After the Sunset (2004)
User ReviewsReview this title
After the Sunset is a pretty ordinary movie with some entertaining moments and a lot of gorgeous scenery. It won't challenge the viewer at all but it will offer a pretty enjoyable ride. The premise is fairly simple and it is nothing really new. Brett Ratner keeps things easy and safe as he moves the film at a nice pace. The opening scene is pretty funny and nicely done. The middle is also pretty good yet a little dull while the ending is just plain disappointing. I was expecting a nice payoff but the ending was so simple. This didn't ruin the movie but it doesn't warrant a viewing either.
The acting is pretty good and there are a few characters that keep the film interesting. Pierce Brosnan stars as Max and he gives a good performance. He sometimes looked a little tired but he usually seemed to be having fun. Woody Harrelson is great as the FBI agent and he looks to be having a great time. Salma Hayek offers great eye candy and a decent performance. She doesn't really do anything special except look very beautiful. Don Cheadle gives an okay performance though he doesn't get a lot of screen time.
There are a few reasons why After the Sunset would make for a good rental. First, the scenery looks great and eye candy never hurts. Second, the chemistry between Brosnan and Harrelson is surprisingly good and it is fun to watch them on screen. Third, those looking for some escapist fun should find it with this film. Last but not least, Salma Hayek looks amazing. I would have preferred a little more substance but the movie proved to be entertaining. In the end, After the Sunset isn't worth checking out in theaters but it could make for a decent rental. Rating 6/10
Pierce Brosnan takes to his dressed-down James Bond role very well, and the jokes and his style make him a very likable character. Woody Harrelson, the rival FBI agent, puts in a similarly enjoyable performance, and his inept bumblings around the island create some unexpected comic situations between the cop and the thief. It's the relationship between these two (and the compromising situations they find themselves in) that makes the film, as they antagonize each other and almost become buddies toward the end. Their encounters add something fresh and unexpected to the movie's simple formula and make it really entertaining.
Oh, and special mentions have to go out for Don Cheadle and Salma Hayek. Don's character is very funny, and he plays both sides of it well, and as for Salma...let's just say the directors are aware of what their male audience wants to see.
All in all, it's funny, quick, easy to follow, and contains enough little quirks to make After the Sunset an enjoyable and entertaining experience.
The unlocking Special Agent Stan Lloyd of the FBI (Woody Harrelson) suspects that the two are planning to purloin it But how could they with six cameras plus 24-hour rotating guards, unbreakable polycarbonate display?
Max (Pierce Brosnan) knows he can easily clip Napoleon III and make Lloyd look like a jerk again For him, it's more about the challenge and the alibithat's his work of art But he affirms that the two are a couple of retirees trying to enjoy the island life
The gorgeous Lola (Salma Hayek) knows that, with Max, they went out at the top of their game, undefeated They were great together But, now, she feels it is the best time to quit For her, now, the challenge is to find joy in simple things, as a life filled with sunsets
Lloyd was chasing Max for seven yearsever since the first Napoleon Diamond went missing That day, he got to the scene, and took a few shots at the getaway car Next day, a bottle of champagne arrives at FBI Headquarters with a note saying, "Aim for the tires next time."
In the island, Lloyd teams up with the beautiful Sophie (Naomie Harris) a local intriguing cop who requires a big arrest
On the scene also appears Henri Mooré (Don Cheadle)the biggest gangster on the islandwho affirms to Max that the impoverished people of the island need his help, and that a cash injection in tens of millions of dollars would relieve the entire Caribbean So, he suggests to Max a partnership He would give him what he doesn't have: access to the marina, the crews, rotation schedules, whatever he needs
With picturesque sunsets, this colorful caper comedy has plenty of beauty, fun and humor
Salma Hayek adds some necessary female steam in this otherwise masculine tale! As always Pierce Brosnan delivers a wonderful performance helping to make this movie a real delight!
I can't tell you much more about the movie without spoiling scenes, so, see this movie; it's worth the whatever price you pay.
