Black Mass

Wailin

MisterAnarchy wrote: »

Which in turn wasnt a patch on Infernal Affairs.

Your joking right?

I've seen Black Mass. Sadly, I was disappointed.

Here's an extract from my review, the rest of which can be read here.

Just as Universal dominated the horror film genre in the 1930s (with movies like Frankenstein, Dracula and The Mummy), Warner Bros. cornered the gangster picture. The Public Enemy, Little Caesar, Angels with Dirty Faces, The Roaring Twenties – all stemmed from the same studio, and brought gun-toting tough guys of Chicago and New York to a global audience. It was fitting that Warners delivered what many consider to be the definitive mob movie with Goodfellas in 1990, but Black Mass, their dramatised take on notorious ‘Most Wanted’ gangster James ‘Whitey’ Bulger, has more a touch of stagnation about it. Remarkably, so many years after Martin Scorsese’s opus, long-established tropes are wheeled out as if they were a fresh or cliché-free take on a familiar story.

marklazarcovic

disappointing ****ee

Agricola

Very average. Hard hitting scenes of murdering werent as intense as the director obviously envisioned them. Scenes were Depp is supposed to ratchet up the tension through the sheer force of his gangster menace werent pulled off either. Seemed aimless and disjointed. Pissed off I went all the way to feckin Korea for this.

e_e

This was such a nothing movie that even Tom Hardy's Legend (a flawed film in its own right) seems like Goodfellas by comparison. :rolleyes:

Agricola

Ben Affleck's The Town is a better Boston crime drama than this. Pete Postlethwaite had more menace in his little finger.

Arghus

Yeah I have to add my voice to the chorus of disappointment that's accompanying talk of the film. It's just....Meh.. I just can't help but feel a little short changed by that result. There were so many ingredients in there that should have yielded tastier results; the cast is good, the real life story is blackly fascinating and the production values and overall tone of the thing is, at times, pretty alluring and evocative. So for everything to come out so forgettable and half-baked is a bit of a mystery. I wasn't expecting a masterpiece but I was expecting something. Something with a bit more oomph to it, that could grab you a little, even if it wasn't perfect. There's a real feeling of "I've seen this before" throughout the entire film.

You know when you go on a short break to a foreign city and you set yourself an itinerary, for, let's say two days. It's the whistle stop tour, right? It can be a wonderful experience, but sometimes you just wish you had that extra couple of days to do the four day tour. You'd really get to know a place that little bit better. Well, I think the good gangster movies - Scorsese, Coppola etc, etc - are the equivalent of a full satisfying tour of the sights of a place called Crimeland, whereas Black Mass is definitely more of the wham-bam variety. It shows you all the sights you'd expect - the rise to power, the turning away from the light into the darkness, the murder, the goddamn Feds - but it's all done so stop-start and elliptically that it never feels more than a skin deep and derivative portrayal of the actual history. It's hard to care and especially so when you're given no real insight into characters motivations or physiological make-up. The script is weak. Some of the violence is harsh, but it has no real impact because it doesn't really mean anything. It's just gangsters murdering people, cos that's what they do. And, like most other events in the story, we just kind of arrive at bloodletting randomly from time to time. I would have my suspicions that there's a much longer version of this film in some studio vault. I wonder if the final cut was subjected to some severe trimming. The cast is unbelievable, but yet so many good solid actors are barely utilized. How many lines do Kevin Bacon or Adam Scott have? Corey Stoll has two scenes. I find it hard to believe that they signed up just to be glorified extras. I feel like they may have been trying to go for a prestige picture, but ended up with something that had to be butchered into shape.

Depp is pretty good here. A lot of people won't go near it just because he's in it. I wouldn't say that should be your foremost reason for turning your nose up at this. It's a good menacing and magnetic performance, in search of a better script and fresher dialogue. I think he can really act, he's just been sidetracked by rubbish for the last decade. If Matthew McConaughey and Ben Affleck can stage credibility renaissances, then I still have faith in Johnny. Still though, I wish he would stop with the outlandish make-up nonsense. The way he looks in the film is unnecessarily distracting and pointless. Just be yourself guy. You can convince me with your acting. It's like the star performer in a football team taking to the field and doing his best, but deciding to wear a really ostentatious jock-strap the whole time. Not required.

e_e

I kinda wish the rest of the movie was as stylized and mad as Depp's performance, as well as being a more concentrated character study of Bulger (his scenes with Dakota Johnson were probably the most promising). All the film really told me about him was that he's just another one who looks sinister and kills people a lot. As it is it's pretty much the beigest (is that a word?) gangster movie imaginable. I'm not the biggest fan of The Departed but it might look amazing now on a re-watch. :pac:

Memnoch

Wailin wrote: »

Your joking right?

He's bang on the money. The departed is a decent adaptation, but nothing close to the original.

Wailin

Memnoch wrote: »

He's bang on the money. The departed is a decent adaptation, but nothing close to the original.

Internal Affairs....the one with Richard Gere right?

GAAman

Wailin wrote: »

Internal Affairs....the one with Richard Gere right?

Nope, the Asian film

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0338564/

Edit, I just watched The Departed now as it was mentioned here and I haven't watched it in years. Jesus Jack Nicholson hammed his way thought this film, and Ray Winstones accent was awful.

Black Mass, while having its problems (Count Deppula for example) is a lot more believable

fin12

Just seen Black Mass, I enjoyed it but I just love Boston gangster films, I think its a lot better than the film the drop anyway, really love Kevin Bacon and Joel Edgerton and like another poster said here it was nice to see Johnny playing a normal person again.
I love the Boston accent!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.

