Inside Man

Ears · « **on:** 25 Mar 2006, 06:51 am »

Another nice break from the norm with good acting and a story that hasn't already been done a half dozen times for a change.

I would give this one 4 out of 5.

Also saw the remake of The Hills Have Eyes...which actually seem to compete with Hostel for bloody detail.
The story is quite suspensful at times up until a bit over half way, but it does lose some steam and become predictable if you haven't seen the first.
I would give this one 3 out 5.

maxwalrath · « **Reply #1 on:** 25 Mar 2006, 06:58 am »

As an aside, I saw a positive review that said it was refreshing to see Spike Lee bounce back from movies like "The 25th Hour", which I though was a great movie. Sorry to get off topic, but I thought it was a good enough movie to come to it's defense.

Ears · « **Reply #2 on:** 25 Mar 2006, 07:03 am »

Quote from: maxwalrath

As an aside, I saw a positive review that said it was refreshing to see Spike Lee bounce back from movies like "The 25th Hour", which I though was a great movie. Sorry to get off topic, but I thought it was a good enough movie to come to it's defense.

I will have to check out the 25th hour then...as I have not seen it yet.

bubba966 · « **Reply #3 on:** 25 Mar 2006, 09:07 am »

Quote from: Ears

I will have to check out the 25th hour then...as I have not seen it yet.

Having just gotten back from Inside Man I can pretty much agree with what you had to say about it.

But I will say that I wasn't pleased at all with the 25th Hour. Hey, if you liked being preached to and force fed someone else's opion then go for it. Me, I didn't care so much for that. Sure, the whole movie wasn't like that. But it was more than overpowering enough for me to completely dislike the entire thing even though the entire thing wasn't bad.

maxwalrath · « **Reply #4 on:** 25 Mar 2006, 06:45 pm »

Quote from: bubba966

...if you liked being preached to and force fed someone else's opion then go for it. Me, I didn't care so much for that. Sure, the whole movie wasn't like that. But it was more than overpowering enough for me to completely dislike the entire thing even though the entire thing wasn't bad.

I think it's the kind of movie where different parts of it stand out to different people. Off the top of my head I can't remember which part would be preachy, I just thought the story was good and the ending was great.

jakepunk · « **Reply #5 on:** 29 Mar 2006, 04:02 am »

A big thumbs down on Inside Man. Unfortunately, Roger Ebert's review gives away a crucial plot point that allowed me to figure everything out from the beginning. I do not try to "figure out" movies (especially thrillers) and just enjoy them, but I have to say I figured out every scene.

The dialogue is written for fifteen year olds. The movie has a lackadaisical quality and is not a "serious" thriller. I didn't like Spike Lee's directing, either. It was as if he had a checklist of techniques and clichés he wanted to use in the movie and checked them off as he went:

1. Over-exposed soft focus shot. Check.
2. Changing depth of field with telephoto lens. Check. Check.
3. Black and white shot. Check.
4. Close up of brooding protagonist à la Kubrick. Check.
5. Gratuitious use of the "N" word. Check.
6. Social commentary on race relations that has nothing to do with the plot. Check.

(For the last two, what else could you expect from Spike Lee?)

I don't relish writing negative reviews, but I would pass on this movie. I liked the previous Clive Owen thriller I saw, Derailed.

Ears · « **Reply #6 on:** 31 Mar 2006, 03:11 pm »

Derailed is one of the easiest to figure the plot movies ever...and Jen can not act to save her life...in everyones opinion

And I never watch reviews before going to a movie as they always give too much away.

jeffreybehr · « **Reply #7 on:** 31 Mar 2006, 05:23 pm »

'Inside Man'--
1. I saw Ebert's review on 'Ebert and Roeper' but didn't read one. If he included too many clues in E&R, I sure didn't hear them.
2. I too did NOT like the overexposed, excess-contrast shots. I wonder what Lee's point was? Whatever it was, all I saw was the ugly image.
3. I too do not try to figure out thrillers while I'm watching. I go to enjoy myself, and I did. Very good--4 stars.

