Nice

link

interesting

source: Mob Land

I can't say I was expecting a whole lot from this film. Given a freshman director and a cast headlined by Dillon and Fernandez combined with the view that Travolta and Dorff have headlined as many disappointments as they have decent films over the years, I expected little more. The plot is as generic as the title and by itself almost cringe-worthy. It is the execution that is anything but, although some reviewers have called out the use of cliches. They seem to be missing how they are used to full effect here, tearing away the labels and challenging us to put them neatly back in place amidst the growing tension and conflict taking place. The result is immersion and character depth uncommon in films these days. Certain truths and motivations begin to take shape within each character on the way to their reckoning frequently putting the viewer's assumptions to the test. The acting was excellent. Dorff blew me away as the ultra-violent and unconscionable mob enforcer and has matured into his full potential - the true standout in this film and his best role yet. Travolta's character as the backward and aloof sheriff lends heart and soul to the cliche and does so with the least amount of script. Then there's Dillon's praise-worthy supporting role as aging-white-trash-playing-gangsta, and Fernandez with an excellent lead performance as a hard-working and struggling young man who seems to believe honor exists even amongst thieves. Ignore the generic title and don't limit yourself with the cliches - this movie will surprise you.

The filmmakers could have got better results from a teenager using their iPhone. The lighting is wrong, the white balance is wrong, the colour saturation is wrong. Who decided that it would be a good idea to have the camera bouncing around throughout the movie? It is an idiotic idea. Put the camera on a tripod! Better still, they invented something called the Steadicam about 50 years ago. Could they not have borrowed one of these from someone? It is as if they tried to make the movie as unappealing as possible, and as difficult to watch as possible. The awful ighting, childish camerawork, and over-used colour filters are a constant distraction for the viewer. Fortunately, there was little, in the way of substance or quality, to be distracted from. This is everything that is wrong in Hollywood these days. In a desperate attempt to stand out, filmmakers will resort to the most absurd gimmicks, because they don't have the basic ingredients required for a successful movie: A good story, intriguing characters and a powerful script. Don't waste your time on this one!

The film makers could have got better results from a teenager using their iPhone. The lighting is wrong, the white balance is wrong, the colour saturation is wrong. Who decided that it would be a good idea to have the camera bouncing around throughout the movie? It is an idiotic idea. Put the camera on a tripod! Better still, they invented something called the Steadicam about 50 years ago. Could they not have borrowed one of these from someone? It is as if they tried to make the movie as unappealing as possible, and as difficult to watch as possible. The awful ighting, childish camerawork, and over-used colour filters are a constant distraction for the viewer. Fortunately, there was little, in the way of substance or quality, to be distracted from. This is everything that is wrong in Hollywood these days. In a desperate attempt to stand out, film makers will resort to the most absurd gimmicks, because they don't have the basic ingredients required for a successful movie: A good story, intriguing characters and a powerful script. Don't waste your time on this one!

Someone decided to turn on the 'Hillbilly' tropes and keep them going through the whole film. Every line felt like it was a depiction of what someone from California thought that someone who from the South might say, not the way people actually talk. The accents were horrible and the cliche filled caricatures were distracting. This move would have gotten a higher score from me, maybe a solid 7/10 if not for the dialogue and the poor character portrayals. The cinematography was spot on and atmospheric, the music was good (Not great), and there was an okay plot, though not as fleshed out as I would have liked to have seen. This movie was one I didn't regret watching once, but I would be hard pressed to sit down and watch it again.

lovely movie

Mob Land's poster announces yes another of the hundreds of 'Geezer Teaser' films that were released straight to streaming in the past few years. An aging or former action star (who's usually in the movie for 10 minutes) on the cover holding a handgun. However, lo and behold, this one is actually good! The usual suspects from the recent Bruce Willis films are here. John Travolta, Stephen Dorff, Kevin Dillon. Travolta can elevate any material, and here he moves away from his recent more flamboyant outings and plays a subdued take on Tommy Lee Jones's character from "No Country for Old Men". Stephen Dorff plays the sociopathic killer, a man who observes the people inhabiting his hunting grounds with morbid curiosity, trying to rationalize his lack of empathy with a veneer of misanthropy. Dorff is older now, grizzled with deep wrinkles and a deep raspy voice. Yet he maintained the combination of being handsome and menacing at the same time, which gives him the perfect look and demeanor to play a villain. And what a role this is. It's layered performance with well written lines, a far cry from the one note villains usually found in movies these days. I don't want to spoil his arc, but those final 15 minutes are great. The plot on its surface is a small town neo noir, set against the backdrop of the opioid crisis and the decay of small town America. Two good ol boys get in over their head as they steal from the mob, and the mob sends a bad guy to fix the mess. But there are deeper themes running throughout to give you something to chew on. The scene with Dorff and Travolta is suspenseful in the best Hitchcockian manner, while setting up the final confrontation. It's just three men talking, but we the viewers know there is a bomb under the table. The music and cinematography were excellent. The soundtrack features some great Americana music, with the organ and violin theme being particularly haunting. The film isn't perfect, and there were a few things that bothered me. The color grading is ugly. The entire movie has a dark green tint, which looks entirely unnatural. I get why they did it, they want it to feel noir and bleak, but a more naturalistic look would have worked better. And there is a ton of shaky cam, even in scenes where the camera isn't moving. I get it in action scenes, where it's shaky and disorienting during the scenes involving the rednecks who aren't used to killing, while calm, collected and in control during the villain's kills. That makes sense. But having the camera shake and tilt on a wide shot of two people talking in a standing truck is just stupid. But overall, for a first time director this is a very impressive debut. I hope we get to see more of Travolta and Dorff. Those two are among the best actors working today.