Once Upon a Time in Mexico

Rob Babcock · « **on:** 19 Jan 2004, 05:15 am »

I was thinking of buying this one Tues, as I like the cast. Has anyone seen it? Is it any good?

bubba966 · « **Reply #1 on:** 19 Jan 2004, 05:38 am »

Change the Mex in the title to Crap and that's the real quick version of my opinion on it...

Ears · « **Reply #2 on:** 19 Jan 2004, 02:30 pm »

Quote from: bubba966

Change the Mex in the title to Crap and that's the real quick version of my opinion on it...

Does this hold true for the content only...or does the transfer not hold a candle to Desperado?

bubba966 · « **Reply #3 on:** 19 Jan 2004, 08:21 pm »

The movie is crap. I was more than a bit disappointed.

I've no clue as to the transfer. But the transfer is rarely an issue anymore. The compression is the problem.

My problem with the movie was that there was a whole lot going on that wasn't being explained. It was like they cut out an hour or so's worth of footage.

And extensive cutting would also go along with why it sat around for 2 years before they decided to release it in the theaters.

Maybe it won't be so bad on DVD if they have a bunch of deleted scenes that explain many of the unexplained plot points in the film...

Rob Babcock · « **Reply #4 on:** 19 Jan 2004, 08:23 pm »

Hmmm...that sucks. I wanted this to be a great movie. Maybe I'll have to get "Open Range" instead on Tues. It got really great reviews, for what that's worth.

bubba966 · « **Reply #5 on:** 19 Jan 2004, 08:28 pm »

Quote from: Ears

or does the transfer not hold a candle to Desperado?

I'm guessing you're speaking of the newer transfer on Desperado (the one done for the Superbit release), and not the older DVD transfer?

I know the old DVD transfer is bad (the one on the El Mariachi/Desperado single disc issue), and the new Superbit transfer was a good deal better. And I'd imagine that they used the Superbit transfer for the new re-issue that was put out a month or two ago.

And while the new SB transfer on Desperado was good, the transfer on Mexico should be as good, or better. But I can't say for sure as I didn't bother to pick it up early last week, nor do I have plans to pick it up when it's released tomorrow...

bubba966 · « **Reply #6 on:** 19 Jan 2004, 08:40 pm »

Quote from: Rob Babcock

Hmmm...that sucks. I wanted this to be a great movie.

Yeah, so did I. Maybe that why it sucked for me, I was expecting a bit too much. And it was only so-so (if that). High expectations + so-so at best movie is never a good thing.

Man, you shoulda heard the girl at the video store last week when I told her that Mexico sucked.

She really wasn't thrilled about that. She said I ruined her entire day with that news.

Maybe I'll stop by tomorrow and see what she thought of it after I ruined it for her...

IMO, the series kept going downhill with each new movie. Mariachi was great. Desperado was still good, but not on par with Mariachi. But Mexico wasn't even good.

Ears · « **Reply #7 on:** 20 Jan 2004, 04:36 pm »

Yes, I was talking the SB version of Desperado which I like even better than El Mariachi which was also very good.

Once Upon A Time was filmed whith a hi def camera which should lend itself to DLP so this is why I asked about the transfer.

Open Range is a given to buy and I guess I will be renting Once Upon A Time.

bubba966 · « **Reply #8 on:** 20 Jan 2004, 07:14 pm »

Yeah, I'd just rent Mexico first, or buy it from someplace you can take it back if you don't like it (like Costco).

It's certainly not a movie I can recommend people rush out & buy. Watch it first to decide if you don't mind it.

Rob Babcock · « **Reply #9 on:** 21 Jan 2004, 06:43 am »

Well, heaven help me, I bought it anyway. My family really wanted to watch it, it was on sale, etc etc. If it sucks, I'll admit I was forewarned. And it'll be off to Disc Go Round to sell it. But it will get its day in court.

Rob Babcock · « **Reply #10 on:** 10 Feb 2004, 08:36 am »

Geez, I just tonite finally got around to watching this one!

Well, it was a mixed bag. Bubba was right about one thing- it's a bit short on anything you could call plot or character developement. And I can't really call it a good movie in any conventional sense. But it was oddly compelling on some levels, and it had some fantastic performanced, most notably by Johnny Depp. In a more just world, he'd have Oscars lined up all across his mantle.

The stunts and action sequences were sublimely absurd, just completely rediculous. Still, I got a kick out of them.

The verdict? I don't regret watching it, and there are some really cool elements, but I think this one will go to the used store.

