Great Cast! How come it sucked?
-
Krog__ — 21 years ago(June 23, 2004 02:12 PM)
One of the initial things that made it suck to me was that the music was ill-fitting i.e. whenever they were driving around, upbeat theme music was playing as opposed to what it should have been: dark.
But that shouldn't be an entire reason why a movie sucks. I am thinking the crappy story and nothing to draw you in. No characters that you felt anything about, no story worth paying attention to, no nothing.
Join my new political party, the Anti-Death Party, and remember Death is dead -
inoldhollywood — 21 years ago(September 06, 2004 02:46 AM)
I liked this movie a great deal. As far as cigarettes and hats well, you better look at films made in the 1940s and you will be surprised to see that EVERYONE smoked and EVERY man wore a hat! I wish more films today cared more about authenticity. I think it adds a lot to a film to have some genuine feel for the period it depicts. Films like "In Harms Way" (made in the 1950s) about World War 2, showed women in late 1950s hair styles and dresses, and it was hard to belive it was THE Pearl Harbor attack. The same for "Singing in the Rain" which was made in the mid-1950s and was about 1927 the music, arrangements and costumes were completely contemporary. Both were wonderful films, but I believe could have been improved by a little more authenticity.
Meanwhile, the music was every bit as appropriate as the masterful Jerry Goldsmith score from "Chinatown". The music WAS contemporary, but instead of "simulating" music of the 1940s, it was more of an "atmospheric" score in the way Goldsmith wrote his. The music was more "mood" than "in your face" art deco style big band. The music was terrific in both films and never took away from the period feel.
This film was not in the caliber of "Chinatown" or "L.A. Confidential", but it still was interesting, thought provoking, fascinating and very entertaining. I also thought it was much better than the long-awaited sequel to "Chinatown" called "The Two Jakes". -
ridge-m-1 — 11 years ago(December 26, 2014 12:59 PM)
The film definitely competes with L.A. Confidential. First off, LA looked more like LA in the Fifties in MH as opposed to LAC.
This aficionado will take the cast and the superb acting in MH over LAC. The two Aussies' performances were nothing to write home about. Sure, Spacey, DeVito, and Cromwell were excellent but only Spacey had a leading role. Basinger's performance was way overrated and just goes to demonstrate the politics of the Academy.
Nolte gave one of his greatest performances in MH. Melanie Griffith, who I usually can't stand, was very good. Malkovich was awesomely eccentric. Any screen time offered Michael Madsen is always a treat. Speaking of Treat, excellent performance. Palminteri, Penn, Baldwin are always reliable and McCarthy played the role of his career. Last, but not least, who's your Baby,
Basinger or sweet and sexy Jen?
Hanson made conscious decisions, very few hats and did anybody ever light up a smoke in LAC. Nolte chain-smoked his way through MH like a fifties cop under the pressure that he was under would and should and the hats were central to the plot. And, Hanson just could not resist an unbelievable shoot-out at the end for the younger, modern audiences. The ending of MH is in the tradition of the classic noir films.
I've screened both pictures in Blu-ray and I'll take another viewing of MH any day. This viewer believes that MH will grow in stature as LAC stabilizes and begins to decline in the eyes of knowledgeable critics. -
wolfmanjeffrey@hotmail.com — 21 years ago(November 10, 2004 01:03 PM)
I truly enjoyed the authenticity aspect of the film. All the details were great, plus the suites thous guys wore back then were just crazy cool! The details are truly great, even the apartment building where Jennifer Connlys character lived and the dolls swimming by the pool! I mean thet was a real 1950s Los Angeles apartment building surprisingly still in its retro original condition ( with some fix up paint of course). But non the less the movie looked great.
Now if could just find out what the name is of that small leather club Nick Nolti has popping everyone with? -
gshaunm — 21 years ago(December 15, 2004 12:38 PM)
I went and saw this movie for my 21st birthday. My best bud and I wanted to leave the theater right then and there. I think the reason it sucked so bad was you just didn't care about the story. SPOILER HERE -> So what if this girl was killed because she knew to much about the US Nuclear program. It just wasen't enough to pull the audiance in. And after a while the mystery just creeped on so bad you just were like. "Oh who cares. Investigate something else. She didn't matter anyway." But noooooo Nolte was to obsessed with Connelly. He just had to find out why. I love 1940s style crime dramas. But this movie left such a bad taste in my mouth I avoided LA Confidential. Although I have sine been told what a good movie that Was.
Shaun of South Carolina -
inoldhollywood — 21 years ago(January 08, 2005 09:49 PM)
In the 1950s, EVERY man wore a hat, had a short haircut and most men smoked a cigarette. It was the style. Check out films, as one man wrote above, but also just take a look at candid street scenes at the L.A. Public Library of ordinary folks on the streets of Los Angeles during the period you will see what I mean.
The biggest problem with Mulholland Falls is that there are those who will compare it with other modern day film noir COLOR classics. of which there are very few. "Chinatown" and "L.A. Confidential" come to mind. This film is not in the same strata as those great films, but has a charm all it's own. The music in those films was written by Jerry Goldsmith and neither soundtrack is anything like the music of those period films, either, but the music works! The soundtrack for this film is by David Grusin, and the music is NOT intrusive, but actually more along the lines of mood setting tonalities. Very quiet, moody and silky in tone, to contrast the austere and sininster character of the story. For me, it works very well and hearing the music on it's own is a real treat. It's beautifully and skillfully written and performed. Like "Chinatown", the CD of the soundtrack to "Mulholland Falls" is out of print.
