Rating: 
Summary: Provocative and Entertaining, there's snuff, too!
Review: This movie doesn't get boring. You've got two foreign nationals, one killing people and the other filming it. Then you have a real cop (or firefighter?), Edward Burns, and a TV cop, Robert De Niro, looking for them. There's also a beautiful witness that both the cops and the criminals are in pursuit of. Then you've got Kelsey Grammar's Hard Copy-ish newcaster willing to pay the criminals to broadcast the murder of a cop on national TV. On top of that, the killer plans on pleading insanity so he'll have his 15 minutes of fame and then get off clean. Quite the film.
Rating: 
Summary: Too violent but still above par for this type of movie
Review: 15 Minutes has been raked over the coals by some people because its message about how the media feeds on violence is hypocritical, since the movie itself is so violent. I didn't see it that way for two reasons. One is that it seems to be as much a dark comedy as a message picture. The other is that. compared to other recent action thrillers, this one is a more original, faster-paced and interesting. While it does tend to fall apart in its rather formula climax, the rest of it packs a wallop and has a couple of scenes that are riveting and unexpected. My advice is to forget the message, which isn't anything new anyhow, and just enjoy the movie. In the opening scenes we meet the villains. They are Emil and Oleg [Karel Ruden and Oleg Taktarov]. One is Russian, the other is from eastern Europe. They are fresh out of prison and have come to New York to get their share of the loot from the bank robbery that landed them in jail. One of the best things about 15 Minutes is that we get to know the bad guys. In many movies the heavies are cartoon-like characters we have little interest in. Here, Emil and Oleg are human, though certainly not humane. Their concept of America is based on the violent movies and TV shows we export. Their points of view provide much of 15 Minutes' diabolical humor. When they find the man who was their partner in crime and who they think has their money, the encounter goes terribly wrong. The man and his wife wind up dead, and, afterwards, Oleg and Emil set fire to the apartment to hide their crime. We then meet Eddie [Robert De Niro], a high profile New York detective who is adored by the media, and Jordy [Edward Burns], an arson investigator. They are assigned to investigate the fire, which they soon realize involves murder. At first they don't hit it off. Eddie is a local celebrity who unashamedly basks in the spotlight, while the younger Jordy, who doesn't even watch TV, is appalled by such things. As they work together, they come to understand each other. They become a great team, which is good because the case soon escalates out of control after Oleg and Emil, who have videotaped their crimes, decide they can sell their story to sleazy tabloid TV star Robert Hawkins [Kelsey grammar]. The pacing is really tight in this sometimes too graphic thriller. There is a scene with Jordy and an eyewitness and one between Eddie and the killers that are about as tense and absorbing as one can hope for in a movie. These moments build the movie up, only to have the final minutes nearly take the wind out of the film's sails because they lack the originality we are expecting De Niro has done this kind of role many times before. While he can waltz through such parts now, he is still one of our great actors. No matter how often he repeats himself, he is always a pleasure to watch. Edward Burns is terrific as Jordy. There has been a lot of talk in Hollywood about who will replace today's aging male stars - Harrison Ford, Sean Connery, Mel Gibson, etc. I'd like to nominate Burns as a candidate for future superstar. He has the looks and the talent to do it. The deciding factor will be the roles he chooses in the next few years.
Rating:
Summary: Up and down but entertaining
Review: I gave this movie 4 stars because I wanted to give it 3.5 but couldn't. First I'll bring up the bad stuff... I think DeNiro is getting lazy, the love story is weak at time (thankfully its not too drawnout), and the movie does seem to get over the top. Of course, what could you expect from a director whose past credits include the Long Island Lolita TV movie of the week? I did get more than I thought at times. Ed Burns is good in this movie, he has the pressence to hold the screen with Deniro and actually steals it from him at times. Additionally, the colors and crispness of the lighting are a nice commentary on tabloid TV. Its like the director has set everything up too perfectly to complain about tabloid fictionalizations. This is a good movie. Its entertaining, violent, surprising at time, and funny. Its a good rental or bargain buy for your collection. Its no Taxi Driver or She's the One, but its good. *On a special note, the DVD special features are slick and entertaining. They are woven into the movie instead of presented individually. The packaging is nice, though not as inovative as the Intelitelivision or whatever brand name it is makes it out to be.
Rating: 
Summary: Unfortunately, the movie's longer than that.
