Eastern promises?

joe123

Just after watching Eastern Promises.Great Film but the ending was a bit anti-climatic.

Only thing is I only found out about this film from hearing that it had a nomination in the oscars. So can anyone tell me how come this went straight to DVD and wasnt in the cinema?

Its usually the rubbish thats straight to dvd not something thats part of the oscars?

Another film ive heard of from the oscars is American Gangster is this going straight to dvd aswell?

Maybe it was in the cinema and I just never seen any ads for it but I dont think it did?

Can anyone shed some light?

Puck

It was in the cinema if I remember correctly.

monkeyfudge

Yep. It was definitely in the cinema back in October.

It was well made, but the plot was a bit silly.

I started a review thread for it in the review forum.

johnny_ultimate

Em got a fairly wide cinema release all right. Definitely didn't go straight to cinema.

Otherwise I don't know what the hell I sat through. Male Nude Wrestling Volume 5 or something.

joe123

Alright fair enough thanks. Im usually fairly clued up on good films coming out especially gangster ones.

Does anyone know what the story is with American Gangster?

monkeyfudge

The Ridley Scott film? It would have been out around the same time.

I wish he'd stop putting Russel Crowe in all his films.. the guy is a cock.

joe123

monkeyfudge wrote: »

The Ridley Scott film? It would have been out around the same time.

Jese the advertising for these films is awful dont remember seeing any ads for either of these films.

ixoy

joe123 wrote: »

Jese the advertising for these films is awful dont remember seeing any ads for either of these films.

Umm there was a fair bit of advertising for both, particularly "American Gangster" - bill boards, on buses, etc. Noticable enough too. Were you away at the time or something?

MooseJam

I saw this in the cinema

meditraitor

joe123 wrote: »

Just after watching Eastern Promises.Great Film but the ending was a bit anti-climatic.

Understatment of the year:D, good film for the most though

I just saw this last night. I enjoyed it but thought the ending kind of fizzled out. I though the same about No Country For Old Men as well funnily enough.

Laserface

****e film.

i was expecting something good seeing as it was cronenberg&mortensen again..plus naomi watts(my fave since mulholland drive)

but this film was ****in terrible.
nothing worth remembering about it.

My name is Todd

Saw this in the cinema too - it was hyped up but I was very disappointed. Turkish bath scene was good but overall the film was quite average.

AARRRGH

joe123 wrote: »

Does anyone know what the story is with American Gangster?

American Gangster is terrible. It's completely cliched and predictable.

Eastern Promises... it was OK, although I'm disappointed this was the best Cronenberg could do as I quite like his stuff...

Running Bing

joe123 wrote: »

Just after watching Eastern Promises.Great Film but the ending was a bit anti-climatic.

Only thing is I only found out about this film from hearing that it had a nomination in the oscars. So can anyone tell me how come this went straight to DVD and wasnt in the cinema?

Its usually the rubbish thats straight to dvd not something thats part of the oscars?

Another film ive heard of from the oscars is American Gangster is this going straight to dvd aswell?

Maybe it was in the cinema and I just never seen any ads for it but I dont think it did?

Can anyone shed some light?

Excuse me but have you spent the last year in a crater, on the moon, with your eyes shut and your fingers in your ears?

Karl Hungus

Little surprised at some of the responses here. I've just watched Eastern Promises again last night, and it remains a fantastic film.

PWEI

Funnily enough,I only watched this last night for the first time.I enjoyed it but I have to admit I was also bitterly disappointed with the ending.It's as if the writer just got lazy towards the end of writing it and didn't feel like putting in the effort to finish off the story.Still definitely worth a look though,if only for
viggo mortensen Russian accent.

monkeyfudge

You just never got the feel of it being a very large criminal operation.

The relationship of the father and son reminded me too much of Pop and his sons in The League of Gentlemen.

Running Bing

Karl Hungus wrote: »

Little surprised at some of the responses here. I've just watched Eastern Promises again last night, and it remains a fantastic film.

Agree 100%


Also get the bucket of tar and the feathers ready....I preferred it to a history of violence:o


Really thought Naomi Watts, Viggo and Armin Mueller-Stahl(the daddy gangster) were spot on. Vincent cassell was a bit OTT/cliched but I thought it was superbly written with an interesting plot and I liked the ending. Everything was resolved without forcing anything down your throat.

