www.filmbrats.com

hotline
reviews
shorts
interviews
home

Please select a letter from the list below to see the reviews.

a / b / c / d / e / f / g / h / i / j / k / l / m / n / o / p / q / r / s / t / u / v / w / x / y / z


Behind The Screens

by Jon Waterman
Volume 1, Issue 2
Volume 1, Issue 1
Special Features
D-VHS
Digital Projectction vs. 35mm
Multiple DVD Releases

FILMBRATS - REVIEWS

Ocean's Twelve (*)
review by Jon Waterman

Danny Ocean and his boys are at it again. Well, actually, Terry Benedict is at it, forcing the old crew of eleven to be at said “it.” You see, Terry wants all the money that was stolen from his casinos back. He has been in contact with a mastermind thief to track everyone down. If the money isn’t repaid in full, with interest, Mr. Benedict is going to the authorities. Well, the guys already spent the majority of the cash on various things. So, how will they come up with the tens of millions needed to square up the bill? Why, by stealing of course. What else?

With “Ocean’s Eleven” I was in. This time, count me out. For starters, once again it takes far too long to get into anything. We spend a good half hour or more catching up with everyone and reintroducing the characters. I could honestly care less what they’ve been up to, or how they spent the money. It didn’t mean anything to the storyline or to the audience. So, by the time any sort of actual plot line comes along, the interest in gone. Screenwriter George Nolfi (who’s only previous work is the sure-to-be-classic, “Timeline”) doesn’t get things moving any better once the heist starts up. The first job they pull was too uncomplicated, and the major one was complex beyond comprehension. All the twists and turns couldn’t be predicted, but they also couldn’t be believed (even for a movie that requires so much suspension of reality as this). It makes this whole escapade rather lifeless.

The characters aren’t as fun as they were, either. A big problem is the addition of the other thief, the Night Fox (played by Vincent Cassel from “Irreversible”). He’s out to one-up everyone and prove that he’s the best in the world, and so he sabotages their efforts. The movie probably didn’t need two enemies (three if you count the FBI agent played by Catherine Zeta-Jones). That’s a bit of overkill. He wasn’t even a good character to begin with.

The visual aspect suffers from the same type of overload. Director Steven Soderbergh shoots most of his own stuff (under an alias). This time, he also brought in another cinematographer in Chris Connier. Even though he worked on “Angela’s Ashes,” I think having the two working like this created too much of a mish-mash, stylistically. It tried to accomplish everything and hit the eyes with all sorts of tricks and maneuvers and whatnot, which made it all fail.

I have a problem with the name, too. I know that’s the easiest way to indicate a sequel and everything. But they didn’t really add another person. Sure, an argument could be made that they did, but look at the big picture of the movie and you’ll see that the twelve is essentially meaningless. The hokeyness of the script verged on insulting, especially at the end. But for the most part, the big problem is that it just wasn’t fun or interesting or exciting.

respond to jon@filmbrats.com