In the 10 Ring: Gunslinger45's Reviews

→ in
Tools    







It is that time again kiddies, time for your friend Gunslinger to hit the cinema again as a treat to get away from the weekly grind of the Academy. Last week we delved into uninspired cinematic fan fiction with Fifty Shades of Grey. Unoriginal story, dull characters, a crap love story, and pitifully short on the sleaze and trashiness that was advertised. This week my film was Kingsman: Secret Service. And I can’t say this was very original either. The whole British secret agent angle was done first and arguably best with James Bond, and the whole “commoner becomes a super spy/ agent in a secret agency to save the world” plot has been done to death as well. This ranges from great movies like Men In Black to plenty of crap films like I Spy and Vin Diesel’s xXx. It was because of this unoriginality that made me initially not wish to see the movie. But having entered into this little trip to the cinema once a week deal, I decided to drop my standards and pony up to see this movie. Then again my other options included Jupiter Ascending, The SpongeBob movie, and Seventh Son. So clearly my options were limited. The film was directed by Matthew Vaughn, the man who directed Kick-Ass and X-Men: First Class. And much like First Class, I was really surprised in how much I liked this movie. With X-Men: First Class I was surprised in how much I still enjoyed the film despite the many flaws of the flick, but with Kingsmen, I was surprised in how legitimately good this film was.

The movie opens on an action sequence in the Middle East where 4 English agents are infiltrating a stronghold and then attempting to interrogate a prisoner. Due to unforeseen circumstances, one of the agents in killed is the line of duty. One of the revealed agents Galahad (played by Colin Firth) must then inform the deceased family of his passing. Leaving little Eggsby a trinket that he says will help him out of a jam. Fast forward 17 years, and Eggsby has grown into quite the juvenile delinquent. But give the kid credit; he is nowhere near the level of wankery as some of the other twats he knows. Eggsby gets into a pinch, calls the number on the back of the trinket he has been carrying around for years, and gets bailed out by Galahad. Eggsby is then recruited by Galahad to join the ranks of the Kingsmen. An independent intelligence agency funded by exceptionally rich families who wished to provide a service for good, but without the messy politics of dealing with government’s and the gits in charge. Think MI6 funded by the private sector. But what is a good spy movie without a good villain, and we get that from Samuel L Jackson. Jackson plays Valentine, a billionaire philanthropist and media mogul. And unlike Christian Grey, he does not get off on violence. In fact he abhors it. But that will not stop him from killing of the world’s population. And he wants to do so because he thinks there are too many people, they all contribute to global warming and people won’t do anything about it so everyone has to die. So yeah this guy is completely bonkers. I can imagine this guy beginning his plans at genocide after watching And Inconvenient Truth. Proving my position that crazy people should have no access to media! To top it off he dresses like Spike Lee, talks like Mike Tyson, and has a hot female Asian bodyguard with blades in her prosthetic legs. His plan includes recruiting various rich people and political leaders ranging from Swedish (Republican?) Prime Ministers, The British Royal Family, to the White House to go along with his plan. Leave it to the Democrats to sell out the nation. It is now up to the Kingsmen, as well as their newest and youngest recruits to try stopping Jackson from annihilating the human race. All the while dealing with cute little dogs, satirical references (and one action scene) dealing with a fictional representation of the Westboro Baptist Church, and Swedish Princesses who are totally down with giving up the rear bobsled entrance if ya know what I mean.

The first characteristic I noticed for the film was that this movie is very VERY… English. I mean gentlemen spies in classy suits whose codes names include Galahad, Lancelot, and Merlin working for a boss names Arthur; the various pub scenes, the British Mansion countryside, the gadgets built around posh items like fountain pens, classy looking lighters, and even turning umbrellas into weapons! Which I admit does make this film just a little classier. The only way this flick gets anymore English is if they get Helen Mirren to cameo as the Queen of England, John Cleese as the English Prime Minister, and Brian Blessed as a House Lord announcing “GORDON IS ALIVE” during tea time surrounded by Welsh Corgis!

