5:00 PM
0
I think I saw just one ad for this on TV.

I didn't read a review but felt like hitting the movies today. Man, what an awesome flick. I really recommend this one.

Manohla Dargis has a review at the New York Times, "Smoldering Superagent Runs...and Keeps on Running."

And from Kenneth Turan, at the Los Angeles Times, "Movie review: 'Safe House'":

Is any place less safe than a safe house? In the entire lexicon of movie locations, is any setting more likely to be visited by chaos and destruction on a biblical scale? Not very likely.

So it's no surprise that the Denzel Washington-starring "Safe House" is a take-no-prisoners action extravaganza that doesn't stint on either bullets or brutal hand-to-hand combat. It also shows how much can be done with a business-as-usual CIA-thriller script when it's bolstered by effective acting and expert direction.

That directing is courtesy of Swedish filmmaker and top-drawer mayhem manipulator Daniel Espinosa, who's been one of the hottest new names in Hollywood since his last film, 2010's "Snabba Cash" ("Easy Money"), unofficially made the high-echelon studio rounds though it has yet to show itself on American theatrical screens. Even without "Snabba" as a reference point (it's been acquired by the Weinstein Co. with no firm release date set), it's easy to see what action junkie executives saw in Espinosa.

Working with the top-flight team of cinematographer Oliver Wood and editor Richard Pearson, both of whom have "Bourne Supremacy" credits, Espinosa has given "Safe House" an unmistakably stylish and unsettling tone, characterized by probing camera work, quick and edgy cutting and a fine ability to keep audiences off-balance and wondering when they'll get a chance to catch their next breath.

"Safe House" is grateful for all this pizazz because its David Guggenheim script is filled with standard-issue elements all pointing to the not exactly original notion that the intelligence community is a hotbed of corruption whose operatives eat betrayal for breakfast. Who knew?
And see Kurt Loder's review at Reason.

0 comments:

Post a Comment