9/10 - I would like to motion for a critical reappraisal of Brian De Palma's absolutely terrific Snake Eyes. Terrifically thrilling, Snake Eyes features Nicolas Cage as Richard Santoro, a charismatic and corrupt Atlantic City police detective who witnesses an assassination during a boxing match. Supported by a strong supporting performance from Gary Sinise as Commander Kevin Dunne, Snake Eyes is a spellbinding conspiracy thriller that is terrific to the very last drop.

Featuring all of De Palma's major trademarks, Snake Eyes is a showcase for his lovely camera work. The tracking shot at the very beginning of Richard Santoro walking through the arena is terrific, but what makes it all the much better is De Palma's repeated use of split-screen later on in the film that showcases how perception changes everything. For Santoro, he believed he knew what had occurred during the shooting. He thought he knew the players. It was only through speaking to Julia Costello (Carla Gugino) and Lincoln Tyler (Stan Shaw) that his eyes were opened. De Palma does a terrific job of using the split-screen to showcase the different perspectives a situation can have and how that can lead to false conclusions if you do not have both takes on a situation.

The camera work also comes into play when Julia is going up to a man's room and the camera pans through an aerial shot of the rooms on the floor. While it may not add much to the overall film, it was incredibly stylish and highlighted a very important element to the story: it was not about the assassination. In every room, people were either celebrating something completely unrelated or changing the channel from the news. For De Palma, this essentially serves to refocus the audience on what actually matters: the characters. Having read the critical reception, I was particularly struck by a quote from De Palma himself in which he stated, "There's a lot of discussion in Snake Eyes about why do we reveal who did it so soon. Well the problem is that it isn't about who did it. It's a mystery about a relationship, two people, and how finding that out affects their relationship... Those kind of procedural movies are extremely boring..." In essence, for me, many critics wind up missing the point of the film. While I loved it a conspiracy thriller and thought it was thoroughly captivating in this regard, De Palma's aim was to showcase the fracturing of the friendship between Santoro and Dunne when Santoro finds out the truth about his long time friend. Thus, the sequence in which he shows everyone ignoring the news of the assassination, it becomes clear that De Palma is trying to nudge the audience away from the murder mystery aspect and onto the character study.

As a character study, the film is equally riveting. Richard Santoro's reaction to the news, as relayed to him by Julia Costello who was revealing the conspiracy to the assassinated Secretary of Defense when the killing happened, is perfection. Cage brings the emotions to life and wears them on his sleeve in this sequence as you can see Santoro's heartbreak and, at first, deny that this is what occurred. His dedication to his friend is being tested, but he knows that it is true. When he finds video evidence confirming what she had told him was true, his heartbreak over losing his childhood friend is shattering and tremendous cinema. This is truly where the writing from David Koepp excels, as he manages to develop his characters so well, while also subtly keeping them within their characters even if its seems out-of-character, if that makes sense. For Santoro, he is established as being an adulterer and a corrupt cop. Yet, he wants to be mayor, which is why he wants to solve this case. For him, he may put on a facade of being charismatic and magnanimous, but deep down, he wants more than his current lot in life. For Kevin Dunne, he may seem like the "goody two shoes", but instead he is ruthless and manipulative, willing to do anything to get ahead. These characters truly come to life thanks to the writing from Koepp.

Another element captured incredibly well by De Palma is the chaos. This element is really put on display during the assassination, which is a chaotic, thrilling, and hectic sequence that is equally hectically shot. You can hardly tell what is going on and can feel your own heart beating as this sequence unfolds. This feeling is sustained throughout the film, in large part due to the free flowing camera of De Palma. It truly captures the significant amount of moving parts within the film and the chaos, as the long tracking shots emphasize. In particular, the opening tracking shot involves numerous different moments that could be a scene all on their own. Santoro runs into many different people and the camera struggles to keep up with him. The chaos inside is backdropped by the events outside where a hurricane is ravishing Atlantic City. The news teams covering the event and the entire character of Lou Logan (Kevin Dunn) all had to the conflict and adds yet another piece of hecticness to the events faced by Richard Santoro on this night.