The fine performances in this film for me, are Nick Nolte and Treat Williams. the latter totally under-rated as an actor. Some aspects of the story are pulled from actual stories of late 40s and early 50s headlines in the city. The more I see this film, the more I see in it. There is so much to enjoy in films without having to pidgeon-hole and compare them to each other. These are all fine films and all have something to say.
This film was just released on DVD and Brazilian copies of it were selling on ebay for up to 60.00 just a couple of months ago, so obviously there are many people who do enjoy this fine film and are willing to have a copy. The good news is MGM has released it for under 15.00. -
Wetbones — 20 years ago(May 04, 2005 12:52 PM)
It sucks because MGM took the film away from the director and ruined it by editing it to death. I keep hoping for a restored director's cut DVD release in the future but the sad thing is that the movie simply isn't popular to make it worthwhile for anyone to invest in such a thing.
-
lbradford47 — 20 years ago(June 02, 2005 02:00 AM)
I may be one of the few who see this as a fine film. I lived in the 40's and 50's and know how people dressed. There is magic in this film, it was no easy task driving across a desert and water was everything. Everyone is so used to seeing a cell phone and jet travel the whole story is missed. People dont know how vicious J. Edgar Hoover could be, and this jumps at you in the film. Maybe so many disliked this film because it was as if they were sitting in a history class in high school. Jennifer Connelly could have been used more and possibly expanded. All in all I enjoyed this film and still remember when ladies wore white gloves in public and black ones to funerals. It was a classy time period for clothes, men wore suits and hats to LA Rams football games.
-
rock_bustin — 20 years ago(July 12, 2005 02:03 PM)
Well, I don't think it sucked - but many did. Why?
I think it's a fine movie and have waited for the
DVD having just about worn-out my old copy pulled
from Cinemax years ago. IMHO, it's main faults are
two: 1. It's episodic (doesn't flow well). 2. It
won't really work on you unless you are sympathetic
too, or admiring of, the main characters.
"It's episodic" is something you could probably say about
a lot of movies (Star Wars Epi IV - in fact all of them).
I can only say even I feel it fails to make one flowing
story. The ensemble cast is underdeveloped and Madsen is
completely wasted. The conspiracy theory on the A-bombs
is not explored enough - If J.Edgar was knowledgable it
went right to the top. Why would a Army officer take it
upon himself to set himself up on murder charges without
a "get-out-of-jail" card like is mentioned in "Patriot
Games" ? What were the two pilots supposed to think if
the officers pulled it off and murdered Nick and Chaz ?
They just fell out? Really, it could've made a better
Trilogy : Part I, The Hat Squad bust the Mob and Nolte
sleeps around, Part II. Murder, Conspiracy and Cover-up,
Part III Final Denouement.
For me, it's my sympathy to the main characters and their
foilbles that suck me in. I have never cheated on my wife ever
But for Allison Pond ( Jennifer D.) - WOW ! OK ruin my life
baby. Whata goddess she was in this movie. "Spectacular", the
dialog sez at one point. And Nolte is in top form: "You carry
your own water." Spoken like a true tough guy.
This film is a great film if you like the time period style and
are honest enough to admit sharing some of the same weaknesses
of the main characters while still admiring their strengths. -
maturity — 19 years ago(January 27, 2007 10:50 PM)
"1. It's episodic (doesn't flow well). 2. It
won't really work on you unless you are sympathetic
too, or admiring of, the main characters."
I think it will appeal to people who like Chinatown, The Big Sleep, The Maltese Falcon, The Public Eye, and L.A. Confidential. It's slow, but so was Chinatown. It has some weaknesses, but I liked it overall.
"I can only say even I feel it fails to make one flowing
story. The ensemble cast is underdeveloped and Madsen is
completely wasted."
Chris Penn is also wasted, but that's probably because MGM butchered the film. It needed 130 minutes to be told. Instead, it got 107. Half the characters are not really developed or introduced properly. Wait for the Director's Cut. Many movies are ruined by the studio's interference.
"Why would a Army officer take it
upon himself to set himself up on murder charges without
a "get-out-of-jail" card ?"
He thought he could get away with it and nobody would ever find out that he was responsible. If not for a series of (huge) coincidences - Hoover being involved with the girl, for instance - he would have gotten away with it. Look at how he interacted with General Timms. There was obviously tension and insubordination. He questioned orders, debated them, and then defied them. He saw Timms as unfit to command. He had the Captain on his side, too.
"What were the two pilots supposed to think if
the officers pulled it off and murdered Nick and Chaz ?
They just fell out?"
They wouldn't think anything. They wouldn't see every person who gets on or off the plane. They wouldn't hear the gun shots over the engine. They wouldn't know that someone had been thrown out of the plane. What makes you think the pilot/s would keep track of every person getting on or off?
"And Nolte is in top form: "You carry
your own water." Spoken like a true tough guy."
Nolte's good, but he mumbles a lot and is almost unintelligible half the time. This is my second favorite Nolte film, after 48 Hrs.