A close one, and one shot of Salma gettin' naked woulda swung it the other way!

bubba966 · « **Reply #11 on:** 10 Feb 2004, 08:41 am »

Quote from: Rob Babcock

The stunts and action sequences were sublimely absurd, just completely rediculous. Still, I got a kick out of them.

It's supposed to be like that 'cause you're watching the story of a legend in action. And legends are always bigger than life.

So you felt it was missing large chuncks of story as well? If so you'd only be the second person I can recall that felt the same way. Most people I know had a big problem with the over-the-top action because they couldn't get it in their head that it was supposed to be like that because you're watching the retelling of a legend (and a big one at that).

Rob Babcock · « **Reply #12 on:** 10 Feb 2004, 08:46 am »

I guess the "story" woulda been a bit more plausible if it was some tiny little banana republic somewhere, but IT'S FRIGGIN' MEXICO! Are we supposed to believe one CIA agent can just topple the president of FRIGGIN' MEXICO to snag 20 million pesos? And what would that be anyway, like five hundred bucks? It really had no story- it was like a music video without any music. They even had Erique Eglacious fer Crissake!

The Legend is supposed to be larger than life, but they did a crappy job building up just how he got to be such a legend. And that doesn't explain all the other wackiness.

Still, if there's any justice at all Depp will win an Oscar for this one.

bubba966 · « **Reply #13 on:** 10 Feb 2004, 08:55 am »

Depp ain't gettin' any Oscar for Mexico because he wasn't nominated for Mexico. He might get one for Pirates though...

I'm not talking about the plausibility of the story. I'm just talking about it just making plain sense. One example I recall, what was up with Depp & Eva Mendes? They were shown to have (or have had?

) some type of relationship. But what kind? For how long? What the hell was going on?

It just felt like waaay to much stuff was cut out of the picture that left many a thing unexplained. I don't know if any of the extras on the DVD make any better sense out of the film after them.

And I guess you're supposed to know exactly how big the legend of the Mariachi was/is from the first two movies.

Or, maybe there was more build up of the legend, but they cut it all out. There had to be some reason it was finished & sitting on a shelf somewhere for 2 whole years before they released it...

Rob Babcock · « **Reply #14 on:** 10 Feb 2004, 09:00 am »

He definately deserves one for Pirates, that's for sure. It'll be criminal if he doesn't get it.

Yeah, you know there's some relationship between the Depp & Menendez characters, but like every interesting element in the movie, they never explain it.

I can forgive some of the movies flaws, but it just didn't make any sense. It really did seem like they lost 30 minutes of film stock and said "what the hell" and assembled it anyway.

bubba966 · « **Reply #15 on:** 10 Feb 2004, 09:02 am »

30 minutes?

Boy, you're being nice!

Looked to me more like they dumped 45-60 minutes somewhere. Hell, the damn LOTR movies had buttloads of footage cut out of them and made waaaaaaaaaaaaaay more sense than Mexico did.

JoshK · « **Reply #16 on:** 10 Feb 2004, 03:38 pm »

I saw it Sunday. Overall I agree with you two for the most part. The movie was entertaining but not good. It was missing a lot in my mind as well and seemed to jump around incoherently a bit too much to feel like a real story. I wouldn't watch it again but I don't regret watching it once, like many movies these days.

My Boss's Daughter however I had to turn off. Wasn't funny and was going nowhere fast.

Ears · « **Reply #17 on:** 11 Feb 2004, 12:57 am »

Actually, watching it twice is required to keep track of WTH is going on in this movie

It still is not going to win any awards but seems to be slightly better the second time around......except for the part were my kid comments constantly about how Jack Sparrow looks a lot different in this one

Rob Babcock · « **Reply #18 on:** 11 Feb 2004, 01:06 am »

I just got to thinking today that I'll probably watch it once more before I decide to sell it. Maybe it'll make more sense the second time thru.

That's the strenght of Depp's charisman and performance- Sands is a real cold blooded POS killer. I mean, the guy murders the cook just because the food's too good! We shouldn't be rooting for him, but we are anyway.

PhilNYC · « **Reply #19 on:** 11 Feb 2004, 03:05 am »

Quote from: bubba966

I'm not talking about the plausibility of the story. I'm just talking about it just making plain sense. One example I recall, what was up with Depp & Eva Mendes? They were shown to have (or have had? ) some type of relationship. But what kind? For how long? What the hell was going on?

It just felt like waaay to much stuff was cut out of the picture that left many a thing une ...

I haven't seen the movie, but I do know that Johnny Depp was only on the movie set for 10 days... after Pirates became such a big hit, the movie studio re-cut Mexico to make Depp's role more prominent. That's one reason why the storylines around him may seem to be underdeveloped...