Badabing

Did people rate Donnie Brasco?

fin12

Badabing wrote: »

Did people rate Donnie Brasco?

Ya I thought it was quite good, is that the one with Al Pacino and Johnny Depp?

Badabing

fin12 wrote:

Ya I thought it was quite good, is that the one with Al Pacino and Johnny Depp?

Yeah that's it, i thought Depp was very good in it.

fin12

Badabing wrote: »

Yeah that's it, i thought Depp was very good in it.

I used to love Johnny Depp and then got sick of him because he was playing the same characters all the time with Tim Burton so it was nice to see him in this film. Did you see his film Public Enemies?, love that film he's really good in that and so gorgeous!!!!!!!!!!!

LordSutch

maximoose wrote: »

The makeup on Bulger was pretty distracting I found, he looked slightly vampiric at times and there was something off about his eyes - contacts too big or something? Took my attention away from what was going on too often

Heard somebody on the radio saying that he looked liked a cross between Max Headroom & a doctored CGI version of Johnny Depp.

https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-F60EPYUdjPk/AAAAAAAAAAI/AAAAAAAAC9g/eGGOUhKt-gU/photo.jpg

poshea69

class film , cant wait to see it again.

rockatansky

Mediocre at best. I'm sure Depp did a good part playing Bulger, he certainly look the part.

Nothing big really happens it. It's just a series of low level events with a large amount of dialogue in between each. I'm guessing the infamy relates to him having a contact in the FBI and avoiding capture for so long. At one point he starts going on about how he wants to be in control of the Vending machines in the south Boston area. Fairly low level stuff. Maybe I expecting more along the lines of your typical Italian gangster flick.

Looper007

It was a enjoyable 2 hour watch but it reminds me of Legend with Tom Hardy, great central performance that deserved a better film. Depp was excellent but the film did drag in places. Joel Edgerton was very good but poor Benedict Cumberbatch was totally wasted and above the role they gave him. Also Kevin Bacon and Peter Saragaard were also wasted.

But the worst offence is the female characters, Poor Juno Temple was given two scenes and totally wasted of her talents, anyone could have done that role. I wonder if most of her scenes where cut, Sienna Miller was totally cut from the film (she was supposed to be Whitey's second wife). Also add Julianne Nicholson and Dakota Johnson to the badly underwritten roles and barely used.

Not a total white wash, worth a watch but like after mentioned Legend, a wasted chance.

K-9

I thought it was quiet good, but as others said, the acting probably made up for a run of the mill script. Edgerton, Cochrane and Depp were very good and there wasn't enough Bacon or Cumberbatch. The Oirish scenes weren't too bad in it actually, I've seen worse!

MEGA BRO WOLF 5000

Decent film. Really enjoyed it despite the reviews being poor enough. First half hour was dire, really picked up though despite not a whole lot happening. I enjoyed it.

J Mysterio

Stopped watching 2 thirds of the way through, bored to tears. For such excellent material, and with a good cast, it really underdelivered.

Having read a few books about the Bulgers whilst I was living in Boston, I found it even more dissapointing than I otherwise might have. The film seemed to be just a sort of chronological telling of whats on record rather than anything else. There was no soul to it and ultimately, it was pointless.

It really didnt play enough on the relationship between Billy and James, which is really an interesting contrast - the divergence in their lives and life choices

I agree Depp looked weird - just not right - and that was also immersion breaking.

WHIP IT!

J Mysterio wrote: »

Stopped watching 2 thirds of the way through, bored to tears. For such excellent material, and with a good cast, it really underdelivered.

Having read a few books about the Bulgers whilst I was living in Boston, I found it even more dissapointing than I otherwise might have. The film seemed to be just a sort of chronological telling of whats on record rather than anything else. There was no soul to it and ultimately, it was pointless.

It really didnt play enough on the relationship between Billy and James, which is really an interesting contrast - the divergence in their lives and life choices

I agree Depp looked weird - just not right - and that was also immersion breaking.

I think you've actually summed up pretty much how I felt about the movie. Although I watched til the end, it was very disappointing and frustrating because there's a hugely fascinating story in there somewhere!

yabadabado

I was very disappointed with this.I had read the book and with the material they had to work with I was expecting a whole lot more.Pity,a missed opportunity .

Dots1982

I was impressed enough with it. The gang are led by two psychopaths who are given free reign to do what they want. They aren't particularly interesting or intelligent human beings like scorcese's bad guys are. There's no suggestion that Whitey ever looked to go legit by using his money to buy up businesses like an intelligent gangster would have. There are no shoot outs or heroes in the true story so not sure people are been fair when they complain about it being boring.

Cumberbatch is given nothing to do and not sure what what his motivation for doing this part was.

There's not a whole lot of focus on the community and how he was viewed by the average South Boston resident.

Why Connolly is so loval to Bulger (not testifying) is ridicolous when you think about it.

Parts of the film remind me of snowtown in terms of how victims are stalked and the mundanity of the murder.

murphyebass

Very late to the party on this. Watched it last night and really can not see the reason for the criticism it's getting here.

Very interesting storyline portrayed very well by a top notch cast who played each of their roles to a tee.

Depp I thought was great to watch. All this talk of his appearance distracting people etc is bs.
He gave a stand out performance. Btw I can't stand him normally.

There was no need to overdramatise this story. It didn't need to be another departed which was excellent in its own right. It was a slower paced and more reserved film and it worked nicely.

I'd give it an 8/10.

Really enjoyed it. I'm gonna read up more on the history of it all now as well.