Man on Fire (2004)
2/10
entertainment for idiots
9 January 2006
Warning: Spoilers
I rented this movie thinking it was going to be a rocking and a rollin' revenge flick, but for the first 40 mins there's no real action, no violence to speak of, it simply follows the blossoming relationship between bodyguard Creasey (Washington) and Pita (Fanning). Now, don't get me wrong. I'm not going to critise the film for it's slow build up. In fact this section was by far the best, as director Tony Scott reigned in his infatuation with over-editing and concentrated on the characters. It's something you don't really see in action flicks, and I was sat there thinking 'I really care about these people, it's gonna be hell when Pita's kidnapped.' Unfortunately the film REALLY lets itself down in the second half. Scott's 'psuedo-style' has always stuck me as a diversionary tactic to mask a lack of content and boy, does it show here. The camera flies all over the place whenever Creasy fires his weapon, so much so that far from 'gratuitous,' the violence seems non-existent, emasculating Denzil's Man of Fire with a wet-paper bag of gratuitous editing (sorry 'bout that last sentence, the film seems to have rubbed off on me in some way).

Wanna see a good revenge flick? Watch Oldboy.
4 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed