Great Cast! How come it sucked?
-
daisysmom — 17 years ago(January 12, 2009 10:00 AM)
Easy question. Answer in two words. John Malkovich. He was severly miscast. No way he would ever have been a General- not to mention that was when the wheels came off the movie. The Amry (especially a highly classified division in the 50's cooperating with the LAPD?? Not a chance. They would have had Treat Williams boot Hoover's a** off the second he crossed the no-wake zone, not have Timm, in his smoking jacket, invite him to tea.)
Also, I have to agree with the posters who discuss the many inconsistencies in the film. Tough cop with psychiatrist. Hoover "in love" with wife but adulterous affair "as much as he could get away." A lot just didn't add up so it was hard to get behand the characters. -
inoldhollywood — 15 years ago(November 27, 2010 11:30 AM)
John Malkovich's character is the only thing that keeps me from rating this film a "10" in my book. Unfortunate. There is so much I like about the film. Mainly love the atmosphere, costumes, sets and music. John Malkovich's character is so difficult to watch and his performance is so artificial. Too bad. I rate the film a solid "7" with him in it.
"Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown!" -
jmim-1 — 17 years ago(February 08, 2009 12:24 AM)
Get real, driver 8, Devil in a Blue Dress was a great film. You are in a definite minority on that one. Maybe you've watched too many MTV videos and have seriously warped your attention span. Maybe you have ADD. Too bad.
-
Noirdame79 — 12 years ago(January 27, 2014 09:28 AM)
Very good points, Belmontheir. My main issue with
Mulholland Falls
is that it just felt hollow to me - an attractive surface, good recreation of the period, costumes, cinematography, talented actors - but I couldn't really care about the characters or what happened in the course of the movie. I'm not saying that you have to like the characters, but they should inspire some feeling in you other than indifference.
I agree that the military angle felt very out of place. It would have made it much better if the plot involved organized crime, a serial killer or some kind of Hollywood cover up. That's what made
LA Confidential
and
Hollywoodland
so interesting.
Mulholland Falls
is not a bad film (and certainly does not fall into the same company as the horrific theatrical cut of De Palma's
The Black Dahlia
), but it's not in the league of others that it has been compared to.
I'm also not a Nick Nolte fan, so that might be another reason why I'm not overly fond of this movie. -
CromeRose — 9 years ago(October 09, 2016 02:21 PM)
I'm late coming in, but I suspect that for all those who thought/think this films sucks, it's because they have to actually pay close attention (meaning they must have an actual attention span) and listen to dialog and follow a story-line that is intriguing and unfolds in a natural way. Watching this film, one has to actually engage one's brain, which I know is difficult for many, especially in this day and age of tweeting and texting and looking at one's iPhone while watching a movie. Oh, and there's no shootouts, explosions or ludicrously over-choreographed martial arts fights in this either - so that's a problem for many bird-brains also.