|
|
Post by kernowsqueen on Jan 12, 2013 15:16:09 GMT
Hooray! I got my copy last night and today is my birthday so I can just enjoy fun RS goodness!
Happy birthday dance!
|
|
|
|
Post by Rachel on Jan 14, 2013 16:49:24 GMT
Well, I watched Hotel Noir yesterday and have to say that it was a major disappointment as a movie. Very self-indulgent on the part of the writer/director. I know Sebastian Gutierrez said his movie was a homage to film noir but I didn't see it. It was more like a "wink, wink, nudge, grin, aren't we clever" send-up of film noir pretending to be a homage.
I found it jarring that in a movie shot using the conventions of film noir, with characters dressed in 1950's clothing, those characters would at times mouth dialog that was very contemporary. Sloppy writing or the writer trying to be clever? I couldn't decide.
The movie has intersecting plot lines, some of which didn't make much sense. Lots of WTF moments in this one. Pretty much the first 10 minutes with Danny De Vito had nothing to do with the rest of the movie.
As for Rufus - his plot line was the only one that DID make sense in a noir movie - and he did his usual excellent job. I think if Sebastian Gutierrez had made Rufus and Malin Ackerman the focus of the movie it would have been a true film noir. She was shamefully underused, she would have been a fabulous femme fatale leading Felix astray.
I think we can add this one to the list of movies Rufus did because he got to work with some interesting people and play an interesting character even though it was a weak script.
|
|
|
|
Post by anyother on Jan 14, 2013 18:50:22 GMT
Oh, that does sound a bit disappointing - pity. But of course I first have to see it for myself.
I braved through Extreme Ops and even found some enjoyment in that, as in Dirty Weekend, so I'll try and keep positive...
|
|
|
|
Post by Rachel on Jan 14, 2013 22:22:59 GMT
Anyother - Oh yes, everyone who can should watch this one. It's not a terrible movie and Rufus does give a strong performance. My problem was with the movie as a film noir.
It just wasn't very "noir-ish". And not because of the comedy, lots of movies considered film noir included comedy. It could be because most noir is tightly plotted and this one definitely isn't.
I think my expectations were raised by the interviews in which Rufus said how much fun it was to make this movie and the enthusiastic interviews with Sebastian Gutierrez.
|
|
|
|
Post by kernowsqueen on Jan 14, 2013 22:24:33 GMT
SPOILERS! Well, I watched Hotel Noir yesterday and have to say that it was a major disappointment as a movie. Very self-indulgent on the part of the writer/director. I know Sebastian Gutierrez said his movie was a homage to film noir but I didn't see it. It was more like a "wink, wink, nudge, grin, aren't we clever" send-up of film noir pretending to be a homage. I found it jarring that in a movie shot using the conventions of film noir, with characters dressed in 1950's clothing, those characters would at times mouth dialog that was very contemporary. Sloppy writing or the writer trying to be clever? I couldn't decide. The movie has intersecting plot lines, some of which didn't make much sense. Lots of WTF moments in this one. Pretty much the first 10 minutes with Danny De Vito had nothing to do with the rest of the movie. As for Rufus - his plot line was the only one that DID make sense in a noir movie - and he did his usual excellent job. I think if Sebastian Gutierrez had made Rufus and Malin Ackerman the focus of the movie it would have been a true film noir. She was shamefully underused, she would have been a fabulous femme fatale leading Felix astray. I think we can add this one to the list of movies Rufus did because he got to work with some interesting people and play an interesting character even though it was a weak script. Well I will have to agree with Rachel on this... This was a disapointment to me the story was disjointed and the mix of characters was at times too silly to be believed! Sometimes a character would express shock or amazement with "Gosh thats neat Mister"in a manner that suggested neither a quaint reflection of the Noir environment nor a sense of sarcastic mockery... then a second later comment "Yes Soothing so like your demeanor ."  The mix of Eugene Onegin/Micky Spillane and the softest sort of Bette Page imagery just made the whole thing a mess to me - BUT admittedly I don't really know all that much about Film Noir. Rufus looked great as always, but I would much rather watch some of his other works than this. kq |
|
|
|
Post by anglophile on Jan 14, 2013 22:29:47 GMT
Have only had time to watch this once, as I mentioned on another thread, but I liked it very much. Admittedly, I know next to nothing about film noir, so I'm not the one to look to for a serious discussion about where this succeeded or failed, but it's easy to watch it and get an idea of the things that were supposed to be spoofed.