In addition to the overwhelming British feel of the film, the movie does something you do not see a lot of these days. It goes for an R rating. A lot of previous generic spy flicks like xXx go for the easy and safe PG-13 so they can get as many butts in seats as possible. I give credit Vaughn for having the sac to stick to his guns on the matter. Vaughn directed Kick-Ass before this movie, so you know he has no issue with violence and profanity, which is good for me as there are plenty of curse words and bloody gunfights in this movie. Now the violence is all CGI, and it does come off as a bit cartoony. Which sometimes is distracting, while other times actually works rather well of the movie, especially during this one bit towards the end. I will let you see this to find out.

As I said this is not the most original film. In addition to the stuff I pointed out earlier, the
"mass murder to the save the environment" plot was done in the John Clancy Rainbow Six novel, evil corporate bad guys and Asian henchmen with unique weaponry was done in James Bond, and the various gadgets have been done by just about every spy movie ever. But that is not a bad thing. Heck I have enjoyed lots of films that explored old territory. What makes a movie that is not using a fresh idea good, all comes down to execution. And this was done very well, starting off with a very strong cast. Colin Firth is an excellent casting choice, as was Michael Caine, and Samuel L Jackson. Additional great performances were done by Taron Egerton, Mark Strong, and an unrecognizable Mark Hamill. In addition the writing for the film was overall very good. Sure there were a lot of clichés in the beginning about how Eggby would get to the Kingsmen, as well as a few parts of his training, but the characters and the actor performances helped make the film feel new enough for me to not care. And with a healthy dose of humor, this helped the movie to stand out amongst some of the crappy generic spy films that came before it. And this film sure as hell is not boring!

The overall feeling I had leaving the theater was a positive one. I sat down and watched a pretty good movie in the theater in the season where good movies are at a premium. And after suffering through 50 Shades of Dull, this was a serious palate cleanse. You have to wade through a lot of crap to get a good movie in January and February, and this is one of the good ones. I don’t think it will make My Top Ten at the end of the year, but it is worth your time to see. Give it a watch; I doubt you will be disappointed.




Home-run review, wasn't sure if i'd go see this though now i might. Look out JayDee, somebody's swingin' for the fences



Good review, Gunslinger. I enjoy your conversational, easy-going writing style.

I'm not willing to fork over the extra dough to see Kingsman in the theater, but I look forward to renting it later down the road. I loved Stardust, X-Men: First Class and Kick-Ass, so despite Kingsman's been-there, done-that story, I was hopeful that Vaughn would deliver another fun, entertaining flick. Judging by your review, it sounds like he did just that.

And he wants to do so because he thinks there are too many people, they all contribute to global warming and people won’t do anything about it so everyone has to die.
One day I'm going to run for President on that exact platform.
__________________



Master of My Domain
I loved Kingsman. My favorite film of the new year so far. The "(Kick-Ass+ Bigger scale and action) x Suit Porn" equation really worked for me. Good review GS, I was thinking of doing a full-length review myself but ya beat me.



Good review, Gunslinger. I enjoy your conversational, easy-going writing style.

I'm not willing to fork over the extra dough to see Kingsman in the theater, but I look forward to renting it later down the road.
I think that is fair. The film is not like a Pacific Rim, The Avengers, or Gravity where the theatrical experience adds so much more to the viewing experience. This one could be rented and you can enjoy it just fine.



I loved Kingsman. My favorite film of the new year so far. The "(Kick-Ass+ Bigger scale and action) x Suit Porn" equation really worked for me. Good review GS, I was thinking of doing a full-length review myself but ya beat me.
Glad you liked it!





Welcome back MoFos! It is time for another at the cinema review with The Gunslinger45! Well… okay I actually can’t make it to the theater this week. North Texas has been hit by an unusually long bought of winter weather. Or so I have been told by residents of the city of the Dallas. Usually the Dallas/ Fort Worth area gets a day of ice and or snow a year. This entire week it has been nothing but exceptionally cold weather, snow and ice storms. And the roads are going to ice up bad most of the weekend. And rather than risk an accident in my non 4X4 rear wheel drive mid-sized pick-up truck, I figured Friday night was a good night to turn on the heat, stay inside and watch a DVD. Something I have not had much time to do because of work. And I figured I should watch a movie I recently bought, Last Tango in Paris. A film where Marlon Brando acts opposite of Maria Schneider, directed by Bernardo Bertolucci, was originally rated X by the MPAA (now NC-17) and described by some as “porn disguised as art.” Was this the case? Well read on and let’s find out.

