|
"Let's Play Rock,
Paper, Fire Again" |
 |
Directed by Tony Scott -
Written by Brian
Helgeland
Starring Denzel
Washington, Dakota
Fanning, Radha Mitchell,
Giancarlo Giannini
Distributed by 20th
Century Fox - 2004 -
146mins - Rated R |
|
Richard Propes' Review
|
 |
C |
|
| |
|
A promise to protect. A vow to avenge. |
| |
Director Tony Scott shoulders almost all the blame for this not being
a solid action film. This Denzel Washington film has the cast in
place...a fairly predictable, but tension-filled script...yet, almost
single-handedly Scott ruins this film with the most remarkably inept
cinematography I have seen in quite some time.
Scott takes what could have been a powerful, human drama and tries to
give it some razzle dazzle camera work...in the process, he kills the
tension, ruins good performances and creates more distraction than
attraction. It's so incredibly disappointing.
If not for the performances of Denzel Washington, Radha Mitchell,
Giancarlo Giannini and a surprisingly strong Dakota Fanning this film
would have sunk into oblivion. Instead, it manages to surface as an
almost entertaining, but mostly frustrating film.
In a supporting role, Marc Anthony does a pretty decent job...but, I
was halfway through the film wishing I was seeing any number of other
Hispanic actors who could have added depth to the role. Additionally,
Christopher Walken is surprisingly weak in a throwaway supporting role
and Mickey Rourke is competent but adds little to the action.
Fanning is the true delight here, and she's in the film far too
little. I'd never have guessed this smiling, perky little actress
could pull off such a dramatic turn. Excellent job.
This film has sort of a "John Q" logic to it...in that a "wronged" man
becomes vigilante to make things right and hurts, even tortures,
people along the way. Washington can play these characters, but I
can't say I found a lot unique about the performance.
This is a merely average film that had much more potential. It's
ruined by director Tony Scott's overambitious and way out of focus
camerawork...This "Man on Fire" should just go up in smoke. |
| |
|
© Written by Richard Propes-
Email
Me! |
TC Candler's Comment
If Tony Scott had stopped taking uppers before
editing this film together, "Man on Fire" would
have been one of the better action films of
2004. It is a taut, tense thriller with very
good performances all around. It probably
arrives at its conclusion about 25 minutes too
late. Some things could have been trimmed for
time and pacing. I just wish Tony Scott would
have trusted the screenplay to take care of
itself without plastering his so-called style
all over the screen.
Richard Propes' Comment
For a mainstream film, "Man on Fire" is
incredibly violent. This is a double-edged
sword. It makes the film mature and realistic,
but it also makes it often unpleasant and
disturbing. Creasey is not a "good guy," he's a
desperate, somewhat crazy man. He chops of
fingers, tortures, and inserts C4 up a
man's...um, you get the picture.
Due to it's violence, this is not a film for
everyone. It could have used some time in the
editing room because it's running time is about
30 minutes too long and the director could have
indulged in his flashy editing desires
elsewhere, but this is a solid thriller that may
be gone from my memory in a few years, but I
don't regret viewing it.
|