My only complaint was that there was not nearly enough of the underwear scene, but then I have a peculiar standard of satisfaction when it comes to partially disrobed handsome men in black and white. for me, more is better. Just sayin' ...
|
|
|
|
Post by kygal on Jan 15, 2013 1:14:33 GMT
Lol Anglo. Agree that the first of the movie was a waste. Really just enjoyed Rufus, which is pretty much what I focused on while watching ( as usual). Who else was in it...just kidding. I did like it enough. I think he liked the idea of it because it was different.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rachel on Jan 15, 2013 16:44:09 GMT
but it's easy to watch it and get an idea of the things that were supposed to be spoofed. My only complaint was that there was not nearly enough of the underwear scene, ... Anglo - I think if I had gone into this movie thinking it was a spoof (like Dead Men Wear Plaid) I wouldn't have had the problems I did. It was more the disconnect from what SG claims to have been doing in this movie (a homage to film noir) to what he actually did (which was to re-imagine the some of the conventions of noir and gently mock others). As for your complaint - oh yeah, totally agree there! Modified to add - one thing I did enjoy was seeing Rufus play the tough guy - not a role he gets to play often and he did a great job with it. |
|
|
|
Post by Petruchio - Good God on Jan 16, 2013 5:56:20 GMT
LOL Anglo... you said the right words ...
|
|
|
|
Post by rueful on Jan 16, 2013 14:30:57 GMT
I did like the movie a lot and I thought it was mostly successful, although I agree there were elements that could have been eliminated. SPOILERSFor example, the subplot about the superhero costume was up and down. I thought her obsession with the superheroine said a lot about Malin Ackerman's character. Then, Rufus's response to that obsession (initially thinking she was kidding, then kind of laughing, but ultimately getting her the costume) gave some insight into the development of their relationship and his level of love for her. Then they passed off the costume to Rosario Dawson (who otherwise seemed a reasonably intelligent character), and it just became kind of schtick, so to me that was less successful. I thought the first scene was tied in by the implication that Mandy Moore's husband who was so good at satisfying women was Vance (Kevin Connolly's character), but I could be wrong about that. It also was a standard film noir scene, where the average guy is seduced by a beautiful woman. In another film noir, the rest of the movie might have been about how she talked Eugene's loser character into murdering her husband. But in this movie, it had the twist of her ultimately being a nut and sobbing all over him. I didn't think it was meant to be a mockery of film noir though. I thought it was using humor to establish Eugene's character a bit. He's telling the story, so we need to know a little bit about him to decide how reliable a narrator he is. It also established the black humor that we got at the end. As a framing device it was probably unnecessary, but I didn't mind it. END OF SPOILERSGuitierrez brought a very modern sensibility to the film. I think he was influenced by people like Tarantino, who like to turn fillm conventions upside down. To me, these guys are not always mocking the old film genres. Instead, they seem almost gleeful about being allowed to "play" in a game they love, and sometimes that glee becomes too obvious in the film, to the point where it takes you out of it for a moment. It would be good if there was a grown up on the set, saying, "you're going just a little too far here." I'm not really a fan of Tarantino, but that's largely due to the buckets of fake blood he uses during filming. That's probably one reason I liked Hotel Noir so much--bloodless!  To me, it's not perfect, but it's definitely not Extreme Ops (which is always my low-standard Rufus film for comparison ;D ). I'll watch it again, and not just Roofing my way through. |
|
|
|
Post by Rachel on Jan 16, 2013 23:16:27 GMT
SPOILERSFor example, the subplot about the superhero costume was up and down. I thought her obsession with the superheroine said a lot about Malin Ackerman's character. Then, Rufus's response to that obsession (initially thinking she was kidding, then kind of laughing, but ultimately getting her the costume) gave some insight into the development of their relationship and his level of love for her. Then they passed off the costume to Rosario Dawson (who otherwise seemed a reasonably intelligent character), and it just became kind of schtick, so to me that was less successful. Rueful - yes! This is the self-indulgence I was talking about. They went and made a joke out of something that should have had some real significance. IMHO they could have cut out all of Rosario Dawson's storyline - it added nothing to the overall movie. Even her scenes with Eugene were kind of flat. MAJOR SPOILERIt would have been much more satisfying, emotionally, to have Eugene (Danny De Vito) connect with Hannah (Carla Gugino) his estranged wife rather than Rosario Dawson. The scene they had at the end of the movie was sweet. Rueful also said: Hmmm, I'll have to rewatch this - if this is so then yes, this does make some sense. Rueful continued That explains it! I hate Quentin Tarantino's movies. Finally LOL Rueful - I actually kind of like Exteme Ops - it's a dreadful movie, but it is faithful to the conventions of its genre - lots of action, lots of beautiful scenery, lots of breathtaking stunts, not a lot of plot or character development.
|
|
|
|
Post by kygal on Jan 17, 2013 11:45:50 GMT
Possible Spoilers.......
