Traffic

Rating:
Summary: Incredible, perceptive examination of the war on drugs
Review: Every era has movies that define it, set it apart and act as a sort of historical notation of the moods and points of view of the people of its time. Traffic, director Steven Soderburg's sprawling and ambitious look at the effects of America's war on drugs, is one of those movies. Years from now, I suspect people will view it and admire its power. They will also ask themselves what we/they were thinking back then. Can the 'war' really be so misguided, so fatally flawed? Does it solve anything, or does it simply escalate the misery and violence? Does it inadvertantly act as a price support system for the drug cartels? The movie almost never preaches. It simply records (in near documentary fashion) three distinct yet somewhat interwoven stories. It doesn't tell you what to think. It merely suggests that you do think about the possibility that a new approach to drug abuse be taken. Those who do not wish to dwell on the subject can take Traffic on its other level, which is that of a first-rate thriller.

One story revolves around Javier [Benicio del Toro], a Mexican cop in Tijuana. Javier is by nature an honest man who wants to do good, but he is well aware of the corruption all around him. When he and his partner make a substantial drug bust on their own, their mission is intercepted by a group of soldiers working for the Mexican equivalent of the United States drug czar. From this incident, Javier becomes tangled in a lethal web of lies and corruption. Meanwhile, across the border in San Diego, Helena Ayala [Catherine Zeta-Jones], who is at the top of the local social circle, watches in horror as the DEA busts her husband and charges him with being one of America's biggest drug kingpins. Slowly, Helena realizes that the businessman husband she has loved and trusted all these years really is a master criminal. When a rival gang threatens the life of her young son, Helena decides to take some radical action. In the third story, Robert Wakefield [Michael Douglas], a Federal judge in Ohio, has just been appointed head of a US task force on drugs. He heads to Washington hoping to make a difference. He quickly realizes that the drug war has turned into a political circus. Elected officials no longer believe it can be won but are determined to put on a show for the folks back home. After Robert discovers that his own daughter is an addict, his view of the world is quickly turned upside down.

Besides the actors mentioned above, there are many others in the cast. All of them are great. Don Cheadle and Luis Guizman play DEA agents who relish being assigned to the Ayala case, not because they still believe they are making a difference, but because they get to go after a white man for a change. In a star-making performance, Erika Christenson is remarkable as Caroline Wakefield, the addicted daughter. Of all the characters, hers may be the most telling. Drugs pervade every segment of our culture. Caroline and her friends don't fit the user stereotypes. They are smart, educated and privileged. They are the very children of the group probably most in favor of the war on drugs. As Michael Douglas's character says, "How can we make war on our own families?"

Some viewers may be put off by the movie's documentary style, but I liked it. Director Soderburgh was himself the cameraman. This is most unusual in a big budget project, but it is typical of this ever inventive director. In post-production, the film negative was color-washed. The result is that the Mexican scenes have a yellow tone, the Ohio and Washington segments have a bluish hue, and the California parts are in bright or 'normal' colors. Not only did I find this interesting to look at, it made the movie, which jumps around a lot, very easy to follow.

Traffic isn't perfect. One scene in particular doesn't make good sense, but I can't tell you which one without spoiling the plot. Any film with a great number of characters is apt to confuse some people. Still, despite a few flaws, it is easily one of the top five American movies of 2000 .

Rating:
Summary: You either love it or loathe it
Review: One of the few movies I ever walked out on (I eventually sat through it on the insistence of trusted friends), this film is somewhat polarizing. I found it to be trite, vapid, predictable, and nausiating with its jerky let's-cash-in-on-the-indy-craze handheld camerawork.

If you loved this movie, I am happy for you that the greatest people producing DVDs is making it for you. But PLEASE rent it first or you may be one of the 10-20% of viewers who felt like they had just seen the wrong movie.

(If it helps, my judgement is that THE LIMEY is the only good film Soderberg has made, and I would give it about 3-1/2 stars).

Rating:
Summary: Well, I suppose it might make a fair infomercial
Review: I've seen mention that this movie captured the "harsh realities" of the war on drugs, so I expected to see something tragic. Well,the only tragedy I noticed was that these scenes reminded me of a billion other scripts I had seen a billion boring times. The problem with Traffic was that these "harsh realities" were just like every other "movie with a conscience" I had ever seen, placing movie morality above movie quality...
Traffic, to me at least, was just another piece of modern movie hype. It makes me long for those drug movies of yore.

Rating:
Summary: Hollywood destroys another classic story.
Review: When I watched this it reminded me what I thought of The Assassin (Bridget Fonda). In that case an absolute classic movie Nikita was destroyed with a mind numbing version for the US audience. It's happened again here with Traffik becoming remade as Traffic. Traffic won all the awards and took all the money buy you owe it to yourself to watch Traffik, the original.