'Derailed'--
1. As I wrote above, I don't analyze while I'm watching, so I didn't figure it out, I just watched and enjoyed.
2. Not everybody thinks Annison can't act; I thought she did just fine, and she's nice to look at. WARNING--I hoped to see more of her on the unrated version on DVD, but no such luck.
3. I enjoyed 'Derailed', but it's just 'good'--3 stars.

I gave up on Lee's social-commentary films after 'Do the Right Thing'; what a waste of talent.

LordCloud · « **Reply #8 on:** 4 Apr 2006, 10:29 pm »

Just saw this over the weekend, and I enjoyed it very much. I thought there was very little use of the "N Word", as a matter of fact, I can't recall any use of it as all, but I'm geting older. As far as any social commentary on race relations goes. I thought it was very lightly touched upon. Sorry, but if you have a black guy amidst a bunch of white (NYC) cops, race is going to come into play. Get over it. But again, it wasn't thrown in your face in my opnion. I like Spike Lee's directorial style, but he is far from my favorite director. I thought Jody Foster's character was a waste of time and budget, and they could have put anyone in Mr. Dafoe's character. I really liked Denzel's and Clive's acting as usual. I give it a thumbs up.

wendell · « **Reply #9 on:** 6 Apr 2006, 11:00 am »

saw this last night, and I enjoyed it!

PhilNYC · « **Reply #10 on:** 19 Apr 2006, 03:21 pm »

I saw this last week with fairly high expectations, and while the movie didn't come close to those expectations, I did find it enjoyable. I expected this to be one of those movies where the leader of the robbers was some brilliant villain, and the back and forth between the villain and the negotiator swings back and forth dramatically, and the consequences of who wins/loses is of national/world importance. This movie came across more "neighborhoodie" despite the bank owner's pedigree and Jodie Foster's mingling with "bin laden's nephew"...

I'd give this a 7/10...a good rental...

bboplive · « **Reply #11 on:** 19 Apr 2006, 04:29 pm »

My 2 cents. I saw it and liked it, but with the talent involved, including mega-stars like Denzel and Foster, it could have/should have been a lot better. This is not a typical Spike film at all, as if some "ghost director" did it for him. No traces of the ingenuity of his earlier films. IMO, Lee has not risen to the level of "Do the Right Thing", which was ignored by the Academy back in 1989. That film was so much better than this year's winner ("Crash") while covering similar themes. Catch this classic if you have not seen it yet!

Besides Clive Owen was totally wasted in his role, with only two major bookend scenes with no mask on. Foster's role was more of a distraction (especially in those heels!) and did not further the plot development IMO. Denzel was Denzel – superb as always. His character could have been further developed.

As always, with Lee the soundtrack is superb and this time features a cool Bollywood song -"Chaiyya Chaiyya Bollywood Joint (featuring Panjabi MC". Check it out – it will have you dancing in the aisles!

Woodsea · « **Reply #12 on:** 20 Apr 2006, 12:08 am »

7/10. I noticed the race stuff as well. I was surrounded by a room full of Singaporeans and just a few other ex-pats. It just seems it was not needed in this film. Jodies role was superfluous to the whole thing. Denzel's character was just too cool, and at least once stepped way out of bounds with what I though his character would do.
The prize should not have been there, if it was how did they find it? This was not explained. Yeah, a number was missing in the count, but that is a needle in a haystack when nothing should have been found.
The grainy shots were not needed, and Denzel gliding back to the bank door was silly.
Everything else was good, and it had a nice hollywood ending.

PhilNYC · « **Reply #13 on:** 20 Apr 2006, 06:05 pm »

I thought Spike Lee did a pretty good job at keeping the race stuff to a minimum...pretty much just that one little exchange between the patrolman and Denzel, and it was handled in a pretty humorous way.

Regards to the graining scenes, I didn't have a problem with that. Those scenes were "in the future"...interviews with some of the hostages after the whole ordeal was over, offering some clues (or maybe just confusion?) as to what actually happened. Making them grainy was just a way of distinguishing them from the "current" timeline of the film.

After thinking about it, I think the reason this movie didn't knock my socks off was because there was very little consequence at stake here. Once the motive of the robber was revealed, the only guy who really had something to lose was a guy you actually hoped would lose. It would have been better if every character had something huge to lose if they failed at what they were trying to accomplish...