The film opens in Paris where we first meet Paul played by Marlon Brando. Paul is an American expatriate and local hotel manager whose wife has recently committed suicide. A chance encounter with an engaged 20 year old Parisian girl named Jeanne (Schneider) leads to an anonymous sexual relationship. And by anonymous I do mean it in the truest sense. The two meet up in a rundown hotel room and engage in various sex acts all the while they do not even exchange their names. Nothing about them is to be shared; only what they do to each other in the privacy of their quarters. This is a condition on Paul’s part, who is still traumatized by his wife’s death. Jeanne frustratingly tries many times in her efforts to share personal info to try and gain some kind of emotional intimacy with Paul. Stories are exchanged, but no names or ages are not to be shared. If she does, he gets very angry. Clearly he is a man with intimacy issues, but this is understandable as we learn more about him, his wife, and their marriage. Jeanne on the other hand has her own issues. She is set to be married to her long time boyfriend, but cheats on him with Paul. This puts a strain on the relationship with her fiancé, but is further complicated as the emotional distance between her and Paul and his controlling behavior further infuriates her. The relationship between her and Paul is rather bipolar. One second they have their hands all over each other and actually look like a cute couple, to fighting like cats and dogs in the same scene. The transition can be rather jarring but it still ends up working. As we see Paul further work out the issues he has about his wife and their past, we begin to see a change in him. But is this change for the better in his relationship with Jeanne? Or is it the beginning of the end?

As I was watching this movie I began to compare this film to Fifty Shades of Grey. Both films where highly controversial at the time of their release, were sexually charged movies and made dump trucks full of money on fairly reasonable budgets. According to Wikipedia the budget for Last Tango in Paris was $1.25 million and took in a box office of over $96 million. Both films were also condemned by religious organizations, social groups, and critics alike. That is where the similarities end however. First off, Last Tango in Paris is a FAR superior film to Fifty Shades. This is made by a world renowned and critically praised director who also made films like The Conformist, was written by the same writer who wrote Once Upon a Time in America, was shot by the same cinematographer for Apocalypse Now, and the lead is Marlon freakin’ Brando! This movie is loaded with talent. Which is a lot more then I can say for that crap movie Fifty Shades of Grey. And as much as other critics bashed this film, one of its strongest defenders was legendary film critic Pauline Kael. Kael wrote a 6,000 word essay which praised the film with much gusto. To put that into prospective, this review is just over 2,000 words. Good luck getting someone of that stature to defend Fifty Shades of Grey.

But the controversy was huge for both films. The Fifty Shades of Grey scandal mostly revolves around the alleged glorification of abusive relationships (which I do see some truth in), the sexual content, and the fact that it is a really crappy film based off a Twilight fan fiction. The scandal for Last Tango in Paris mostly centers around one scene. A scene involving Marlon Brando, a stick of butter, Jeanne, and … ugh… Brando storming her trenches with his bayonet. Okay seriously, what the hell? Why is a running theme in the past three movies I have reviewed been ass play? Fifty Shades had talk of anal fisting and butt plugs, Kingsman ended with a Swedish Princess offering to give up the balloon knot, and now we have Brando polishing some woman’s rusty sheriff’s badge. I swear this was not intentional! Good thing I have already seen Caligula so it is not like this trend could get any worse. But the film does at least have a bit of balance since later on in the movie Paul has Jeanne shove her fingers up his butt. Problem is he also has her swear to prove her devotion to him by sleeping with a pig. Which I was hoping was a metaphor for Paul being the pig, but I doubt it. Was this movie originally supposed to be an exploitation movie? It has plenty of nudity including female full frontal, explicit sex scenes, and now talks of bestiality? All we need is for someone to travel to the Amazon and get gutted after killing animals on screen and I think we will have 70’s exploitation BINGO! But this was made by a classy director so if anything it would enter Salo territory.

