Rating: 
Summary: No Classic, But Very Good
Review: "Road to Perdition" is a very well-made picture driven by skilled direction, great performances and canvas-like cinematography. The only thing that seems to be missing is a greater depth to the fine and dignified, but ultimately disappointing screenplay. The simple plot details feel merely like little graph points to lead the story down its necesarry path...all the way to its (intentionally) predictable ending. But thanks to Tom Hanks (in the lead) and, especially, the legendary Paul Newman, the script seems, in places, better than it really is. For all of its hypnotic beauty and stellar acting, it's almost a wonder that this great (in fact, near-excellent) film leaves you feeling kinda...empty.
Rating: 
Summary: Resisting Mightily Another Gangster Film but.....
Review: But director Sam Mendes was at the helm plus my all time favorite actor, Paul Newman, was in a strong supporting role. So I went. Boy, am I glad I did! First, this is the most artistically rendered gangster film I've ever seen. There is one scene of gangsters being machine gunned to death out in the rain that is absolutely magnificent, for example. You don't hear the sound of the gun at all but see its flash instead from deep within the shadows of the rainy night. The whole movie is like this, including an off camera rendering of grief (finding a wife and child gunned down). The theme is fathers and their sons, where fathers may lead their sons and how that can come back to haunt them. Paul Newman is the head gangster, Rooney, with a son, Connor, that it would be tame to describe as "good for nothing." Rooney is used to making excuses for Connor though and that is the genesis of the conflict at the core of the movie. Hanks' Mike Sullivan is a father too. One of his sons is killed by Connor and he's forced to go on the lam with his other son, Michael. I was not a Tom Hanks fan in his younger days but I like the job he is doing on these middle-aged characters who have more complexity. He does a fine job. The boy who plays his son does a terrific job too. Some may complain that this has some mawkish or overly sentimental moments but the whole of it is so well done that I can't really complain about them.
Rating:
Summary: Too much hype for "Perdition"...
Review: ...In the 30's in the Midwest, crime is controlled in cities large and small by the mob. In each city, the ethnic group in charge of criminal activities depends on the surroundings. In the mythical midwestern city where the film starts out, the Irish Rooney family is in charge. The film opens as Rooney patriarch, John, (Paul Newman) is hosting a wake for one of his "fellows". The young Sullivan family (Hanks, Jennifer Jason-Leigh and two sons) is in attendance, and it becomes quickly evident that Rooney treats Michael Sr. (Hanks) as a son (he participated in Mike's coming of age, has employed Mike, and Mike seemingly is his most successful bagman and enforcer), and Michael and Peter (Tyler Hoechlin & Liam Aiken) as grandsons. The men of the film, with the exception of Rooney's disreputable son Connor (Daniel Craig) are taciturn and solemn - all business, cold and bleak. Hard men, for hard times. Mike Jr., at 12, is convinced his father is more than just an ordinary man, but can already feel the strangeness of suspecting that what his dad does for a living doesn't fit with the religious and moral code so evident in the Sullivan household. He hides in the car one night as his father and Connor set out for a "discussion" with a disenchanted member of Rooney's organization. The film erupts with the violence that Mike Jr. witnesses. Soon, both Sullivan's are on the run from the Rooney organization, which has closed ranks to protect Connor, seemingly because they cannot trust Mike Jr. to keep what he saw a secret. Mrs. Sullivan and Peter are assassinated by Connor and the two remaining must find a way to stay safe and to gain their revenge. The tragic tale that follows is less about the storyline and more about the parallels of father/son relationships. Mendes earned, with his reputation, the right to work with some of the best in the business. Hanks always rises to perform as a master when surrounded by a talented ensemble, and particularly with an actor/actress of Newman's caliber. Hanks is self-contained, communicating with his eyes and his instinctive reactions to events. His scene at the piano with Newman, and his victory in the rain against Newman's men are both masterful displays of acting prowess. He's not alone in these scenes, and Newman is memorable here - easily slipping from engaging man among men to fearsome patriarch to a father torn by anguish over competing responsibilities to family - should he value his own flesh and blood more than the "son" who is his by demeanor, ability and character? Young Hoechlin, as Mike, Jr., is either one of the finest young actors we have seen, or, more likely, a truly successful student of Mendes/Hanks - he conveys much of what we learn about him with his eyes and his gestures. Jude Law has a scary turn, as a smarmy contract killer, and too little is seen of Stanley Tucci as a Chicago mobster, and of Jason Leigh. Both, however, get more screen time than Anthony LaPaglia, who was cast as Al Capone, but all of the film of his character ended up on the cutting room floor. Strong performances make memorable characters, but the plotline of "Perdition" is thin. Mendes enhances the film with its own bleakness. The sound and the lighting capture the suspense - both are almost visceral in the violent sequences, and the cinematography of Conrad Hall is evident in the transition of camera shots - the film manages to feel like a series of artistic masterpieces wound together as a film. Each time two characters meet in a one on one sequence (be it Connor warning young Michael, a kindly farmwoman who confronts Mike Sr. with the knowledge of how much he means to his son, or the dawning awareness of the danger in a roadside diner where Law's Maguire and Sullivan meet) the film draws you in to the sequence as though it were really unfolding before you. There will be many filmgoers who are amazed by "The Road to Perdition", and many who will reject it because it was billed as a successor to "The Godfather", and, aside from the mob plot and the tales of family revenge and relationships, the two have very little in common. "Perdition" takes place over 6 short weeks - "The Godfather" unfolds over two decades. The sense of golden unreality that captured viewers for Puzo's rich storyline is missing from the quick sketch of the harsh midwestern mob life in the 30's. Hardest for me as a filmgoer is the film's ending. A little short on plot, it leaves us with an implausible, if necessary conclusion. We've guessed it all along based on the way Mendes introduces the film, but the closing sequence, (again, beautifully filmed) is melodramatic and unrealistic. Mike Jr. would have taken the action he had to take to survive.