Review: Inexcusably amateurish piece of [junk]. It's about violence, sensationalist TV, and the vapid quest for celebrity (the title tells us so). A pair of Eastern Euros, sweating and twitching like meth junkies, somehow make it past Immigration (at JFK, of all places -- this is pre-9/11) and commence a violent murder spree that begins with the whacking of a fellow Euro and his wife who owe them money. The filmmakers then ask us to accept the idea that these nutcases start butchering people because they can make a financial killing off book and movie rights once they're caught. And they do plan to get caught: the calmer, dumber Russian insists on filming everything, including the murders, of course. The "brains" of the duo, the Czech (terribly overacted, btw), even comes up with their defense: low self-esteem, a concept he gleans from watching the *Roseanne Show*. This is storytelling on par with 11th-grade creative writing assignments. Unaccountably, Robert DeNiro is in this mess as a celebrity New York cop who is hot on the murderers' trail, accompanied by (unrealistically enough) an arson investigator played by Ed Burns. Burns claims he never watches television -- I suppose this is to let us know that he has some sort of moral high ground. As if the basic story isn't bad enough, we have to also endure much digital video cinematography, thanks to the murderous Russian auteur. This is a movie that's as hard on the eyes as it is on the brain. The overall impression *15 Minutes* leaves is that the people responsible for it are no better than the bloodthirsty media leeches that the movie is supposedly making an example of. Be warned.
Rating: 
Summary: A good idea gone wrong.
Review: People just don't 'get' satire. That is what 15 Minutes is. In recent times, 'reality' TV has afforded the ordinary man a shot at fame. Mass media creates the celebrity, and feeds it to a public hungry for such pap. That image survives for as long as it serves the medias purpose whether it be TV ratings, sales, exposure, whatever. 15 Minutes, is an exploration of this very pertinent phenomenon. There have been instances in recent times that prove heinous acts command instant infamy. Everyone wants to know who these people are, what makes them tick. In this film, everything is accentuated and exploded to proportions bordering on parody. Two crooks from Europe arrive in New York and trash talk shows and slick celeb mags give them the idea to grab fame and fortune by murdering a popular police officer and videotaping the act. Are these guys for real? Please. And the morally bankrupt news anchorman? Don't even get me started. The characters are bland and not to be taken at face value, they're much more interesting from the way they behave. The pacing was too slow to give this facinating and potentially exciting concept the impact it was capable of delivering. I would have loved to see some more MTV-style editing and dizzying camera shots, which reminded me of Oliver Stone's "Natural Born Killers". And, DeNiro's talents are wasted. I get the impression the director knew what movie he wanted to make, just not how to make it. '15 Minutes' would have been better if it knew what type of film it wanted to be, a shoot 'em up actioner or a social commentary dressed up as a shoot 'em up. But I applaud Herzfeld for taking a leap. Its worth watching at least once. ** 1/2
Rating:
Summary: better than you would think
Review: I saw 15 minutes in the theatres when it came out and was blown away by the movie. The movie has a great deal of intensity. While the plotline isn't the best, the movie has a great deal of exitment to it from begining to end. I was really pleased to see Ed Burns and Robert DeNiro give such great performances. The commentary about our media was great.
Rating: 
Summary: Just by chance...
Review: I watched this DVD that I had missed in theaters and when the DVD was launched, in the same week I read a thriller by John Philpin called "The Murder Channel". Both satirize crime and the media, and the strange fascination we residents of America have with Court TV, and getting our "15 minutes" of fame, even if it means we look ridiculous in the prospect. Awaken this concept in the criminal mind, and the way that the media can steer the coverage of a horrific crime is really mind-boggling. As far as the film is concerned, I liked it. Just that. The premise was so good, that I should have been able to rate it more highly, but there were too many flaws in the film. Very few of the flaws are connected with the DVD production, by Infinifilm, which continues to impress me with its features. One feature we could have done without in this particular movie, however, was the music video! It just didn't wash. Robert DeNiro plays Eddie Flemming, a famous big city detective (reality: only detectives who screw up become famous) who allows a young arson investigator to attach himself to the investigation of a series of crimes that involve both murder & arson. The investigator, Jordy Warsaw, is played by Ed Burns. I liked Burns in the film, but didn't pick up on any real chemistry between the two men; and unfortunately DeNiro has two tracks: drama, for which we all know he has a flair, and comedy (for which he is somewhat amusing). Unfortunately, he needs a third style to pull off a satire, and he almost plays this role as a comedy. Not good enough for an actor that has wasted most of the last five years in forgettable roles..... The media crazed villains are a couple of screwup illegal immigrants, Emil & Oleg (Karl Roden & Oleg Taktarov), and they both pursue their obsessions (Emil's -- $$$ and fame through crime; and Karl's -- movie making with a hand-held mini cam in America) to the hilt. They make the movie. There are some forgettable cameo roles - Vera Famigia is given virtually no good lines, but her unusual beauty lights up the screen, much like in her role on television, Kim Cattrall and Avery Brooks are talented, and not featured enough....Kelsey Grammar is forgettable, and should stick to the small screen, as he's proved over and over and over. I really enjoyed a humorous bit played by David Alan Grier as a petty criminal who bumps into DeNiro in a park, and takes revenge for his humiliation in the same way everyone else does....through the media! A little miscast, a little overlong, some jarring notes in a drama with an interesting premise, mishandled by a director. Don't buy the DVD, rent it.
Rating:
Summary: Welcome to a world of confusion?
Review: Well, well, well. Check this out: what do you get when got De Niro, a great idea for a film, good "side performances", and a director who isnt sure what exactly he is making? You get confusion.
Add to that a couple of horrible miscasts and the soup is ready.
This film actually starts out greatly and develops beautifully up until it reaches its final 10 minutes where everything crumbles apart and the whole thing becomes just another movie that "could've been"...
The premise of this flick is to actually be a satire and at the same time sharp commentary on american society, the role of the media, the role of the police and in the end human nature as whole (greed, alienation, modern day madness).
And it does well at that. Two eastern european psychos with a great plan to get their 15 minutes of fame set out on a murder spree while filming their feats and expecting to plead insane when they eventually get arrested. The final touch of their scheme is to escape through a legal loophole and become rich through the book and movie deals.
Now, while the film demands from you NOT to judge it on whether it works on a logical basis (the script does have its holes) it makes it clear that this a satire, a commentary, and it "asks" from the viewer to concentrate on the essence rather than the tightness of the plot. This isnt too much from the director to be asking actually. His comment is good, his idea is good, he has De Niro, what could possibly go wrong?
Well, for starters you dont cast Frasier (yes HIM) to play because through the whole film one has a constant question mark over his head (uhm, so what is Frasier doing in this movie again?)...Then, theres the guy who plays the Fire Dept. investigator who also qualifies for a paradigm for a cast that went hilariously wrong. He could play loads of daytime soap-operas sure, but he does destroy the sequences he stars in.
And then you have the ending. Since the intention of the director (who also wrote the script) is to actually make a hard punching comment about american society as a whole why does he resort to the good ole happy ending??? Worse than that, why does he stretch things to the point of parody (no, satire isnt the same as parody) just to make his lil happy ending work?
In other words why fix something that isnt broken?
Good try. No cigar.
Rating:
Summary: Don't waste your time with this garbage
Review: This is the worst movie I have ever seen in my entire life. The director of the film took good actors, de niro and burns, a intresting idea for a story and blew it. I can't believe de niro would waste his time with this garbage. I won't even bother trying to explain the story, just take my advice and stay as far away from this terrible excuse for a movie.
Rating:
Summary: Pro Law and Order Propoganda
Review: The premise of this film is that two criminal from Eastern Europe come to America to visit a former criminal accomplice. They want their share of a previous criminal enterprise. As the money has been spent they kill their former associate. One of the East European's is fascinated with film. He checks into hotel rooms as Frank Capra. He steels a video camera and films this and other murders the two commit. Both of them then work out a devilishly cunning plan. They will film more murders. They will then sell the film to a news outlet and use the money to finance an insanity defence. If they are found not guilty then they can cash in on book and movie deals. The makers have included in the DVD some alleged "documentaries" about the reality of such a scheme. In fact the major premise is drivel. It suggests that to be acquitted of a crime in the United States all one has to say is "I'm insane" and the authorities will apologise for the inconvenience and let you out. The reality is that "insanity" had a defined legal and professional meaning. However this film is not about reality. It is about propaganda. It consistently shows police as heroic enforcers of all that is decent in the community rather than giving a real picture. Some police are heroic, some police are heroic some of the time. Some are lazy some are corrupt, some are decent but make occasional mistakes. This film is not concerned with how things are but shows police under sieges from a system which makes it easy for "criminals" to win. In much the same way the portrayal of the News Media is similarly a caricature. It shows a News Reader who has been friendly with one of the major characters jumping out of his skin to buy a video of his torture and murder. Lastly the villains in the film come from the land of fantasy as well. The sorts of villains who have no relation to reality and are designed purely as emotional levers. Apart from the ideological problems with the film it is a limp thriller. The concentration on the "wider issues" sacrifices the drama and means the plot moves slowly.
|