After the heist Harrelson follows the pair to an island where he believes they plan another big job. As the two male characters get more closely acquainted throughout the film we start to wonder who's tricking who.
Brosnan displays rare emotion in this film. Harrelson escapes his Cheers role by excellently portraying the many sides of what would have been a simple character.Hayek doesn't miss a chance to show off her body, and Don Cheadle's villain was superb. The only problem with that character was that we didn't see enough of him.
The film has some nice scenery and entertaining scenes, particularly the shark capture.Rush hour director Ratner has made a great film, which only really lacks style and good pacing. this film would have been better handled in the reins of, say, Steven Soderbergh.
But nonetheless, a very funny enjoyable film which will please fans of the cast and crew, as well as the movie-going public. It's not up to the standard of Oceans's eleven yet it beats the likes of Ocean's 12. Any fan of the comedy/thriller genre should go see this film, but I will be looking more forward to Rush Hour 3.
THE GOOD - (1) A very colorful film, with wonderful bright colors from the Bahamas scenery; (2) an interesting story right from the get-go; (3) originality in the story; and (4) yes, to be honest, Hayak's figure, which is seen in abundance throughout the film. She knows it's good and isn't shy about showing it, and (5) overall a good mixture of crime, comedy, romance and suspense and just right amount of time at just under 100 minutes.
THE BAD - (1) Insulting gratuitous sex and really stupid sexual dialog at times; (2) once again subversive Hollywood making the FBI character a moron, for the most part; (3) some Rambo mentality (bad guys miss from close range, good guys never miss, etc.).
It's an outlandish story but don't analyze it for credibility or you'd be turned off and quit after 10 minutes. Just go along for the ride and enjoy the entertainment....and entertaining it is!
Director Brett Ratner seems to be having great fun directing the movie. He was lucky to get the genius of Dante Spinetti's cinematography to create a movie that is entertaining with great locations. It's a good excuse, as any, to spend time in the theater. While Mr. Ratner is not breaking new ground in this genre, he makes "After the Sunset" fun to watch.
Pierce Brosnan is his usually suave self. His take on Max is to play it with an economy of gestures, as though he is bored by being told what to do. Salma Hayek, on the other hand, adds a beautiful presence to the proceedings without being too obvious. Woody Harrelson is a goofy FBI agent. Heaven help us if they ever are this dumb! Don Cheadle doesn't have much to do, as his character looks as though he was an after thought.
Just pretend you are on vacation in the Bahamas. Nassau never looked this good before!
The story about the diamond heist though, seems secondary to the beautiful locations, and Brett Ratner's obcession with filming Miss Hayek's chest from all conceivable angles (not necessarily a bad thing). Although Hayek is SO botoxed that she can barely move her facial muscles to express any kind of emotion.
Woody Harrelson and Brosnan make a really funny team, and if they make a sequel, I hope it concentrates on their two characters, because they have a great screen chemistry.
Stan believes that Max wants to steal the last remaining diamond, before he really retires. The third Napoleon diamond is going to be displayed aboard a cruise ship heading for the Bahamas. This may be Stan's last chance to catch Max stealing the jewel. Stan joins forces with Sophie (Naomie Harris), an island police detective, to help in catching Max. I enjoyed the movie, and it will keep your attention to the end. Of course, Max performed some 007 type scenes in the movie while stealing the jewels. There is somewhat of a surprise ending. (New Line Cinema, Run time 1:40, Rated PG-13) (8/10)
Max Burdett (Pierce Brosnan) and his girlfriend Lola Cirillo (Salma Hayek) are in retirement, having stepped down from the ranks of the international jewel thief set, and are enjoying the good life in the Bahamas. Woody Harrelson (as FBI agent Stan Lloyd) has appeared on the scene; he is less sure they have retired and with the arrival in port of a ship-borne display of jewels (featuring 'The Third Napoleon Diamond' in the collection) has them under close watch.