For adult moviegoers this summer, it is a quietly powerful film choice, beautifully made.
Rating: 
Summary: O.K. but it doesn't change your life
Review: I just saw this movie and i can say that it was a GOOD movie , but nothing more...Way benneath American Beauty , this movie has great photography, as expected, great acting, as expexcted. The music, though, is rather mediocre, and the plot lacks in substance. I mean this movie doesn't have a meaning, a deep one, it's only about showing off good skills in making cinema. Sorry, Sam Mendes, without Alan Ball it's tough out there...
Rating:
Summary: Not your average gangster film
Review: Road to Perdition is not your average gangster film. Althought there is violence, gangsters and robbery to describe it as such would be a big mistake. Instead it is also a tale of fathers and sons, family and obligations. Both Hanks character and Newman's are confronted with choices. For Hanks it is easy, though he is caught between his loyalty to his family and his long time mentor- revenge and protection of his son Michael are his focus. For Newman it's more difficult for Hanks almost a son to him. But not his real son and he chooses as a father and in doing so resigns the movie to its fate. Road to Perdition is a well thought out, adult and intelligent film. It takes its time to develop a story and treats the viewer as an intelligent observer. Tom Hanks is excellent as an Irish Catholic mobster and family man for whom his profession is a job. Newman does a fine job himself as the gang boss/mentor to Hanks. The writing in this film is also to be commended. Well recommended.
Rating:
Summary: Requiem for a Killer
Review: Stately, elegiac and beautifully photographed Road to Perdition is a tale of redemption and revenge. Tom Hanks is Michael Sullivan, stone killer and first assistant to mob boss John Rooney (Paul Newman). Twelve-year old son, Michael Jr. sneaks a ride with Dad and Conner Rooney (Daniel Craig), worthless son of the boss, to see what exactly it is that Dad does for a living. Young Michael gets a knee-high view of a talk that went wrong that turned into a hit by the impulsive and reprehensible Connor. Mike, Sr. did the clean up with a tommy gun. When Mike, Jr. is discovered, the dilemma is set in motion. Fearing that the boy will be unable to keep a secret, Connor, with astounding ineptness, kills the younger son and mother, mistaking him for Mike Jr. Father and son abandon everything and hit the road for six weeks, partly in flight, partly to plot and carry out revenge. It is worth the price of the ticket just to see Newman and Hanks interacting. Newman has the dramatic role of anguished love for his adopted aide, a lilting Irish charm, and a deadly coldness. Hanks is subdued, probably not overly bright, taciturn and determined. As usual, his eyes tell the story. Jude Law in the scene-stealing role of assassin McGuire is a marvel of slithery, oddly graceful pop-eyed menace. You tend to forget about him for a while, but then he pops up unexpectedly and startles you anew. Stanley Tucci is a splendid suave, civilized Frank Nitti. Poor Jennifer Jason Leigh as the wife and mother had not more than five lines of dialogue, which was rather a waste. The mood and the settings were dark. It rained and sleeted and snowed; everything and everybody looked miserable in the cityscapes. I would guess the original locale was supposed to be Rock Island, IL, a very corrupt fiefdom of the Chicago mob during prohibition. I was continually reminded of artist Edward Hopper and his painting Nighthawks. Road to Perdition imbues the viewer with the same loneliness, separation and disassociation of the big unfeeling city. The ballet-like scene of Rooney's assassination in the rain, umbrellas like graceful markers-all without sound --- is unforgettable. All was not perfect. The static voice-over introducing and ending the film weakened it. The harsh solution to the boy's keeping a secret seemed unreal to me. A major point in the movie was redemption for the boy, where the father was doomed for the life he had led. Then why did the father make the boy his accomplice; further physically and morally endangering him? Well, there would not have been a story if Hanks had found a monastery to hide the boy, now would there? Overall, Road to Perdition is an amazing experience of mood, originality and visual artistry
Rating:
Summary: Unexpectedly moving climax ...