Rating:
Summary: Barely tolerable
Review: I saw a sneakpeek of this one shortly before it came out, and wow, was I not able to predict the way it would be received. Soderbergh shows a surprisingly uneven hand with his storylines. Del Toro is good, but he's been (and will be, no doubt) much better. Michael Douglas is, surprise surprise, Michael Douglas. And Zeta-Jones is not as deft an actress as she is stunning. Sorry, but it's true. My main problem with the film, however, has to do with the overall approach. It reminds me of Natural Born Killers, in which Oliver Stone tried to make a point about how popular culture makes us numb to violence by making a movie equally numbing. Interesting point, but not an enjoyable film experience. Similarly, Traffic seems to address the "the drug problem is really complex and seemingly unresolvable" idea by making a movie as muddy and tangled as its topic.

Rating:
Summary: overrated look at the drug war
Review: "Traffic" has been heralded as a "daring" look at the War on Drugs. But it's only daring from the perspective of someone who thought the War on Drugs has been a resounding success. Frankly, to those who have been willing to make themselves familiar with the failures of the multi-trillion dollar campaign, the film covers nothing new and really could have been far more provocative. Not that it's a bad thing that the limited scope of the film shook up people who think inside a narrow box a bit. As a film on it's own, it deserves some praise as an entertaining, well-acted (especially from Del Toro) crime film. But make no mistake, this film has much broader aspirations, and that is where it fails. It is fair to compare it to the British mini-series that it's based on, "Traffik", which was produced 11 years earlier yet is far more insightful and relevant. That film has a broader scope-- it deals with the a third world opium farmer rather than a third world cop, for example--, the dialogue is sharper -- compare the Hollywood gushiness of Douglas's final speech to the powerful efficiency of the original's counterpart speech-- and it makes far more daring observations-- the original notes how America allies itself with Pakistani heroin traders so they can fight the Soviet Union, where as the remake has dialogue and plot points which completely exonerates the American government of such activity, which is, sadly, totally false. If you want to see a really want a daring film about the War on Drugs, skip "Traffic" and see "Traffik". Then, if you want to really have the tragedy and hypocrisy of War on Drugs laid out for you, read "Dark Alliance" by Gary Webb.

Rating:
Summary: Jamed up to pieces!
Review: 4 stars to this? Best picture nomination to this? Oscars to this?
Well, Hollywood has sunk again. No script. No story. No plot. And Catherine Zeta-Jones is as dislikable as ever.

And let me saw Benicio is one ugly mother. His acting?
Lame as hell! And an Oscar to it! The world must be insane!

Why do people find me, myself, insane? Because they know that
my words on this awful, awful picture are true! Whether they put 0 out of 234 people found this review helpful, I don't care.
They can't talk back. They can only work with digits! Digits, I say! Digits mean nothing! What have digits ever done for you?
Like the law, they are meaningless. The same as this film.

Kudos to the direction, though.

Rating:
Summary: 2 movies - One good, one bad
Review: Okay drugs are bad. I get it. It can affect anyone's life. Sure why not. What else do you have? Not much. This is a pretty standard storyline for a movie about crime. I kept thinking Godfather. Enough to make or kill a movie? Not really.

What you end up with is a patchy movie. I wanted to really enjoy it but it kept throwing me curve balls from left field that just made parts of this movie ridiculous. Suburban mom living in La Jolla turns into a hard bargaining Don Corleone with cutting edge smuggling technology in a blink of an eye. Trained drug policemen flippantly let a fake delivery man poison a suspect they know people are after. A federal gov't official hangs in the ghetto to find his daughter with no (police) help. Come on. Give me something to work with here.

Okay Benicio as a Mexican drug enforcement official struggling with honor and money. Two US drug enforcement officials struggling with a job they know is ludicrous. Okay I like it. Why are you constantly cutting away from these men. They seem fairly compelling. Why is there not more of this. Why the rich white kids do drugs too schtick?

Acting is patchy too. Zeta Jones is attrocious (and I'm Welsh too). She's either out of her league or preoccupied with hubby during this movie. Douglas is equally unbelievable. He just walks through the part with no effort or attempt at pulling his character off. Benicio, the corrupt Mexican general, the hit man are all wonderful. Very solid stuff from these guys.

Maybe I can use that movie editting software on my computer to get rid of the junk.

Rating:
Summary: 25 Word Or Less Review
Review: A star-studded picture featuring an intricate story. Problem is, does anyone really care what happens to these characters? Style over substance.

Rating:
Summary: Excellent Commentary on "the war on drugs"
Review: This movie has three seperate story lines and in order to keep them straight, the director (quite masterfully) uses a different tint for each scene. The first story is about how the newly-appointed drug czar's daughter is hooked on drugs, the second is set in Mexico and the corruption the "war on drugs" causes in that country and the third is about a rich housewife who discovers that her husband is mixed up in distributing drugs.

Usually, "movies with a social message" turn me off. I don't need to be preached to, thank you very much. This movie was different: it criticized the absurd policies over "the war of drugs" by showing exactly how these laws effect people. The scene with Michael Douglas talking with senators (while downing scotch) says it all--the "war" is about power and money and who cares about the people. Bottom line: this movie makes you think and is a must see.