters are interesting and contrasting case studies in human nature when confronted with intense, desperate situations. The conflicting viewpoints on Vincent’s profession provide a great back and forth dialogue that’s well reasoned on both sides. Vincent seems very two-dimensional on the surface, but don’t let that fool you. It’s just a cover for the job. As far as the storyline goes, the script works again. It does become slightly predictable, especially near the end, but that doesn’t mean there aren’t surprises. There’s one particular sequence, which shocked me due to it’s against the Hollywood grain execution, but I don’t want to say anymore.
“Collateral” is like Vincent. It does what it has to do and gets out. All business. Very efficient. By the time you know what to expect, it’s too late to stop it, so just let it happen. Yeah, I know. The analogy lost its steam at the end there, but so does the movie. But it’s still a very good movie worth seeing.
Collateral
Review by Jon Waterman
***1/2
Vincent, a hired assassin, needs to complete a new job in Los Angeles. He has several stops with a strict timetable. In comes Max. Max is the premier cab driver in the city. He knows all the best routes and takes more pride in what he does than anyone else you can find. When the two come together, it’s like a match made in…well, I don’t know what. Vincent traps Max into driving him around all night long. This can’t be good, can it?
This, like “28 Days Later…,” is a good example of how digital video can be used effectively. I can see both the practical and stylistic reasons behind shooting with the format. On the one hand, it allows quicker shooting with less set up time while shooting with big name actors Tom Cruise (Vincent) and Jaime Foxx (Max) in the middle of city. However, the streets are isolated and you can easily assume they would be closed off to begin with. So, even though there is a potentially practical motivation, that brings us to the more solid style portion of my argument.
Michael Mann is a calculating, thorough director. Often times in order to make sure something is right, he’ll operate the camera himself. His choice here was deliberate and worked well. With the digital video, you have different options for night shooting. He’s able to get the close-ups he wants and needs while still maintaining a relatively good amount of detail in the background. The lights of the cityscape take over the frame, which creates a somewhat more natural look while the green, blue and orange tints that come with this approach add more grit and an underlying superficiality. Lastly, the video tries to compensate for the dark spots by making it lighter, which gives off a more pronounced grainy look to once again give a subtler less than perfect, raw feel.
Along with the intelligent, well-crafted camera work comes an intelligent, well-crafted script (by Stuart Beattie). His characters are interesting and contrasting case studies in human nature when confronted with intense, desperate situations. The conflicting viewpoints on Vincent’s profession provide a great back and forth dialogue that’s well reasoned on both sides. Vincent seems very two-dimensional on the surface, but don’t let that fool you. It’s just a cover for the job. As far as the storyline goes, the script works again. It does become slightly predictable, especially near the end, but that doesn’t mean there aren’t surprises. There’s one particular sequence, which shocked me due to it’s against the Hollywood grain execution, but I don’t want to say anymore.
“Collateral” is like Vincent. It does what it has to do and gets out. All business. Very efficient. By the time you know what to expect, it’s too late to stop it, so just let it happen. Yeah, I know. The analogy lost its steam at the end there, but so does the movie. But it’s still a very good movie worth seeing.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home