![](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg7gQn0h5hpNGk0Zss1VFsiPIgyBzzM82nE3kta9LihLzrGvk5Sk1Fg6Z2g2wLc9BLGNHhRzG_ZpTewvQIgBWnwDUMqWrOF6_FD_4j0L1UuvYrMdkGMoUkw-wZjsstmdRj6lNDBVWrE0tnn/s320/poolhall-junkies-movie-poster-2003-1020189490.jpg)
If you liked Rounders, this is pretty much the same movie but with 8-ball in stead of poker. I happen to like both films, though this one had a more independent-film feel (film stock was still good, but somehow I got an off-Hollywood vibe).
Callahan's acting was OK, but didn't blow me away. Walken's performance, while not one of the most screen-time consuming, was at his most Walken-y, and I can't think of a film in which I liked him better (ok, maybe Pulp Fiction). Callahan's story creation though, I did really like. Most of the characters had their awesomeness moment and there was some pretty cool dialogue (though in at least one or two parts the look-at-me-I'm-a-cool-character line was a bit over the top). The villain was intimidating, and each person had a distinctive personality. Johnny's group of friends actually felt like friends and like fully-realized characters. To my earlier point, in both Poolhall Junkies and Rounders, the main character is really good at their game and winning money from it but decide to distance themselves from that life for their own reasons; for other reasons they have to get involved with it again to help out a friend who got himself into trouble. Both stories had solid use of tension and get you to empathize and/or sympathise with one or more characters. I enjoyed both, but Rounders was definitely the more polished film.
Anyway, for me it was 3.5 stars. Pretty good, and had great moments, but I don't see myself watching it again. I don't think it had particularly weak parts that dragged it down, just that once I've been through the main character's arc once, I don't feel the need to repeat it. And I didn't really identify with Johnny's character, unlike I did with Ten Inch Hero.
No comments:
Post a Comment