Uncut Gems
Directors: Safdie Brothers
imdb
Printable View
Uncut Gems
Directors: Safdie Brothers
imdb
I'm a little iffy on the film itself (it is a bit derivative of Good Time), but Sandler is impeccable. He never breaks, never reminds you of his past work in any of his other films, and every moment he is on screen opposite Eric Bogosian? You know scary shit could go down at any second. Julia Fox also is a real find against Sandler. Safdie's might still need some work for their craft, since at times I did feel like the editing and score was doing a lot of work... but as a piece of NYC storytelling and showcase for Sandler, this is a worthy watch.
This may articulate it better then I've seen anywhere else. Some of the storytelling in the end is also a little too convenient for my taste, but I'm definitely curious in seeing this again.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zac Efron
I'll echo those that do note a little derivative quality between this and Good Time. That said, this film has a wild energy that helps it careen headlong toward a conclusion that feels inevitable even as it's thrilling. The business between Sandler and Bogosian is well handled in ways that shift their motivations throughout, and I thought that Julia Fox especially elevated a fairly rote character into an ambiguous-to-root-for mistress, helping make her a reflection of Sandler's character in how, despite an unethical nature, she still operates by certain codes.
Wasn't sure about the abstract camera bits inside the crystal, but I very much liked the shift up to the stars by the end; several people seated around us were having none of it and were walking out after the climax, so I'll be interested in the staying power for this one and the older generations come Oscar nominations.
Went nay.
This was an unpleasant experience, but unlike other unpleasant experiences I've had at the movies, this one really doesn't tell you much about the human condition. It's a one-note junkie movie and it's too long for what it is.
Zac nailed it about Sandler. He absolutely commits and he's incredible to watch. I kept staring at him looking for some sign that he was there, somewhere, inside. But there was nothing, no tell, no giveaway. He's 100% Howard when he's on screen.
But the Safdies exhaust me. They seem to think constant movement and rapid dialogue are a good substitutes for depth and intelligence, but they're not.
I was able to accurately predict everything that came after the Passover scene, not because I'm so super special smart (I'm not), but because I asked asked myself 1 question every 5 minutes: What's the most obvious reversal that could happen right now? The movie didn't disappoint. Whatever was the most stupid option, that's the direction the movie took.
I loved "Good Time" until I didn't, because it piled contrivance on contrivance in order to feed its own manic high. My reaction to "Uncut Gems" is pretty much the same, except I'm a little more depressed this time around because the Safdies have once again exploited their audience's good faith with a cynical film.
PS: Read Ezee's review on Letterboxd. He nails another aspect of Sandler's character, too.
Who needs trans when you have Irish?
C'mon, Joe. Put up or shut up. Defend the film or don't, but don't take a pot shot just to take pot shot. It's so boring.
Bahahahah Irish wrote “are a good substitutes”, which is grammatically incorrect and he clearly meant “are a good substitute”!
What a loser!
Everyone come in here and look how dumb Irish is!!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xR-FLwonazAQuote:
Originally Posted by Milky Joe
Geez, it was a joke. Lighten up.
Nah. Put up or shut up. I mean, I'd rather read a hearty defense of "Uncut Gems" than have this conversation (again), you know?Quote:
Originally Posted by Milky Joe
McNulty clips are never serious, everyone knows that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Milky Joe
Won me over in the second half. I kinda hated the first half. I'm not sold on the supposed 'genius' of the Safdie bros. I think they really want to be the Jewish Abel Ferrara or something (and I like Abel Ferrara's films).
Made me think of how I feel about Everybody Wants Some!! in that the film is good at being what it wants to be. I just don't think I'm into what it wants to be; whether that is obnoxious WASPy baseball bros in early '80s Texas or obnoxious (Jew)elers, basketball bros, and gangsters in early 20teens New Yawk.
I doubt Julia Fox's character would ever be into a guy like Howard Ratner so that seems to be some Safdie wishful thinking. I do like the casino leather (skin) daddy who apparently came from the same casting agency as the ass-to-ass guy from Requiem for a Dream. Sandman and the Daniel Lopatin score are as good as you've heard.
Bratty young edgelord stuff I would have been into when I was 16. Today I find this as enjoyable and valuable as listening to a cocaine blasted couple argue for two hours at a loud club. Honestly, I think I prefer Joker for my 2k19 edgelord fix. At least that is well shot and lets the material breathe a bit. This is just nonstop "Howie, fuckin' fuckin' what a Howie Howie fuckin' cocksucka getoutaheeee" and so forth for two hours.
Wasn't that Keith David?Quote:
Originally Posted by Pop Trash
Or wait, I think Keith just brough Connelly to the club.
Nope.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ezee E
[]
Yeah, that came back to me. Woof.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pop Trash
I wasn't head over heels in love over this movie but I have to admit it's quite a feat to keep the level of adrenaline and urgency the way this movie does over two hours. And Sandler's character, from the writing to the Waterboy's priceless acting, is a memorable one. Its main flaw is, as mentioned, that all the plot threads are resolved a bit too conveniently for the ironic effect.
Loved this!
P.S. Kevin Garnett can act. He didn't look like a basketball player trying to act but a bonafide actor.
Though I like the film in general, one of the things that bugs me about it is that Sandler is supposed to be this degenerate gambler, but []It doesn't sit right.
I liked Daddy Longlegs a lot as well - how is Good Time?