Smokin' Aces (Joe Carnahan, 2007)

Message

Cinesimilitude · #1 Post by **Cinesimilitude** » Fri Oct 27, 2006 3:54 am

The trailer for this film is now online, and it shows why Ben Affleck had that godawful handle-bar stache in Clerks 2.

Smokin' Aces

Fletch F. Fletch · #2 Post by **Fletch F. Fletch** » Fri Oct 27, 2006 9:27 am

SncDthMnky wrote:The trailer for this film is now online, and it shows why Ben Affleck had that godawful handle-bar stache in Clerks 2.

Smokin' Aces

yeah, Carnahan must have thing for those kinds of 'staches as Jason Patric sports one in Narc too.

flyonthewall2983 · #3 Post by **flyonthewall2983** » Fri Oct 27, 2006 9:29 am

Looks fun.

Len · #4 Post by **Len** » Fri Oct 27, 2006 7:29 pm

JASON BATEMAN! Excellent! I previously thought he had just like a small cameo or something in the film, as I hadn't seen him in any of the earlier pics from the film, but I'm positively ecstatic if he's got a major role in this.

Trailer looks great too, and I loved Narc, so it's all good.

Fletch F. Fletch · #5 Post by **Fletch F. Fletch** » Fri Dec 01, 2006 2:23 pm

New trailer.

Len · #6 Post by **Len** » Fri Dec 29, 2006 2:57 pm

I can't wait for this. The new trailer looks lovely and I can't get over how interesting the cast is (I'm overjoyed Jason Bateman is appearing in a lot of interesting roles now, he's wonderful).

Also I thought it was quite clever how Carnahan described the film as being something like "if Fellini had ever done an action film". Apparently not so much as a comparison between him and Fellini, more about how the eccentric cast of characters might somewhat remind the viewer of a Fellini film. Dunno how it plays out in the film, but the whole thing seems to be something entirely different from anything else out there.

EDIT: jesus christ, what a disappointment the film turned out to be.

JHunter · #7 Post by **JHunter** » Fri Dec 29, 2006 7:53 pm

I went to an early screening of this a few weeks back as a member of the Philadelphia Film Society. The film is incredibly entertaining, with some fantastic action pieces and humor (the three redneck assassins in particular are great), yet it falls apart in the last few minutes as one of the "twists" doesn't really pass any logical test, while another is telegraphed from its introduction. Also, at times, it tries to be offbeat for the sake of being offbeat. Despite those quibbles, I would still recommend it in a heartbeat. It is the kind of filmmaking that so many of the post-Tarantino wannabes aim for, but rarely seem to hit.

Fletch F. Fletch · #8 Post by **Fletch F. Fletch** » Tue Jan 23, 2007 5:14 pm

Cinema Blend's interview with Carnahan. Sadly, despite being questioned about it, he doesn't dish dirt on why he dropped out of M:I III.

tavernier · #9 Post by **tavernier** » Wed Jan 24, 2007 10:14 am

How's Alicia Keys? She looked INCREDIBLE on Letterman the other night.

Fletch F. Fletch · #10 Post by **Fletch F. Fletch** » Wed Jan 24, 2007 1:57 pm

J. Hoberman kinda digs it.

neal · #11 Post by **neal** » Thu Jan 25, 2007 3:22 pm

I agree with JHunter that this is actually pretty badass and entertaining until the end, when it falls apart a little. Until those last moments, it succeeds at what it's trying to do-- be entertaining and quirky.

Fletch F. Fletch · #12 Post by **Fletch F. Fletch** » Mon Jan 29, 2007 1:59 pm

GreenCine Daily interviews Carnahan and Piven.

Antoine Doinel · #13 Post by **Antoine Doinel** » Tue Apr 17, 2007 10:21 pm

Rented this tonight and thought the film started off poorly and got worse. The script by Carnahan is ridiculously overplotted for what it is and by the middle becomes a muddled mess with enough plot holes to drive a semi-truck through and an ending that is atrocious. Also, I guessed the big "twist" at the end of the film about an hour before it happened.

He probably did Tom Cruise a favor by deciding to drop out of directing M:I III.

Fletch F. Fletch · #14 Post by **Fletch F. Fletch** » Wed Apr 18, 2007 9:06 am

Antoine Doinel wrote:Rented this tonight and thought the film started off poorly and got worse. The script by Carnahan is ridiculously overplotted for what it is and by the middle becomes a muddled mess with enough plot holes to drive a semi-truck through and an ending that is atrocious. Also, I guessed the big "twist" at the end of the film about an hour before it happened.

