This movie is awful. It tries to be funny and fails every time. You can see where you're supposed to laugh, you know the intention is humor, but it's just not funny. The characters are terribly written. They start off as complete fools and by the end they're devising intricate schemes that come together in entirely ridiculous fashion. But the most painful part of watching this movie has to be sitting through these pathetic attempts at humor.
The next point is this split-screen editing. Some here are raving about it. First of all, it's terrible. Second of all, why even use it to begin with? Brian De Palma used it to tell a story, Norman Jewison used to perfection in the first Thomas Crown Affair. In Crime Spree it just pops up an hour into the movie and then disappears. It's like the editor discovered a new trick on the Avid and then got sick of it before he knew how to use it. Only one of the three splits moved at any given time, the other two were static. What's the point? If you want to direct our attention to the only one of the three splits that's moving, then don't use a split screen.
The director desecrates the masters time and time again. Remember the baby carriage on the staircase scene from De Palma's The Untouchables, Crime Spree has the little girl in the hallway scene, without one iota of the suspense. How about the great Leone showdowns with Clint, Lee Van, Fonda, and Bronson- the close ups of the eyes, the tension before the first man goes for his gun. That's here in Crime Spree too. Not the tension or the beauty, or the sheer power Leone had of capturing the moment and making it last forever, but the close ups of the eyes that say, "Look at me, I've seen The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly," that's there. Then we move to Tarantino, right out of Pulp Fiction, remember when Jules and Vince escape a barrage of bullets miraculously and Jules is changed forever? Well, Crime Spree has that too, without the revelation of course.
And though not a master, Crime Spree also steals liberally from Guy Ritchie as well, right down to the bridge scene in Lock Stock. Not to mention the hole in the door shot.
This director has seen good movies, that's obvious, he's tried to copy them. But he has no idea what makes them good. It's like when these bozos in Hollywood decide to remake the old Twilight Zone series. They give you the shell of the old show with some weird premise, but with none of the depth, with none of the soul of Rod Serling.
There is nothing good about Crime Spree. It's bad on every level, from the script to the editing to the lighting to the directing, and everything in between. I can't believe that of the 260 people who have thus far voted on this movie, that 60 have given it a 10. If I could vote from one to and hundred, I'd give this a zero. It's truly awful.
I just can't believe these other reviews. I think someone's stuffing the ballot box. Anyone who rates this movie anything higher than garbage is suspect.
I rented this and Dirty Deeds on the same night, and although I didn't think much of Dirty Deeds, it's looking Oscar-worthy after seeing Crime Spree.
The next point is this split-screen editing. Some here are raving about it. First of all, it's terrible. Second of all, why even use it to begin with? Brian De Palma used it to tell a story, Norman Jewison used to perfection in the first Thomas Crown Affair. In Crime Spree it just pops up an hour into the movie and then disappears. It's like the editor discovered a new trick on the Avid and then got sick of it before he knew how to use it. Only one of the three splits moved at any given time, the other two were static. What's the point? If you want to direct our attention to the only one of the three splits that's moving, then don't use a split screen.
The director desecrates the masters time and time again. Remember the baby carriage on the staircase scene from De Palma's The Untouchables, Crime Spree has the little girl in the hallway scene, without one iota of the suspense. How about the great Leone showdowns with Clint, Lee Van, Fonda, and Bronson- the close ups of the eyes, the tension before the first man goes for his gun. That's here in Crime Spree too. Not the tension or the beauty, or the sheer power Leone had of capturing the moment and making it last forever, but the close ups of the eyes that say, "Look at me, I've seen The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly," that's there. Then we move to Tarantino, right out of Pulp Fiction, remember when Jules and Vince escape a barrage of bullets miraculously and Jules is changed forever? Well, Crime Spree has that too, without the revelation of course.
And though not a master, Crime Spree also steals liberally from Guy Ritchie as well, right down to the bridge scene in Lock Stock. Not to mention the hole in the door shot.
This director has seen good movies, that's obvious, he's tried to copy them. But he has no idea what makes them good. It's like when these bozos in Hollywood decide to remake the old Twilight Zone series. They give you the shell of the old show with some weird premise, but with none of the depth, with none of the soul of Rod Serling.
There is nothing good about Crime Spree. It's bad on every level, from the script to the editing to the lighting to the directing, and everything in between. I can't believe that of the 260 people who have thus far voted on this movie, that 60 have given it a 10. If I could vote from one to and hundred, I'd give this a zero. It's truly awful.
I just can't believe these other reviews. I think someone's stuffing the ballot box. Anyone who rates this movie anything higher than garbage is suspect.
I rented this and Dirty Deeds on the same night, and although I didn't think much of Dirty Deeds, it's looking Oscar-worthy after seeing Crime Spree.