You may remember a few months ago my review of a British gangster film, "London Boulevard", that ended up being a disappointment. Now I bring you another gangster flick, and the book it is based on, is written by the same author as the "London Boulevard" novel. Like "Boulevard", "Blitz" only had a theatrical release in England, so many of you here probably haven't heard of it. How did it compare with "Boulevard"? Lets find out......
"Blitz" stars God's actor, Jason Statham (we are off to a good start already), and some other English actors that I recognized but you rarely see outside of English films. The synopsis can be written quite simply, as the movie is the story of a hard-boiled London detective (Statham) who is trying to track down a psycho who is killing policmen. I figured, "hey, this sounds pretty promising".............
..............but, there really is no point in trying to get around it, "Blitz" is a terrible film. I had perused some reviews before sitting down to watch it, and the word "shite" came up quite often (must have been English reviewers), and, I have to say, that sentiment is not misplaced. Miserable acting, bad writing, shoddy plot elements, and some really atrocious film editing (without a doubt, the worst movie goof ever takes place in this film). Right in the very opening scenes of the film, when Statham takes out some troublesome youths with a field-hockey stick, the acting was so bad, I had to cringe a little bit. I mean, Statham was just his usual self through-out the whole film, mumbling his lines and just trying to be an overall badass, which I don't begrudge, he at least does THAT well, but the rest of the actors were, to use the term again, "shite". The story was badly written, as there were a number of plot holes and elements that just went unexplained. They reveal who the killer is about 15 minutes it, so there went the mystery. The rest of the film basically became an-hour long manhunt. Oh, and that editing goof? Mind-blowing. Towards the end, Statham is firing a gun, a pistol, and when we get a shot of the action from the side, he is holding in his hand a silver revolver, nothing like the gun he was using a second before. This wasn't some quick, oh-shit-I-barely-saw-that type of thing, this was on screen for like two seconds, and very noticeable. I can just imagine the people behind this film sitting down and watching their final product. I would have loved to have seen the shock on their faces when that happened. "Blitz" didn't give me the impression of a low-budget flick, but that type of thing didn't help its case.
All that being said.....I actually enjoyed the damn film. When all is said and done, "Blitz" really is just a quirky British gangster flick, with some really over-the-top violence, and hilarious lines (I have a real soft-spot for British slang/humor/style of speech, particularly when it is coming from salty characters). Even though all the mystery went out the window early on, I still felt compelled to watch it. To the movie's credit, it still made it interesting enough such that you wanted to see how they would apprehend the killer. I think in the end though it is my weird fetish for British gangster flicks that made me like this movie in the end. It is a cinematic disaster, but those Brits always seem to have a fun take on crime films, and something about them keeps me coming back. If you are really looking for the next Oscar contender, then stay very very far away from this film, but if you just have an hour and a half to kill, and are willing to settle for some mindless fun, than "Blitz" is actually not a bad way to go about it.
Verdict: I can't believe I am doing this, but I am going to say see it, but with conditions. Be warned that this movie is fun to watch, but it is a terrible example of film-making. Grade: ummm, well, under normal circumstances, I would give it a C-. Yeah, I guess thats about right.
If you liked this movie you might also like: Can you name a hard-boiled British gangster or crime film? OK, that will do......
"Blitz" stars God's actor, Jason Statham (we are off to a good start already), and some other English actors that I recognized but you rarely see outside of English films. The synopsis can be written quite simply, as the movie is the story of a hard-boiled London detective (Statham) who is trying to track down a psycho who is killing policmen. I figured, "hey, this sounds pretty promising".............
..............but, there really is no point in trying to get around it, "Blitz" is a terrible film. I had perused some reviews before sitting down to watch it, and the word "shite" came up quite often (must have been English reviewers), and, I have to say, that sentiment is not misplaced. Miserable acting, bad writing, shoddy plot elements, and some really atrocious film editing (without a doubt, the worst movie goof ever takes place in this film). Right in the very opening scenes of the film, when Statham takes out some troublesome youths with a field-hockey stick, the acting was so bad, I had to cringe a little bit. I mean, Statham was just his usual self through-out the whole film, mumbling his lines and just trying to be an overall badass, which I don't begrudge, he at least does THAT well, but the rest of the actors were, to use the term again, "shite". The story was badly written, as there were a number of plot holes and elements that just went unexplained. They reveal who the killer is about 15 minutes it, so there went the mystery. The rest of the film basically became an-hour long manhunt. Oh, and that editing goof? Mind-blowing. Towards the end, Statham is firing a gun, a pistol, and when we get a shot of the action from the side, he is holding in his hand a silver revolver, nothing like the gun he was using a second before. This wasn't some quick, oh-shit-I-barely-saw-that type of thing, this was on screen for like two seconds, and very noticeable. I can just imagine the people behind this film sitting down and watching their final product. I would have loved to have seen the shock on their faces when that happened. "Blitz" didn't give me the impression of a low-budget flick, but that type of thing didn't help its case.
All that being said.....I actually enjoyed the damn film. When all is said and done, "Blitz" really is just a quirky British gangster flick, with some really over-the-top violence, and hilarious lines (I have a real soft-spot for British slang/humor/style of speech, particularly when it is coming from salty characters). Even though all the mystery went out the window early on, I still felt compelled to watch it. To the movie's credit, it still made it interesting enough such that you wanted to see how they would apprehend the killer. I think in the end though it is my weird fetish for British gangster flicks that made me like this movie in the end. It is a cinematic disaster, but those Brits always seem to have a fun take on crime films, and something about them keeps me coming back. If you are really looking for the next Oscar contender, then stay very very far away from this film, but if you just have an hour and a half to kill, and are willing to settle for some mindless fun, than "Blitz" is actually not a bad way to go about it.
Verdict: I can't believe I am doing this, but I am going to say see it, but with conditions. Be warned that this movie is fun to watch, but it is a terrible example of film-making. Grade: ummm, well, under normal circumstances, I would give it a C-. Yeah, I guess thats about right.
If you liked this movie you might also like: Can you name a hard-boiled British gangster or crime film? OK, that will do......
Yeah! yeah! We get it -- you hate Statham!
ReplyDelete