'tis true but I still kinda liked it despite itself. I really thought that Jeremy Piven was excellent as a rapidly self-destructing (via drugs), complete bloodshot, bloated, burnt out mess of a human being. I even felt that he tried to instill some kind of pathos in the guy, despite all of the excessive overplotting and carnage.

I think that it really speaks volumes about the lack of well-written scripts being greenlighted in Hollywood these days when a screenplay like this, that features some clever if not derivative dialogue, would attract this many name stars and character actors. And why not? This film gives them the chance to play larger than life characters and scenery chewing.

That being said, the film was hopelessly derivative of Quentin Tarantino and Guy Ritchie (him especially) and pretty much instantly forgettable too.

Antoine, didja check out any of the extras? The outtakes reel was pretty damn funny and made me wonder if this film was more fun to make than to watch?

Antoine Doinel · #15 Post by **Antoine Doinel** » Wed Apr 18, 2007 10:18 am

I thought Jeremy Piven was good, though his character was simply an even more self-centered, drugged out version of Ari Gold from Entourage.

I didn't have a chance to watch the extras -- maybe I'll see if I can do that before I return the film today. But within ten minutes of the start, upon seeing the huge cast, my girlfriend and I both remarked that at the very least the film must've been fun to make. There is certainly a lot of great talent up there but I just felt a lot of it was wasted with one-dimensional versions of characters they usually play. But the one bright spot in the film for me was Alicia Keys and Taraji P. Henson. They were great and I would to see a film just about them; it was a pleasure watching them on screen, trading one liners.

Fletch F. Fletch · #16 Post by **Fletch F. Fletch** » Wed Apr 18, 2007 12:58 pm

Antoine Doinel wrote:But the one bright spot in the film for me was Alicia Keys and Taraji P. Henson. They were great and I would to see a film just about them; it was a pleasure watching them on screen, trading one liners.

I agree... esp. the scene between them and the hotel clerk. Yeah, I was impressed by Keys. She was quite good and held her own with everyone else. I also felt she and Common made a good team -- I could see a film about them as well.

If you can, definitely check out the "Outtakes" on DVD if only to see Ben Affleck's pool playing "skills."

Len · #17 Post by **Len** » Thu Apr 19, 2007 2:58 am

Smokin Aces was indeed pretty damn bad. How can a director who displayed such an acute understanding of the crime genre in Narc reduce himself to a lame Tarantino/Richie-ripoff like this? I'm still stunned by how incredibly weak the script was. The setup was pretty neat and for awhile, I loved the coked-up editing which delivered the backstory at a breakneck pace, before it was made clear that the rest of the film would be similarily nonsensical MTV-filmmaking. I'm not saying I didn't enjoy watching Taraji Henson turn a .50 Cal Barrett on the FBI guys (altho Mann used the same rifle to a much more devastating effect in Miami Vice), or that the gorehound in me didn't chuckle when a guy falls ass first on a chainsaw, but after watching the mayhem for what seemed like ages I can't even begin to describe how cheated I felt (fuckin' 11 euro friday showings) when it became clear that in addition to Aces just being a bad film, even the huge twist was the one everyone surely got about an hour into the film.

Granted, there are times when the film really rises above it's level, as when Buddy Israel is finally at the end of his line (great performance by Piven), whenever the two hitwomen appear on the screen (totally agree with the praise heaped on Henson and Keys, they were magnificent) or when Jason Bateman steals the show in his few scenes (he'd gotten all the best lines and was just hilarious, and I'm not just saying this as a huge Bateman fan), but in Smokin Aces I saw practically nothing of the storytelling brilliance that Narc was filled with.

Cool 'staches tho.

patrick · #18 Post by **patrick** » Wed Apr 25, 2007 7:14 pm

I feel kind of ashamed to say that I enjoyed this movie until the completely out-of-place ending. I could feel my IQ drop a few points afterwards though.

It's a shame Jason Bateman didn't get more screen time, he definitely stole the show in his two brief scenes. I wish he'd get more roles, he seems to be coming into his own as a comedic actor.

