21

539w

For a while there in college, I spent countless hours trying (and failing miserably) to learn how to count cards after reading Ben Mezrich’s Bringing Down the House: The Inside Story of Six M.I.T. Students Who Took Vegas for Millions. So after hearing a film was going to be made based on the book, I was eager to see how it would turn out. Although it is disappointing how Robert Luketic’s 21 changed so much of the actual story, I know better than to judge a film based on its translation from print to celluloid. Besides, there are plenty of other reasons to be disappointed in this film.

Although Luketic’s 21 supposedly tells the true story of the M.I.T. card counting team, the film is nothing more than another cookie cutter Hollywood cautionary tale of how money corrupts the innocent. The story is told from the perspective of Ben Campbell (Jim Sturgess), a brilliant young student at M.I.T., who after getting accepted to Harvard Medical School, is struggling with the enormous costs to attend. So of course, rather than sticking with his nerdy, socially awkward character, by studying and working hard to achieve a scholarship, he decides to win his tuition money in Vegas at the blackjack table.

The team is put together and is lead by Micky Rosa (Kevin Spacey), an M.I.T. math professor and ex-card counter. Micky teaches the students how to count cards and develops a system of team play that allows the students to win at blackjack, while going virtually undetected by the casinos. As the team starts, and continues to win, we see the team transform from math nerds to high rollers living up the high life of Vegas. However, they quickly learn, even with a system as brilliant as theirs, in Vegas, your luck can change at the drop of a hat. After a double cross from within the team and pressure from the casino’s security consultant, Cole Williams (Laurence Fishburne), the team is forced to rethink their actions. The film then takes a turn from a rise and fall from glory tale, to a story of revenge, in a similar and flashy style of Oceans Eleven.

With the staleness of the story, camera work and acting are two aspects that distract rather than accentuate. Most of the film is shot in an ultraglossy, highly saturated style that you would normally see in a musicPH2008032703385 video. Yet there were a handful of scenes which were shot on a digital handy cam, which gave the images a grainy electronic look and feel that didn’t match up with the rest of the film. In addition, the contrast in acting was another aspect that did not seem consistent in the film. The acting from the student characters were sub par and Fishburne’s reworking of his go to tough-guy role into an aging tough-guy was just lazy. It was a shock that Kevin Spacey even agreed to take this role; his superb acting ability was under utilized in this film, which seems to trivialize his past performances.

Over all the film did not live up to the hype it generated around the festival circuit and it was only mildly entertaining. You are going to like this film if you are a fan of the glitzy Vegas caper genre, which it slightly falls into. However, if you are a poker fan, you will undoubtedly be drawn in by the blackjack story, yet you will be left disappointed with only 15 minutes of screen time devoted to cards. If that’s what you are looking for you might as well read the book, it’s much better anyway.

21

Agree or disagree? Leave a comment and let me know what you think.

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

bookmark bookmark bookmark bookmark bookmark bookmark

Vantage Point

22vantage-600

Considering that one of my biggest guilty pleasures is the antiterrorist show 24, I thought I was going to love Pete Travis’s Vantage Point. Although the film has many similarities to 24 (most noticeably the high intensity of the music score), that guilty feeling I got was not from pleasure, but rather being duped by the trailers into thinking it was going to be a good film.

Right from the start the film dives, headfirst, into the plot, wasting no time with silly conventions like character development. A bold move, considering there is only roughly 20 minutes of actual plot. The remaining hour and ten minutes consists of a storytelling gimmick, where the plot is retold from the multiple “vantage points” of the different characters.

The plot itself, tells the story of a presidential assassination that takes place at a historic peace and terrorism summit in Spain. The various “vantage points” are told from the points of view of a TV news team (lead by Sigourney Weaver), a secret service agent (Dennis Quaid) who has already taken one bullet for this president, an amateur video enthusiast (Forest Whitaker), the President of the United States (William Hurt), and between 2 and 4 different terrorist/assassins (Edgar Ramirez, Saïd Taghmaoui, Ayelet Zurer, and Eduardo Noriega).

The pacing of the film was amazingly fast, which keeps you on the edge of your seats through most of the film. The fast pacing and editing are essential to the storytelling gimmick; they help to distract you from the logistical and timing errors that exist in the plot. Such as Forest Whitaker’s character keeping up with a fleeing terrorist in a dead sprint, for what has to be over 2 miles, while also keeping a his camera steady to record everything.

vantage-pointProbably the biggest drawback was the lack of character depth. I am baffled as to why Travis decided not to spend any time developing any of these characters fully, considering there are so many characters that span across some great archetypes. Having neglected to do so, I found that I was often sympathizing with the assassins, as they were the only characters which had any emotionally motivating purpose to their actions.

Over all, the film had real potential and by the midway point, I was sure that it was going to live up to the excitement I was feeling at the time. Yet, through a series of unfortunate events, a far too long car chase, and Mathew Fox opening his mouth to recite lines, the film took a dramatic nosedive for the mediocre. I wouldn’t go as far as to say this film is a waste of time to watch, but if you are looking for some 24 style action and plot, stick to watching reruns on television.

Vantage Point

Agree or disagree? Leave a comment and let me know what you think.

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

bookmark bookmark bookmark bookmark bookmark bookmark

Next Page »