So Hard To Say No

Come on. With Pacino, Walken, and Arkin how can you say no? Really?

I like the reveal at the end.




















.

Al Pacino is Dr. Jack Kevorkian

Trailer for 'You Don't Know Jack'.

First Ever De Niro And Pacino Interview

Not So Righteous Posters

All around the net the talk re: 'Righteous Kill' goes like this: Element 1) De Niro and Pacino haven't been in full form for about ten years, and Element 2) I'm still kinda sorta looking forward to this movie.

Okay, fair enough. I have to agree these guys did some of their best work in Michael Mann's 1995 crime opera 'Heat', and, I'm hoping 'Righteous Kill' will be good.

However, early signs aren't so good. The two poster workups that have been released are flat, without direction, and lacking focus. Take poster 1, at the top:

The running ink running from the stars' names implies a slasher/horror element -- doesn't belong. Movie has a killer element, not slasher. Also, this is the kind of graphic used in small indy pictures -- doesn't belong on this poster. The ink runs into De Niro's face but not Pacino's -- implying De Niro will die, but Pacino will not -- not right (even if it's true). Also, the 'drips' are clearly drawn -- drawn to look natural (and creepy), like running ink, but clearly drawn -- it's forced and bad.

De Niro is standing in front of Pacino -- shouldn't be, they should have equality. Not only that, Pacino's face isn't fully in frame -- his hair is cropped out. (It's fair to say a movie stars' hair is part of his face). Hello. Who slapped this together? Very sloppy work.

The grainy look is not appropriate for a slick crime thriller that takes place today. Would be more appropriate for a political drama that takes place, say, in the sixties.

The snags of ink coming off the title at the bottom imply a psycho-technological element as in 'Silence of the Lambs' -- doesn't fit. This movie has a human psychological element, but not a tech-psycho element -- lacks focus.

The roller-painted red highlighting of the title at bottom is random looking at best. An afterthought, probably.

Okay, now poster 2:

First the headline: 'The most acclaimed actors of our time in the film event of the year'. Do you think we're stupid? Any movie that calls itself the 'film event of the year' is a lost cause. A movie has to earn that title after it opens, not before. This type of slugline is meant to separate the most gullible audience from their cash on the first weekend, before word-of-mouth kills the picture.

The selling point 'From the writer of Inside Man' just doesn't click. 'Righteous Kill' is being marketed to a broad audience -- they don't know what 'Inside Man' was. Besides, the poster screams 'De NIRO PACINO'. How can you follow that by trying to sell the movie as being written by a particular writer (unless the guy wrote a super-hot genre thriller and has the same name recognition as De Niro or Pacino). Lacks focus.

And, what is that backdrop? A tarp? What does that mean? All that does is confuse the viewer.

What's with the fancy handwriting? Are we supposed to read that? It looks like the preamble of a constitution. Are we supposed to wonder what it's there for? Is the movie about someone who writes in such a manner? This is a total gaffe. These people are trying to sell a cop thriller with fine curvy handwriting -- done with a fountain pen or an actual quill pen (dipped in ink and everything), no less.

I do like the way the title at bottom is cracked and corroding -- this fits. Implies the corrosion of moral values and the rules by which society works, the law. This element works.

These posters send a clear message: "Stay away, this movie barely holds together, spend your money on something else, don't be one of the chumps that has to admit they saw 'Righteous Kill' in the theater."

Come on, guys. Get your shit together and make a decent poster for this movie. This is just plain lazy. Movie opens in September -- you've got time to fix the damage you've done.

Give It A Break

Everybody loves to trash the new Pacino/De Niro collaboration, 'Righteous Kill'. I hate the title, that's a given. And I'll admit it, after viewing the trailer the first time I thought it was pretty much 'been there done that'. I don't know why -- sarcasm I guess.

On subsequent viewings I've gotten over the novelty of Al and Bobby working together (and my knee-jerk feeling this pairing was the only thing the producers could come up with to add appeal to what I assumed was just another superficial script). ...Wait...cynicism. That's the word I was looking for. Not sarcasm, cynicism. There you go.

After seeing the (new) trailer a couple times (earlier versions just didn't click) I'm liking this picture. Al and Bobby look engaged with the material and at home in the genre. They're not trying to reinvent themselves. There's no hard sell, just a cop movie. I'm thinking the boys may have a good movie here. I still hate the title though, don't get me wrong. 'Righteous Kill' is just too 80s. You expect Steven Seagal to jump out any minute and put a wrist lock on somebody. 'Righteous' just shouldn't be in a title.

88 Minutes. Again?

I think titles like '88 Minutes' are a bad thing. They're too literal, too like the on-the-nose titles from the 80s and 90s like, say, 'Total Force', or 'Blunt Instrument' (I made those up off the top of my head but they're actual titles from the 80s and 90s, turns out).

Why does Al Pacino always look like he needs a good night's sleep? Here's Stephanie Zacharek's review of '88 Minutes'. She says of Pacino: He wanders through '88 Minutes' in a baggy suit that looks slept-in, but he's the only thing in it that's remotely awake. Wait a minute. He's the only thing in the movie that looks remotely awake or the only thing in his baggy suit that looks...nevermind. But, really, to me he looks like he needs a week's worth of sleep -- in every movie he does these days.

I'd look sleepy too, I guess. It's just so been there, done that. If the plot is going to be such a retread, recommend a more direct, spelled-out title. How about 'A Movie Where The Protagonist (that's the main character) Finds Out He Has Just Eight-Eight (88) Minutes To Live But Outsmarts The Antagonist (that's the bad guy) And After Some Gunplay And Hot Sex With Really Young Women Lives To See The Credits Role'. That's better than '88 Minutes', don't you think.