#19 Post by **cdnchris** » Wed Apr 25, 2007 10:05 pm

Man, what a turd of a movie. I don't think I've been this disappointed in a while. I really enjoyed Narc and, while I knew this one was VERY different from that one, I thought this one looked to be at least fun, but it was godawful, easily the worst thing I've seen so far this year. Piven was the only good thing in this movie because because unlike everyone else, he was an actual character and gave a decent performance that really shows something during the climax. Other than that the movie wasn't fun, it wasn't funny, it was just dull and stupid with godawful "quirky" characters (I almost shut it off when that Ritalin kid was introduced)

And what a waste of a cast. I even felt bad for Ben A. And even worse for Bateman, Liotta, and Garcia (especially Bateman, though his first scene was at least funny). The twist was obvious 28-minutes in

SpoilerShow

when they started pounding in that plastic surgery stuff some more

. And all I could hope was that I was wrong. But nope. And I don't even know if I can call that a twist, as it really doesn't matter. And the final litte scene, which played out so dramatically like it actually mattered, left me thinking "why should I even care?"

I really hated this movie. And I'm so shocked because I thought there was some definite promise in Narc.

Commander Shears · #20 Post by **Commander Shears** » Thu Apr 26, 2007 10:24 pm

Antoine Doinel wrote:Rented this tonight and thought the film started off poorly and got worse. The script by Carnahan is ridiculously overplotted for what it is and by the middle becomes a muddled mess with enough plot holes to drive a semi-truck through and an ending that is atrocious. Also, I guessed the big "twist" at the end of the film about an hour before it happened.

He probably did Tom Cruise a favor by deciding to drop out of directing M:I III.

You sure took the words right out of my mouth. How is it even possible to make a movie that has a one-sentence plot (a bunch of hitmen / bounty hunters are all after the same guy) yet is still non-stop exposition and this muddled? At least Cabin Fever now has competition for most misguided use of a kid doing martial arts. That was unexpected.

I still like and have hope for Carnahan but his Hollywood career just took a massive turn south. This is the kind of picture I imagine Troy Duffy would be making had he been bankrolled. All kinds of dumb.

Len · #21 Post by **Len** » Fri Apr 27, 2007 3:34 am

Commander Shears wrote:This is the kind of picture I imagine Troy Duffy would be making had he been bankrolled.

Haha, that's pretty harsh (but admittedly fair).

Still, Carnahan can't fuck up White Jazz, right?

flyonthewall2983 · #22 Post by **flyonthewall2983** » Sun Apr 29, 2007 1:16 pm

I liked it. If I have any sort of guilty pleasures as far as movies, this one would be a prime example, along with Tony Scott's recent work. I know that they are hopelessly derivative of other films and excessively violent, so it's hard for me to find solid ground on which to defend this stuff. I shudder to think that if I were ten years older, I might have found myself a fan of Steven Seagal's work.

patrick · #23 Post by **patrick** » Mon May 28, 2007 7:57 pm

Evidently this has done so well on DVD that a sequel (albeit a direct-to-video one) has been greenlit.

From IMDB:

Filmmaker Joe Carnahan is amazed his box-office flop Smokin' Aces became so successful as a rental DVD movie bosses now want to shoot a prequel. Crime drama Smokin' Aces slipped in and out of cinemas almost unnoticed upon its release last year - despite a cast including Ben Affleck and Andy Garcia - but became a hugely popular rental. However, although he will be involved with the film, Carnahan won't be directing the follow-up. He writes on his website: "Universal wants to move ahead with a direct-to-video prequel of Smokin' and asked me if I wanted to Godfather the thing and make sure we did a really cool story. "The DVD numbers Smokin' Aces has done are astounding and they want to strike while the iron is hot. Whatever reluctance I have is alleviated by the fact that we can really do this balls out, hardcore prequel and not be constrained by ratings or any other puritanical MPAA bulls**t. That I love. "I won't be directing. I will probably help break story - something lean and mean and nasty."

It really is ridiculous how well this thing is doing at the rental place I work at, the only other recent movies that have had that kind of sustained interest here are Volver and The Science of Sleep.

jbeall · #24 Post by **jbeall** » Mon May 28, 2007 11:16 pm

patrick wrote:Evidently this has done so well on DVD that a sequel (albeit a direct-to-video one) has been greenlit.

It really is ridiculous how well this thing is doing at the rental place I work at, the only other recent movies that have had that kind of sustained interest here are Volver and The Science of Sleep.

<sigh>

Smokin' Aces was pretty sucktacular, but I guess the moviegoing audience prefers cartoon characters and stock "twists" more than, I dunno, consistency of vision and overall competence.

Some really good acting performances were utterly wasted in this flick, and the moments when it attempted a certain gravitas were completely out of place and ridiculous. It woulda been decent enough had it been thirty minutes shorter and less full of itself.