Maybe it was because it was shot in London but it felt a lot grittier and more realistic than a history of violence to me. I thought Vigo's character was more interesting in this and as long as I live I will never forget that bathhouse scene.


Quality imo.


American Gangster on the other hand was very cliched, by the book stuff, full of trite gangster film staples and Russel Crowe and Denzel were never really believable for me.

GBX

I watched Eastern Promises last night. I thought it was a great movie. Good cast, few nice twists etc. Enjoyable. :cool:

senordingdong

I thought it was fantastic.
My only problem is that it has me wondering...did Watts and Vigo actually hook up? And has he betrayed his

crime fighting job

to take over the mob business?

Karl Hungus

senordingdong wrote: »

And has he betrayed his

crime fighting job

to take over the mob business?

No.

Posted this on another messageboard:

I feel that a lot of the film is left as only being told to the viewer in passing, rather than showing it to us. It's the antithesis of a dumbed down film, and I think a lot of people found it lacking because it's a much more vague narrative than we're used to.

Consider that we find out the means for Semyon's arrest towards the end of the film, but we never see it happening, this occurs offscreen, and we see the reactions to it.

Likewise, Nikolai took over Semyon's business, but in the scene were he's being measured up by the bosses to recieve his stars, it would appear that this business is just one part of a much larger organisation, and the scene where he's talking to his superior in the hospital about pulling him out from undercover, Nikolai explains that he's through the door now, and will take over Semyon's operation.

So yeah, there's a lot to the film that isn't exactly explained, or shown to us, but it's like the film is only a glimpse into a much larger picture, a peak into just a portion of a large criminal underworld.

Eirebear

I really enjoyed Eastern promises, for me a return to form for cronenberg as i didnt like A histoy of violence at all.

OP: What in the world made you think that they would nominate these films for oscars if they went stragith to DVD?

senordingdong

Karl Hungus wrote: »

No.

Posted this on another messageboard:

Yeah I appreaciate that.

I know it was made clear that he wanted to infiltrate further, but the end scene made it seem like Nikolai might have been just using his position to achieve his real goal, taking over the mob.

It wouldn't have been out of place for him.

Karl Hungus

senordingdong wrote: »

Yeah I appreaciate that.

I know it was made clear that he wanted to infiltrate further, but the end scene made it seem like Nikolai might have been just using his position to achieve his real goal, taking over the mob.

It wouldn't have been out of place for him.

Well,

what exactly do we see him do at the end that indicates he used his undercover position to take over? Surely he would have advanced in the same way had he not been a cop.

lodgepole

Karl Hungus wrote: »

Well,

what exactly do we see him do at the end that indicates he used his undercover position to take over? Surely he would have advanced in the same way had he not been a cop.

I don't think he was using the undercover position to take over, but I do think that there's an implication that by the end of the film he had become so enamoured with the life he was leading that he had happily taken over, and not as a cop.

Of course it's very ambiguous and any of the theories suggested here could be the case.

There's a Cronenberg commentary on the DVD isn't there? Has anybody listened to it? Does it shed any light?

Running Bing

senordingdong wrote: »

Yeah I appreaciate that.

I know it was made clear that he wanted to infiltrate further, but the end scene made it seem like Nikolai might have been just using his position to achieve his real goal, taking over the mob.

It wouldn't have been out of place for him.

Why not! I like the theory,

like maybe he got into it for the right reasons but it changed him and his motivations and now he is playing both sides against the middle i.e. using the police as another info source.

Its deliberately open ended so the viewer can make up their own mind.


Mark of a great film being able to create ambiguity like that while still remaining entertaining, engaging and interesting.

senordingdong

Karl Hungus wrote: »

Well,

what exactly do we see him do at the end that indicates he used his undercover position to take over? Surely he would have advanced in the same way had he not been a cop.

He did nothing particular to indicate that, but as you said yourself, Cronenburg doesn't like to spell everything out.
I'm not saying that is the case, I'm just saying that the ending left it open to many avenues.

Karl Hungus

senordingdong wrote: »

He did nothing particular to indicate that, but as you said yourself, Cronenburg doesn't like to spell everything out.
I'm not saying that is the case, I'm just saying that the ending left it open to many avenues.

Yeah, you're completely right.

senordingdong

Cool, I just wanted to see if anyone else got that impression.