MovieChat Forums > Spartan (2004) Discussion > The problem is that Mamet can't direct f...

The problem is that Mamet can't direct film


Hell of a writer. Great stage director. Some of his theory on acting is brilliant. The Atlantic theater is one of the best companies in NYC.

But he can't direct film for sh*t.

The Verdict -- brilliant
Untouchables -- load of fun
Glengarry -- one of the all time greats
The Edge -- a stretch, I'll go with it
Ronin -- fantastic, 1967 all over again

House of Games -- laughably bad
Spanish Prisoner -- most obvious plotting ever
Heist -- you must be joking
And now, Spartan.

He just needs an outside pair of eyes to make his stuff shine on film. And a decent director of photography--everything looks like a TV movie.

I'm giving Redbelt a pass.

reply

I just watched Spartan and I'm inclined to agree with you. It really felt like I was watching a made for TV movie. It was enjoyable, but some of the camera angles and camera movement were highly questionable. The color or lighting, I couldn't tell which, was off as well. The dialogue was kind of insanely ingenious, but occasionally fell flat. Ronin is a great film and The Untouchables was pretty cool, so I know his writing is not the problem. I've also read the original play for Glengarry Glen Ross(not the script for the film, but the play) and that was quite interesting. I usually hate reading plays, but it was actually rather captivating.

I just think he's not well suited to directing films. I'm sure he's great at directing plays, but I think both Spartan and The Spanish Prisoner would have been much better in the hands of a director with a better eye for film. Just to clarify, I didn't think Spartan was bad. I just think it could have been downright fantastic instead of simply serviceable.

reply

You guys have high standards man - i thought he did a pretty good job. Sure he's not Polanski but he's good...and no one understnds a film better than the writer.

reply

Man, I couldn't agree with you more. All of his movies are just downright clunkers. He needs a good interpreter of his work. I actually liked Redbelt, but I liked it despite all it's problems.

This movie was just about his worst so far: the dialogue was so contrived and clunky (I know, I get they were supposed to be spooks and secret service and all that; that doesn't excuse a script full of dialogue that consists of cliches, one liners, and non-sequitors couched as "secret codes!" Ooooo! [I get this is secret cant, but all I'm asking is that one of the characters one time say: "Wait, what? Mini-golf? I'm sorry, could you repeat?" If they are all in on it and know what each other is saying, fine, then it's a foreign language, give me some subtitles]); and frankly, the acting didn't help a single of the lines to be bought as genuine (every line that came out of Val Kilmer's mouth felt bulky, uncomfortable, and just over-acted); and the plot was just down right weak: thank god this kid had her personalized sign that she liked to doodle and draw on windows; thank got that sniper laid down his mat right where her earing feel and it got caught up in his mat; thank god there was a human-sized dummy sitting on a bench during a shoot-out where Val Kilmer was pinned down; thank god they waited until the last second to intercept Val Kilmer at the port, even though they had him on GPS surveillance the whole time; thank god that Val Kilmer's character seemed to be the only person on the original security detail that not in on the cover up, and the only person it seemed that the cover up was intended for. This movie was ridiculousness couched in a week script.

-m

reply


I agree with "Heist' and "Spartan" being somewhat lukewarm, but the other movies were entertaining enough.



















If you love and support Michael Jackson 100%, copy & paste this into your signature. We love MJ!

reply

Disagree completely. Mamet directs films in a logical, no-frills sort of way. He advances camera movements and cuts methodically and only when necessary to the forward action of the story. This movie, in particular, has a very spartan style in direction, where characters don't make complex movements through their environments, the scenes are stripped down to bare essentials, and the camera remains in largely emotionally neutral position, much like the protagonist. Mamet's direction is stark, to be sure, but it's definitely there.

reply

Yep. He's an adequate director at the very least.

reply

abutter^

Yep.

And, the title of this thread is woefully ignorant.







~~ The good ended happily, and the bad unhappily. That is what fiction means ~ ~ Oscar Wilde

reply