Review: Serious, intense, moody gangster drama set in the 1930s, with Hanks as quiet hit man Mike Sullivan who must go on the lam with his one surviving son, after his wife and other son are murdered (an unfortuanate scene, but it sets the story in motion). A few twists make it slightly more intelligent than most genre films of this type, and the period, acting, and characters are vivid and believable. Leigh has a thankless role, but Law is chilling as a murderous photographer. The script adaptation by David Self (while it alters Max Allan Collins original script for the excellent graphic novel upon which this film is based) is fine. Mendes handles the gangster film with taste and style, and in the midst of all the bloodshed there is actual humanity. The film is rated R for shock violence and profanity.
Rating:
Summary: Gorgeous, well-directed, but without much depth
Review: This is a very well made and well-directed film, but I have to agree with previous reviewers who have found it superficial and . . . well, not very deep. The story just doesn't amount to very much, and while there are hints that the film is trying to say more than is on the surface, it doesn't do a very good job of making it clear what points, if any, it is trying to make. On one level, the film is about the relation between fathers and sons, but if you compare this film on fathers to FEAR STRIKES OUT or any of several dozen films one could name, it looks pretty lame. I also suspect that most people will find the end of the movie rather unpleasant. Nonetheless, the film does manage to do several things spectacularly well. Although many films have managed a great period look and feel, this one manages that as well as any I have seen. The film is set in 1931, and the amount of detail is quite stunning. There is also judicious use of computers to eliminate much modern detailing in shots. I live in Chicago where much of the action was filmed, and recognized the exact or approximate locations of many of the scenes, and noted that many details have been miraculously eliminated. The film is also magnificently photographed, and is always utterly beautiful to look at. The musical score is lush and somber and perfectly suited for the film's action. The movie should get a lot of Oscar nominations for art direction, music, sound, and photography. The acting is very competent, but this is not an actors' film. Apart from Jude Law's quirky part, there are few opportunities for thespian histrionics. Most of the performances are muted, as if successfully containing a horde of emotion within. There are few "big scenes." This doesn't mean that the performances aren't enormously competent. But the viewer won't leave the theater thinking, "Lord, that guy can act." Tom Hanks is fine, but this won't rank among his most memorable performances. It was more wonderful than I can express to see Paul Newman in this, given his relative inactivity in recent years. I would take bets right now that he will take home the Oscar for Best Supporting Actor. Daniel Craig turns in an appropriately loathsome performance as Newman's son and the manufacturer of all the tragedy in the film. I was not as enamored of Jude Law's performance as some of my fellow reviewers. For a few years now I have felt that Law was just one or two pictures away from superstardom. In ROAD TO PERDITION, he plays completely against type. Although one of the most handsome actors working today, he is made up to look slovenly, pale, and incredibly unhygienic. But his particular performance required little in the way of acting skill. I still expect him to break out hugely in the future. He is a very fine actor with absurdly good looks, and I will continue to await his future roles with great interest. Tyler Hoechlin did a fine job as Tom Hanks son. This picture will receive a great deal of Oscar hype, and most of that I believe will be undeserved, apart from technical nominations. This is an exceptionally constructed film that ultimately could be considered somber and serious fluff. Not a masterpiece, but also not at all a waste of time.
Rating:
Summary: Made for Oscar
Review: 'Road to Perdition' was made for our friend Oscar, and there's no disputing that. With Paul Newman, Tom Hanks and even Jude Law thrown in there, the only person they're missing is an award winning director...and then comes Sam Mendes, the same man who was at the helm for 'American Beauty' two years back. Just looking at this film's trailer, you can see that it will be a definite contender this upcoming March, and, for once, I am in agreement. Though I'm not one to fall over mainstream films--I'd much rather watch 'Seven' or 'Fight Club' over 'Attack of the Clones' any day--I, every so often, see a film that I really enjoy, and that, though mainstream, pulls away from the typical Hollywood norm...and what a great feeling that is. Tom Hanks is, as usual, wonderful in this film, and Paul Newman is cold, heartless and believable. The cinematography is wonderful, and with Mendes behind the camera, the film looks top-notch. All in all, 'Perdition' is a nice looking piece of work, though it will not, in my opinion, stand the test of time in the mobster genre? Why? Because of 'The Godfather'. Though 'Perdition' is a great film, it will be over-shadowed by the mob film to rule all mob films. To me this is disappointing, because it stands in the same shadow as every sci-fi movie trying to make it, but being pushed aside by such classics as 'Star Wars'. (The original trilogy, I must add.) And now, here's the low-down on 'Road to Perdition': Acting: 5/5. Definitely top-notch here, but what could we expect? With Hanks and Newman, we were in for a treat.
Story: 4/5. Slightly predictable at times, but original in others. I was entertained.
Script: 4/5. This is by far the most critiqued part of a film when I'm watching. To me, directing makes the film, but without a script, there is no film. Here, we see good writing with few cliches...no pin-striped suits for our villians.
Directing: 4/5. Mendes is on the rise, ladies and gentleman, and he's not going away. If I hadn't known better, I thought Spielberg was making this one.
Overall: 4/5. A good film, and if you have the stomach to watch this one and the energy to sit through it--it feels long at points--it's worth a watch.
Rating:
Summary: Tom Hanks Does It Again
Review: Tom Hanks does it again in this ganster thriller. I found his character,as well as the others, along with the story line a captivating experience. I would like to go see it again!
|