I wasnt sure who Mandy Moores hubby was. Thought it might turn out to be Felix when I first started watching it. That part confussed me. Whether we like something or not, we can always agree that Rufus will give a great performance. I kind of enjoyed EO also. It is what it is.
|
|
|
|
Post by rueful on Jan 17, 2013 15:20:16 GMT
SPOILERSSPOILERSRueful - yes! This is the self-indulgence I was talking about. They went and made a joke out of something that should have had some real significance. IMHO they could have cut out all of Rosario Dawson's storyline - it added nothing to the overall movie. Even her scenes with Eugene were kind of flat. You're right, it wasn't strictly necessary, except as a way to get Danny De Vito into Felix's room, but I enjoyed her scene with Rufus (mainly for his facial expressions ;D). I thought the rest of the stuff was an attempt to give her a life of her own as well as to tell us something about Eugene. Whether they managed to do that successfully, is another question. De Vito and Gugino were great together, even in that short scene, but I don't know if I would have liked it if they had ended up together. I'm not sure I would have thought that was realistic either--Hannah would have changed and grown so much since he met her as a young girl in the park, when he was basically her ride out of town. And now, he will be filling the same role for Rosario Dawson. You wonder how many times he may have repeated this pattern... Regarding the first scene: Well, it was just an impression. I'm not sure if we're supposed to think that or not. ;D I'm not a big fan either. I've seen very little, because they are way too gory for me. They remind me of that very old SNL skit with Dan Ackroyd as Julia Child, where the blood comes squirting out--it's played as comedy, but it makes me queasy. Mainly I meant that I think Guitierrez did feel that he was making an homage to film noir and didn't intend to mock it. He has that modern, cynical attitude that if you love something, you have to (using a great British expression I learned here on the Rooftop) "take the p!ss out of it" a little. I thought that the sometimes twisted humor probably appealed to Rufus when he read the script.  There, now you've explained my dislike of EO! That's not a genre I enjoy at all. When cars start driving recklessly through the streets, I head straight to the fridge! I gained 10 pounds watching Bullitt with Mr Rueful.  Possible Spoilers....... I wasnt sure who Mandy Moores hubby was. Thought it might turn out to be Felix when I first started watching it. That part confussed me. I hadn't thought of that possibility, but that would have been a good twist/connection. Absolutely, Rufus always gives his best, no matter what! Anyway, it's probably better that we don't always like the same things. If we did, every post might be, "Didn't Rufus look gorgeous!  ". ;D I love the discussions--you ladies always point out things I hadn't noticed or thought of. I've tried to sit through EO a couple of times, but end up FF a lot. Rufus does look extremely beautiful , and he and Heino Ferch were professional actors working in a professional film. The rest of the cast....  I'm including Rupert Graves in that category, I'm sorry to say.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rachel on Jan 17, 2013 16:38:50 GMT
SPOILER
Rue - agree totally that Eugene and Hannah shouldn't have ended up together. Not only isn't she the same girl who ran off with him, he's not the same man. Plus, if she stayed it would have been out of pity and Eugene is/was way to proud to accept her pity. I just would have liked to see him open up more to her, to tell her the things he told Rosario Dawson. Hannah would have offered to stay, but Eugene would have sent her away.
END SPOILER
An interesting Quentin Tarantino note (being as we both dislike his gory movies): on one of the morning new shows today he was being held up as someone who contributes to the violence culture in this country specifically because, as you pointed out, in his movies killing someone is often a "punchline" to a joke.
And to drag this back to film noir, and Hotel Noir, that is one of the things I liked about this movie. The violence was not glorified. Yes, people were killed, violently, yes people got beaten up, badly, but the film did not linger on the killings or the beatings. We got the same jolt seeing Rufus all bruised and bloodied after his beating by the thugs without having to see the thug administer said beating.
Rueful said about Extreme Ops:
LOL, Rue. What can you say? The only one of the skiers with any major acting credit was what's-her-name who had a minor role in on "Saved By the Bell" (cheesy American sit-com). I think I checked once and none of the other "actors" had done much since. As for Rupert, to me this is where Rufus shows what a true pro does - rises above the script and gives a good performance. You don't sleepwalk through the movie like Rupert.
|
|
|
|
Post by kygal on Jan 17, 2013 23:03:09 GMT
Sitting around and talking about how gorgeous Rufus is sounds good to me...lol. I know what you mean Rueful. The discussions are great around here. Enjoy reading others interpretations. It does may ya think.
|
|
". ;D I love the discussions--you ladies always point out things I hadn't noticed or thought of.
I'm including Rupert Graves in that category, I'm sorry to say.