Anyway the scenes mentioned were controversial because it is 1972 and this kind of stuff did not get shown in movies pretty much ever. It also does not help the fact the scene comes off as very uncomfortable with the amount of crying Jeanne does. So much so this initially gave me a very rapey vibe to the scene. But since she does not call the cops or break off seeing him IMMEDIATELY afterwards (instead choosing to play a practical joke on Paul), that kinda throws those thoughts into question. I have only seen one film where someone acted like that after a legitimate rape and that was Wicked City. Which was A), terrible; and B) really ****ing poorly written. But that was not uncommon in late 80’s and early 90’s ultra-violent schlock anime. Jeanne’s reaction could have easily been the fact that butter is probably nowhere near adequate enough lube for what Paul wanted to do. It could have been the fact that she was reacting the same way Jake Gyllenhaal did in Brokeback Mountain the first night he and Heath Ledger shared a tent. I guess that means that scene is open to interpretation, but that does not make it any less awkward and unpleasant. What is NOT open for interpretation however is actress Maria Schneider feelings about it. In 1975, she said she felt sexually exploited after shooting that scene which was not originally in the script. Those tears she was crying were not acting tears. Those were very real tears coming from a very uncomfortable situation. Schneider would go on to call Bertolucci a “gangster” and a “pimp” for filming the scene. Hell even Brando felt violated afterwards and refused to even talk to Bertolucci for 15 years after the movie wrapped.

But controversy and unpleasantness aside there are still a lot of things to praise about the film. The cinematography is top notch with many fluid camera movements. Brando’s performance is in excellent form and looked like he was having a blast in many different parts of the movie. It is not often I get to see one of the greatest actors ever spew out so many different terms for penises in one sitting or be quite as vulgar with his speech and jokes. It was actually kind of awesome in that regard in the same way it would be funny as hell if Peter O’ Toole were to get up and recite The Aristocrats joke. Brando was even nominated for Best Actor at the Oscars that year. That alone is impressive for a film where we see his bare ass while mooning someone. All the while hitting those emotional high notes he is so known for. It also helps this was filmed before his bat s**t insanity on Apocalypse Now and his straight up not giving a damn in the 1996 version of The Island of Dr Moreau (though in his defense NOBODY outside of maybe Ron Pearlman gave a damn in that movie). But Brando being Brando, if you look hard enough you will find one of his line cue cards stuck to the wall in one scene. The story was also well written and has a legitimately sad ending. An ending I will not spoil in this review. But like with Fifty Shade of Grey I felt the explicit nature of this film was overhyped. Yes I can see this being controversial in 1972. But this day and age we are desensitized by crap like MTV’s Spring Break, internet porn, and have seen WAY more explicit scenes in films like Blue is the Warmest Color or even unsimulated sex scenes like in Short Bus. Overall a lot of this film (outside of the sodomy scene) just is not that shocking. It is kind of like my first experience watching 1968’s Bonnie and Clyde after growing up with Schwarzenegger movies. In 1968, the level of violence was shocking, new, and spat in the face of the Hayes Code. When I saw it in 2006, the film was quaint. In context of cinema history it is ground breaking. In my personal viewing experience, it was nothing special.

As for the claim that Last Tango in Paris is porn disguised as art… I have to say yes and no. Yes in the fact that the first time Paul and Jeanne have sex came out of nowhere during their very first chance encounter, the anal sex, random nudity, and the sex talk is kind of reminiscent of a porno flick. But the production design and effort put into this film, and the fact that there more story then explicit material elevates it above porn. Because let us be honest, there is a lot more art in this movie then porn. If you are looking for “artsy porn” I think there are better movies to see. Maybe a film like Behind the Green Door would be a better choice. Then again I have not seen that movie.

Either way I did like the film overall. But it is not really something I want to watch again or can really recommend. Everyone has their tastes and limits when it comes to films like this; some more so then others. If you would likely become upset by a movie like this then by all means pass on it. If this movie sounds kind of interesting to you then I leave it up to you to determine if you wish to see it. At the very least add it to your “List of movies to see someday” and maybe check it out down the line. I can’t say you need to rush out and buy the DVD unless you are a HUGE Brando fan or really loved The Conformist. The choice is ultimately yours. But if you do decide to watch it, I suggest avoiding the buttered popcorn.




Great review of The Last Tango in Paris, Gunner, I agree with everything you wrote and gave it the same rating.

On a side note, I have no sympathy for the weather you're experiencing(I'm in Boston).



Great review of The Last Tango in Paris, Gunner, I agree with everything you wrote and gave it the same rating.

On a side note, I have no sympathy for the weather you're experiencing(I'm in Boston).
Oh I have been through worse. I used to live in Baltimore and outside Chicago. But I never got to learn how to drive in ice and snow. And from the looks of all the wrecks on I-20 neither has the majority of Texans.