Finally, the film's use of color is spectacular on the eye. The blends of the purples, blues, greens, and brownish golds, all work perfectly together. It looks terrific and gives the film a truly eye-catching and truly unique color-palette. There are not many films I can think of that rely on these colors, but it does make a lot of sense, given that the colors are "cold colors". Given the cold nature of Kevin Dunne's demeanor and how cold and calculated this assassination is (even willingly setting up his friend Santoro), the colors really accent the emotion and feeling the film invokes.

I may be one of the few to truly love Snake Eyes. Given the critical and fan reception to this film, there are not many defenders of this brilliant film from Brian De Palma out there. Yet, I will gladly hold the mantle and defend Snake Eyes. A terrific blend of conspiracy thriller and character study, the film features great acting, writing, and typically terrific camera work for De Palma.



6/10 - Family entertainment on steroids, Speed Racer is a frenetically paced visual extravaganza that elicited a strictly mixed response from me. Often times, the film could best be described as an incredibly rich chocolate cake. For some, they enjoy lots of sugar, especially children, but certainly some adults. Other adults, including myself, get nauseous because something is too sweet. Speed Racer is often times this feel. It may be a family film, but it seemed to pour it on a little thick at times. Telling the story of Speed Racer (Emile Hirsch) and his quest to clean up racing, a sport he was born into, the film is a thoroughly entertaining effort from the Wachowskis that will certainly wow anime fans, action junkies, and children, but for all others, it will be merely diverting entertainment.

An undeniable visual accomplishment, Speed Racer features absolutely killer special effects. When the humans are set against the backdrop of these special effects, it can look quite fake, though that may be intentional. That said, the Caso Cristo 5000 and Grand Prix races are so pretty and incredibly crafted, it is incredible. These sequences, when focused on the race, are tremendous. Yet, these sequences are even held back by the Wachowskis insistence to frequently have jarring cuts to announcers and the crowd with them just talking about Speed Racer kicking everyone's ass. It really kills the mood and does not entertain, but rather annoys. It is a film that has racing obsessed characters, but yet the directors seem wholly uninterested in actually showing racing during the races.

That said, the frenetic pace of the film during the races really adds to the entertainment. Without the racing, this film would be horrifically bad. Without the special effects, this film would be truly hollow, as beneath the surface, Speed Racer offers absolutely nothing. A paper thin plot that is every family movie cliche rolled into one, Speed Racer utilizes cloying sentimentality, stupid flashback montages (especially the one at the end for Racer X), and cliche parent-son conversations to reinforce the image of it being a film about family. If this were at all true, the parents would not be every parent cliche in the book. For example, Pops Racer (John Goodman) is a hard on the outside, but loves his family deeply. He loves car, working on cars, and can be incredibly hard nosed when his wife, Mom Racer (Susan Sarandon), is not around to stop him. Mom Racer, on the other hand, exclusively cooks, serves her husband and sons, and has heart-to-hearts with her son about her pride over him and to help communicate his father's feelings to him. In other words, the characters are walking, talking cliches.

The characters continue to take nosedives in this one with Spritle (Paulie Litt) being wildly annoying. I get there has to be a kid character for kids to relate to a bit, but he is just so annoying it physically hurt. His chimpanzee companion added nothing. No humor, nothing. I think he is from the source material, but could have certainly been left out. It may be a kids movie, but why add a chimp? Do kids just like real life chimps that much? As a former kid, I can attest that this is not the case.

Speed Racer is that hot girl with no personality whatsoever. She may be fun for a while, but when you realize she has no personality worth sticking around for, you realize it may be time to move on. That said, the experience is not completely unredeemable, because hey, she is still hot and you two did have a good time together. However, for anything long-term to really work out, there has be something underneath the surface. Some kind of inner beauty. Unfortunately, Speed Racer offers none of that. Instead, it accepts being nothing but eye candy while being unwilling to offer anything. At the very least, it is better than Jupiter Ascending which, while equally pretty, was plain dumb. Speed Racer is a kids movie, so most stupid moments I can write off for that reason and give it a pass. Overall, stick around for the visuals because they make this one worth a watch.