Most Helpful Customer Reviews
|
|
3 of 3 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
A more intense version of West Side Story, November 27, 2004
Scott Kalvert did an outstanding job directing this movie and making the time period as realistic as possible. The similarity between this and Westside Story is the gang rivalry. In Westside Story, you have The Jets vs. The Sharks and in this movie you have The Deuces vs. The Vipers. I didn't see all of Westside Story though but it seems like its less intense than this movie. This movie has some Rebel Without A Cause as well but I didn't see that movie either. I compare this movie to Rebel Without A Cause because of the gang element and Stephen Dorff is The Jimmy Dean of this movie. Stephen Dorff does a great job as 'Leon', the noble yet violent leader of The Deuces. Brad Renfro also does a great job as Leon's younger brother Bobby. He is easily influenced by his brother's hatred towards The Vipers and his life-style is even more chaotic when he meets 'Annie', who is played by Fairuza Balk. Drea DeMateo was so so as 'Betsy', Norman Reedus does a great job as 'Marco', and Matt Dillion does a great job as 'Fritzy'. Overall, its a powerful and intense movie and a must see for movie fans. You'll be pleasantly surprised!
|
|
|
3 of 3 people found the following review helpful:
2.0 out of 5 stars
Great cast, poor writing!, February 3, 2003
I was looking forward to seeing this movie because of its all-star cast, but I was disappointed by the film's poor writing. The storyline was extremely cliched and predictable, as was the dialogue. It seems like the writer of Deuces Wild took every greaser movie cliche you've ever seen and rolled it into one script.On top of that, the attempts at New York accents were not very accurate. Renfro and Balk are the film's one bright spot, their characters seem to have a little more depth than the others, and they have good on-screen chemistry. Renfro is believable and sweet as a well-meaning guy who is torn between loyalty to his brother (who is leader of the neighborhood gang) and asserting his independence by courting the girl he loves (who just so happens to be the sister of the gang's rival) Balk is charming as a sensitive girl pretending to be a "tough city chick" meanwhile she is watching city life destroy her family and all she wants to do is escape. It is a shame that this big name cast didn't get a better script and a more original storyline to work with.
|
|
|
2 of 2 people found the following review helpful:
2.0 out of 5 stars
A Full House where Dueces aren't wild..., July 17, 2007
Are the "Deuces" a true violent gang, or does MTV just portray them that way? As I sit here struggling to connect my words for this pathetic attempt of a "gang turned Shakespeare's tragedy" film involving the ever buff Stephen Dorff and the slowly decaying Brad Renfro. This is a story, not unlike others that we have seen done better, about violence, drug problems, and falling for the girl that you least expect. It is "Romeo & Juliet", fixed up like "West Side Story", with fights that would no doubtably see the award ranking at that year's MTV Movie Awards. I cannot say if that is what made this film at times unbearable to watch, or if it is what pulled me into watching it a second time to see what the director had to say about his actions. Either way, I made it through two viewings of "Deuces Wild" and before I hear usurped "gasps" from the peanut gallery, I must say, this is definitely not a film that get better with age.
Using whatever leftover table scraps "The Sopranos" wanted to throw, coupled with a storyline recycled from every Hollywood recreation of this genre, "Deuces Wild" begins haphazardly and continues along the trend for the next 96 minutes. Is it brother's vengeance? Is it due to rival gangs making sure that their territory is never advanced by the other? Is is because of money? Is it because of love? I mention these questions again because I believe these random unanswered questions, which lead into a convoluted violent ending, are what hurt the overall picture of "Deuces Wild". From the beginning, we do not know the true motives of our characters. Dorff, the obvious leader, seems more like the lover instead of the fighter, but when it is time to do what is just, he apparently turns into a machine with fists that could take down a passenger train. Renfro, the hard-boiled little brother, doesn't seem like the obvious choice to swoon the possible leader of the all-girl group. His second-grade reading and interpretation of the script, makes him seem more like muscle instead of brains. I believe that if Dorff would have taken control of Renfro's character and vice versa, perhaps a better film would have come from this conclusion, but alas, we were stuck with what was the final product. Balk, who plays Renfro's love interest, is annoying and void of emotion. Her true nature is never revealed, and it is up to us to realize that these two lovers happened to be at the right place at the right time, the action surrounding them is just static.
I have to continue with the characters for a bit more because they were the failing glue that could not keep this film stuck together. Norman Reedus, the weaselly-villain-esque character had angry eyes and an obsession with power ... why? I have no idea. He liked drugs and wanted to distribute, or did he just want to make trouble for Dorff and Renfro? This continues my theory that no true character development occurred, which dumbstruck this viewer from beginning to end. I don't want to repeat myself for Balthazar Getty's character of Jimmy Pockets. Again, nothing seemed set or hardened with these guys. They did what they want, whenever they wanted. That works in most gang films, but when empathy needs to be felt for someone, it is probably better not to just let the fists do the talking. Was that Johnny Knoxville in there as well? Nothing like James Franco playing the same character of James Dean for this role? This transformed into nothing more than pathetic over-use of similar moments. It was sad. It was recycled. It was unoriginal at best. It was a gangster film married to "West Side Story" for the fast-paced MTV generation.
For 96 minutes we were stuck with these characters, so I watched, hoping that perhaps the cinematography would take me to a far away land - perhaps the language would reintroduce me to the genre, or maybe the story would sweep me away. Well, I wanted something to distract me from the characters, but alas, it never happened. The story, as mentioned before, was recycled. The visions seemed like they belonged on stage instead of on screen. After listening to the audio commentary, the director seemed to agree as well since most of the budget couldn't take them to an actual location, but instead a sound stage in LA. The angles seemed short and the people seemed tight in every scene. I am surprised that we didn't seem cameras in every shot. I felt claustrophobic in every scene, even when the gang was fighting. I have to pause and laugh now, because the fight sequences were possibly the lightest element in the film. Does lightening have to spring into the scene just to make those known that the air has grown angry? Lightening and fight sequences, is it the match-up that we have been waiting for all of our cinematic life? In this film, the answered question is: yes.
Poor acting, poor cinematography, cheap dialog, why does this film rate so high among film watchers? Some claim that it is the darker side of "West Side Story", which I could argue against. There wasn't a dark undertone to this film at all. The choreography to the fight sequences made me laugh, the themes of which the characters drew themselves upon were simple, never quite the complex characters that we anticipated. There was no logic to this film, just remake followed by recycling, followed up by further cheapened cliche's that can be found in any other film of this genre. This is not "Goodfellas", so let us not try to make the comparison. Did this film accurately depict the era that it attempted to represent? To me, the answer is no. Well, I have officially become to bitter to continue this conversation. I wasn't happy, nor can I suggest this film to anyone with a straight face. Nothing was put together well, the voice of the film seemed amateur at best. Skip it - you will be happier!
Grade: ** out of *****
|
|
|
Most Recent Customer Reviews
|
DVD ~ Edward Norton
DVD ~ Tony Amendola
DVD ~ Robert De Niro
DVD ~ Patrick Borriello
DVD ~ Robert De Niro
DVD ~ Matt Dillon
DVD ~ Charles Durning
DVD ~ Daryl Hannah
DVD ~ Susan Ward