Oh I have been through worse. I used to live in Baltimore and outside Chicago. But I never got to learn how to drive in ice and snow. And from the looks of all the wrecks on I-20 neither has the majority of Texans.
I lived in Chicago before Boston so I'm pretty used to it. I drive for work so I'm used to that part too.



and now we have Brando polishing some woman’s rusty sheriff’s badge.


Another very entertaining review, Gunslinger. I watched The Last Tango in Paris a few years ago, but I don't remember anything about it now except Schneider's bush and the aforementioned sodomy scene. I have another NC-17-rated Bertolucci film on my DVR -- The Dreamers -- that I've yet to watch. (Although I've fast-forwarded through it once or twice (or three dozen times, but who's counting?) to get a peek at Eva Green's baring performance.)





Another very entertaining review, Gunslinger. I watched The Last Tango in Paris a few years ago, but I don't remember anything about it now except Schneider's bush and the aforementioned sodomy scene. I have another NC-17-rated Bertolucci film on my DVR -- The Dreamers -- that I've yet to watch. (Although I've fast-forwarded through it once or twice (or three dozen times, but who's counting?) to get a peek at Eva Green's baring performance.)
Well a man must have his priorities. lol Glad you liked the review!



Last Tango in Paris is a solid flick. So is The Conformist. I really ought to see more Bertolucci.



I like Last Tango in Paris, too. In fact, it might wind up on my "Another 100..." list.




Army of Shadows

Welcome MoFos! It is that time again for another edition of An Evening at the Movies with The Gunslinger45! Unfortunately I could not make it to the theater again. Not because of weather issues, but because I got a DVD in that I was waiting on. It was the movie I wanted to see before I turned in my list for the MoFo 1960’s Countdown. And since my choices at the theater were between Focus and Chappie; I opted to stay in, watch this film, turn in my 60’s list, then go back to the theater next week. Also I wanted one film that DOESN’T deal with anal sex like the last three movies I reviewed. Otherwise I would have to call this thread “Gunslinger Reviews Trash and Smut.” But since this movie is about the French Resistance odds are good I am safe there. Now the DVD is in okay shape, but it is clear this was bought up from a library in Kansas. However it is still a functional Criterion DVD (though from now on I will buy them in New or Like New condition from now on). Army of Shadows is a French film by director Jean-Pierre Melville. A director I was already familiar with thanks to his FANTASTIC film Le Samurai; which I also have the Criterion DVD for. Needless to say I liked Le Samurai and want to see more of Melville’s work. So I figured this would be a great place to start. A film I know a lot of the more art house friendly MoFos here like and recommended. So let’s chant Viva Le France to the Heavens as we whack some Nazis with Army of Shadows.

The film opens with a French Resistance leader Gerbier after being taken into custody by Vichy Police. After being kept in a camp for a night he is brought to Paris for questioning. From there he and another prisoner make a ballsy escape and they are successful. He returns to Marseille, where he meets up with and manages members of the French Resistance in that area. He is aided by a burly man known as Le Bison, a young man named Le Masque and his friend Felix. In addition to these three, he works with a pilot named Jean Francois, a seemingly mild mannered housewife but brilliant leader in Mathilde, and a wealthy scholar and philosopher named Luc Jardie. All of whom comprise the local French Resistance in the area. The movie details their struggle against Nazi occupiers, trying to secure supplies and men for ops, staying in the shadows, covering their tracks, and hiding their true identities. But the tone of the movie is really set in one of the early scenes. Gerbier and company must deal with a traitor in the ranks who sold them out to the Germans. They take the traitor to an abandoned house in what they believe is a deserted neighborhood, only to discover tenants have moved in next door. Without a suppressor for their pistol, and lacking a knife, they are forced to make a hard choice and must strangle their former comrade to death. And that really sets the tone of the film; a bleak movie about a group of freedom fighters who must make hard brutal decisions dealing with unforeseen circumstances and doing so with very limited resources.

The film is by no means a fast paced film by today’s standards, but in many ways it is kind of an art-house action movie. You get plenty of somber and reflective moments, perfect atmosphere, and fantastic cinematography one would expect from an art house film. But there is also a surprising amount of scenes you would see in an action movie. You have the execution of the traitor, you get a bunch of guys doing a covert boarding of a submarine at night, you have Gerbier jumping out of a plane paratrooper style, various escape attempts, and even the after effects of torture. Now if you go into this film expecting something akin to Michael Bay or 80’s Schwarzenegger movies you will be disappointed. But the film is much more eventful then other films a non art house guy would expect from an “artsy French movie.”

I do not claim to be an expert in French cinema by any degree, but compared to the French films I have encountered, Melville seems to stand out a bit more for me. On one hand you have French directors I do not particularly connect with like Godard. His films are generally good to watch (except Pierrot Le Fou), but feel hollow upon reflection. Kind of like candy, you get a sugar rush to what is on the screen, but the next day the film does not seem to be that good. At least that is how I felt with Breathless and Contempt. I also saw Jean Vigo’s L’Atalante which I did not care for. By no means bad films, but they do not really stick with me much. Then you have directors who have made good movies I have seen like Renoir. I have seen Boudu Saved from Drowning and Le Grand Illusion which are both good films, and then I saw Rules of the Game, which I did not care for. Then we have directors I like but need to see more of like Cocteau, Bresson, and Truffaut. Cocteau made a pretty damn good film with Le Belle et Le Bete, which is his fairy tale film adaptation of Beauty and the Beast (and Moviegal’s favorite film). Bresson made the wonderful Pickpocket and Truffaut’s The 400 Blows was very poignant. Melville however is my particular favorite of the bunch. I have only seen two of his films so far but I want very much to explore the rest of his work. While the other French films I have watched are still very good, most of them seemed to focus on human drama and social/political metaphors for the most part. Boudu Saved from Drowning was focused on a homeless guy who is tried to be saved by high society (with plenty of social metaphors), Pickpocket while dealing with crime (a subject I like), also focused heavily on the protagonist’s relationship with his mother and a girl he knows. And The 400 Blows was Truffaut’s personal film which reflected his feelings about his childhood. Melville on the other hand likes to make films about hitmen and people who kill Nazis. Needless to say, he sounds like my kind of director. And this film was not a disappointment.

I liked the camera work of this film and really liked the bleak tone of the movie. A tone reflective of his own life. You see kiddies, Melville is not just a cool non de plume for a director. Melville was his code name when he fought for the French Resistance. Before he was a filmmaker, Melville was fighting Nazi’s in Operation Dragoon which lead to the Allied liberation of French Ports Tulon and Marseille. Which if you are paying attention, is the location of where this movie is. These are the street Melville walked while opposing the Teutonic Twats that were the 3rd Reich. Making Melville a bad ass in my eyes. This film is bleak because this is what the director lived when France was occupied. I don’t know exactly what he did in the War (maybe I will learn this on the DVD extras). He might have had to make those hard choices; he lived the danger; and got to fight the greatest evil known to modern man. His characters are shown to be complex men and women who while they may do things that might unsettle you, are ultimately shown to be heroic figures. And unfortunately the release of this film was very ill timed. This was released in 1969, coming very soon after the events of May 68. May 68 was a period of protests, takeover of universities and factories, strikes, and general civil uprising by Communist and Socialists who were upset with the current government run by President de Gaulle (who we see as a General in the Film). So a film about the heroes of the French Resistance did not really go over so well. Not to mention the Algerian War was still a thing, and the glorification of French Resistance was not in vague when you have France occupying Algeria. And a lot of critics hammered this film. It did not get much screen time, and the film was not widely released. Hell we in America did not get to see it until 2006! That is insane!

But the film is excellent! If you have a pension for the art house I say give this a watch. Did this make my 60’s list? We shall see when the countdown happens. Until then, Jean Pierre Melville is quickly becoming a favorite director of mine and I need to see the rest of his filmography. Slowly but surely I feel I am becoming this guy.






Glad you enjoyed it so much Gunslinger. As you love Le Samourai so much, I had little doubt you'd enjoy Melville's other films. I've only seen four myself, these two + Le Cercle Rouge and Bob Le Flambeur, but they're films dripping with so much style/class that they're surely irresistible to all fans of cinema.
__________________
Support my feature-length film project - Kickstarter



I think you'll love it. Army of Shadows is a little dark and uncomfortable at times, but Le Cercle Rouge is a pure crime film that is just so awesome. Words like 'cool' and 'style' seem like clichés but they're really appropriate for Melville who clearly loved American crime films. It's like Le Samourai in is photography, but with a lot more characters and more complex story. I'd be shocked if you didn't enjoy it a lot.