this is a mediocre movie…who agrees with me?
-
richcapo — 16 years ago(November 08, 2009 07:19 AM)
And Pacino has all the range of a chainsaw he just screams and overacts, and has been for a long, long time, in my opinion. He really has become a terrible actor, as far as I'm concerned. Better than I could ever be, yes, but that's not saying anything.
_Richard -
cuttingedgenyc — 20 years ago(January 23, 2006 08:00 PM)
My thoughts exactly. This movie was slightly better than mediocre for me but I liked the Devil's Advocate much, much better. And in fact I had the same thought after finishing Angel Heart just today.
Same thoughts here about Pacino as the devil vs. Deniro. I think Deniro also did a great job but the director didn't really do a very good job showcasing just how "evil" Cypher (and the whole situation) was. I know, the movie wanted to be "subtle" - but I am not sure a movie like this should rightfully BE subtle. It was so scary and gross and frightening leading up to the end that I was very let down by the non-explosiveness of the ending itself. -
doubleohlinsey — 20 years ago(January 26, 2006 04:07 AM)
That's interesting. I really felt like the whole romantic situation (i.e. the explicitness of the "love" scene) vs real situation (you've seen it so I won't spoil it for others) between Angel and Epiphany worked really well as displaying Cypher's evil without needing him to be present. For myself, didn't need more than that, but we're all different folks so I can see your point.
I thought both films had fascinating demonic characters, but A.H. more of a tinker-at-the-start-and-watch-it-grow evil vs D.A. is more of a devil-with-his-fingers-in-everything evil. I liked both in different ways. -
DarkRealityX — 20 years ago(February 06, 2006 01:59 AM)
I personally love this film, but I don't put it up on a pedestal, and I do see some of its faults. It's really all about the ending - once you see the ending, you really ought to see it again, within the next week or so, to make everything really fall into place. But up until the ending, the pace of the film could have been a lot better. I liked the start of it, but once he got to New Orleans, it just slowed down. I felt uninterested in Angel finding Favourite. Overall, the film dragged. But once you get to the ending, and once you understand it, it becomes a lot better.
"The Devils Advocate" wasn't as good as "Angel Heart" - not by a longshot. It had a lot going for it, and I did like it a lot. But though the two are similar, I found myself liking them for different reasons, and it's hard for me to compare them. One fault I had with Devils Advocate was the confrontation between Reeves and Pacino - I dunno, either it was too long or otherwise didn't go over well.- Dark Reality
-
wolfman_rory — 20 years ago(February 15, 2006 11:20 AM)
This was better than the devil advocate, hands down. Keanu Reeves is a terrible actor, only thing I watched in which he had any personality was Bill & Ted (WILD STALLIONS!)
This whole movie creeped me out from start to finish, and it didn't need to employ any special effects to do so, hell with a big enough budget I could make a few creepy faces and scary eyes, it'd be just as scary as in DA.
As for DeNiro's character I thought he was pretty good, the scene with the egg is about as evil as he gets but I still think he kicked ass. He made a more convincing baddie than Pacino, remaining mysterious and pretty sinister throughout the film. The thing with his name kicks ass too. -
BERGDORF — 20 years ago(February 20, 2006 11:40 AM)
ANY moron who even suggest that ANGEL HEART is mediorce needs to banned from watching movies altogether! ANGEL HEART is and always will be the most intelligent, intriguing, macabre and sensual horror movies EVER made!
True evil is in everyone and for those who go looking for it they WILL find it.in their own soul. So the scary part is that anybody could have sold there soul to the devil and realize it only after it is too late!
"WE DON'T LIVE IN THAT KIND OF A WORLD THELMA" -
sborges — 19 years ago(April 01, 2007 05:20 PM)
Keanu Reeves - ?!?!?! Up against Rorke & DeNiro in their prime - this must be a joke, right? This movie is exceptional, brilliant - one of the best films to come out of the 80s - as for the devil's advocatejust another piece of beep by mr. reeves.
-
m-slovak79 — 19 years ago(March 10, 2007 01:34 AM)
i just seen this movie it was pretty bad to be honest devils advocate is FAR FAR FAR FAR better than angel heart angel heart it just flat out booring to sum it up. i cant believe people can say this is better than devils advocate, theres no comparison!
i give angel heart a 4/10 (5 TOPS) devils advocate is MUCH MUCH MUCH better, i give devils advocate a 9/10. i dont understand how this movie can get a 7.1/10 , dont make sense to me.
considering deniro was in this movie it was pretty bad and he's barely in it to top it off. i was not going into the movie expecting to much but it turned out worse than i was expecting i was going into the movie expecting to rate it around a 6/10 area but i was wrong.
p.s. those who think keanu reeves cant act i dont even get that crap cause he obviously can even if you dont consider em a top level actor he's still pretty good in devils advocate. -
cadgemeister — 19 years ago(March 16, 2007 10:07 AM)
Everyone's got thier own opinions, but I personally loved it. I loved how the atmosphereic film that Parker managed to create (especially in the beginning) which was heightened by a brilliant score, I also thought De Niro was spot on playing "Louis Chyphre". Rourque and the rest of the cast were really good as well, but for me De Niro stole it.
That said, I am also a huge fan of the Devil's Advocate, Pacino was superb as the devil and the only real problem I had with the film was the bit near the end where all the jazz music started playing, that was a bit cheesy.