Summer three-quels again

• email this story
• read comments (11)
• post a comment
• 
  
  

Go the the N.Y. Post site and Reed Tucker's laundry-list piece about summer threequels -- neutral attitude, no opinion of any kind, and focusing almost entirely on the horse-race aspect (which will make the most money?) and ignoring the certainty that the only tolerable ones will be The Bourne Ultimatum and Ocean's Thirteen.

comment #1

John Y says ...

Actually, I think "Ocean's Thirteen" will probably be the most intolerable of the lot.

comment #2

vansmith says ...

im looking forward to seeing the boys in vegas, the bourne movie will be good just sit back in the theater the jump cuts will give you a headache....

comment #3

Undercover Brother says ...

I'm sure "Ocean's" will be the most placid of the bunch. It won't give you a pulsing headache like "Pirates" might or grate on your nerves like "Shrek" is likely to do. It'll just put you in a nice nap-like trance where thought and feeling are unnecessary. Damn, I wish Soderbergh would get around to being relevant again.

comment #4

Ray says ...

John Y and Undercover Brother got it right. Jeff, "Ocean's Thirteen" cannot be good - the FIRST one was pointless!!!! I am shocked that you actually think that.

www.therecshow.com

comment #5

Edward says ...

The Oceans films are pointless, but a lot of fun. Maybe that's the point. Besides, I'd rather spend my money on Soderbergh over those other "blockbusters."

comment #6

Jean says ...

Ditto what Edward said. I loved the fact that Ocean's Eleven was an "adult" popcorn movie - no CGI monsers or superheroes, no machine gun fights. It's not high art - that's the point.

comment #7

jeffmcm says ...

Depends on what you think 'high art' is. The Ocean's movies are artful, but fluffy.

comment #8

Monument says ...

If Soderbergh made nothing but Ocean's type films, I could understand the complaints, but he doesn't. He has consistently made big budget movies as well as low budget independent project. Like them or not, he does more as a filmmaker than almost anyone out there.

I can think of a million reasons why he would make another Ocean's film. First, because it's probably a lot of fun. Who wouldn't want the chance to direct even one or two of those actors? Pacino, Clooney, Pitt, Damon etc.. plus the huge paycheck, come on.

Secondly, Soderbergh is also an extremely talented cinematographer. Say what you will about the Ocean's films, but they are all consistently gorgeous and consistently artful. Maybe he's just indulging his passion for the visuals, who knows.

I just don't see how you can complain about a director with his work ethic and passion for filmmaking. Check his IMDB page, look at the lineup of projects he's producing, then maybe notice that he's making not one but two films about Che Guevara, not to mention a documentary about Spalding Gray.

Criticism is fine, it goes with the territory, but to call him irrelevant is just plain ignorant.

comment #9

Hallick says ...

I bought the party line that Clooney et al. were putting out for a while, i.e, "we know we slumped up making 'Ocean's 12', but this time we're back on the ball". But the trailers and the ads make "Ocean's 13" look like so much of the same old cheese.

I think the essential flaw in this series is that there's no actual danger in them whatsoever to balance out the "antics". Your caper won't have suspense, even in a fluffy little popcorn movie, without something menacing threating to fuck it all up and maybe get people killed for real. Even "Sneakers" had just enough gravitas in that sense to hold a center together.

And the most ironic thing about the problem is that Clooney and Soderburgh already got this formula right before - with "Out of Sight". Now THAT'S the vibe all of these Ocean's films should have sunk their teeth into.

comment #10

Nick Rogers says ...

I have a hard time believing any of the coming summer three-quels will be more intolerable than "Spider-Man 3," and this is coming from someone who liked the first two quite a bit.

comment #11

cjKennedy says ...

The Oceans movies are trifles, but so what? They're harmless and some people find them fun. At least they don't cost $350 million dollars and I don't have Danny Ocean Happy Meals crammed down my throat. When all you make are trifles (coughcoughMichaelBaycough) it's ok to keep making them but it's not OK for Soderbergh?

Hallick has a point about why some don't dig them, but where's the danger in some CGI Hasbro toys blowing shit up?

Post a Comment