Agent Lloyd has always been thwarted in capturing Max and Lola; this is personal. How the characters play against each other (various local officials become interested and ultimately involved as well) as the clock ticks (the ship is due to leave soon) elevates our interest. Don Cheadle (local crime boss Kingpin) is a key figure among the Bahamians with influence on the outcome.
Jewel heist in paradise. That might be a working title for a script which would become the film 'After the Sunset'. Writer Paul Zbyszewski (previous experience on TV's 'The Weakest Link') has fashioned a reasonably believable story line (see Roger Ebert for discussion of plot holes - http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20041111/REVIEWS/41006006/1023) involving electro-technical moments, great use of locations, wry humor (Woody Harrelson does go over the top in some mugging moments, but overall is quite engaging), and certainly deserves another opportunity to develop a script.
A killer cast of capable actors is expected to deliver and does. No doubt the script could have been terser, the lines more memorable or the plot more believable. We don't get all of the sheer class of the recent 'Ocean's Eleven', the raw energy of 'The Italian Job' or the gut laughs of 'Team America: World Police'. But Salma Hayek works her minimal exposure maximally (her physical charms alone are arresting), Brosnan is an interesting study in this a more laid back role than we are accustomed to seeing from him and Don Cheadle proves again he can do anything, including portray what for all intents is a gangster.
In an interview on the set of the film in January, director Brett Ratner notes about how he saw this as more a 'character-driven movie' and not just a 'big action heist'. He further notes that in taking on the task of balancing all the elements comedy, action/adventure, drama - 'It's more of a challenge for me. Can I do a movie like this and get the tone right? If it's too broad, you don't care about the characters. If it's too serious, it's just a dramatic film and you then don't care.' (http://www.joblo.com/index.php?id=3457)
'After The Sunset' is one of those films you just want to work and because you do redemption is sought in what probably are the small things. This jewel heist caper is a little above the cut of customary plex fare, and the nearly full theater of attentive viewers speaks to the dearth of just plain old decent films at the moment. We were not disappointed, and maybe agree the director CAN do a film like this.
Rating: 2- ¾ stars.
"After the Sunset" is a forgettable but attractive movie: the screenplay is full of plot points, the locations are wonderful; and the cast is very nice, leaded by the delicious Salma Hayek, the ironic Pierce Brosnan and the funny Woody Harrelson. The situations are very pleasant and the viewer will certainly spend 97 minutes of good entertainment with the twists in the story. My vote is eight.
Title (Brazil): "Ladrão de Diamante" ("Thief of Diamond")
This movie is horrible. Brett Ratner does the WORST job directing and the script is really lame with only one or two really memorable lines that made you laugh. The rest of the time, you are just so embarrassed for these actors that you want to shake them and say, "WHY DID YOU DO THIS MOVIE?!?!?!?!" Selma Hayek puts on all her sexual charms for the role of Lola and would have probably done really well if she had actually had a really well written role. Peirce Brosnan, well, we miss him as 007. And who casts Woody Harrelson?! He is what makes this movie so bad. Woody, do us all a favor and never act again, k? The only person in the movie who does a good job acting is Don Cheadle who has probably never done a bad movie in his life. But his role in the film is so small that he is unable to really make up for the bad jobs that some of the other actors did. Plus, the climatic scene where (sorry to ruin this) Max steals the diamond is probably only 3 minutes long and looks like they did it in a rush at the end of filming.
All in all, don't see this movie. It is LAME and a total waste of your time.
It may of course be that those involved had no intention of wracking up a $60 million tax loss. But if not, it's hard to see what other reason informed the genesis of this stupefyingly dire production.
Lacking the charm of a genre best essayed by Cary Grant, and then wonderfully subverted by Steve McQueen, "After the Sunset" is more Total Eclipse, the extinguishing of all signs of life, wit, talent and originality.
Quite why Brosnan was drawn to it (or anyone else for that matter) is impossible to understand: his performance in the re-treaded "Thomas Crown Affair" served only to prove that McQueen was, and so remains, unbeatable. Neither in that movie nor this is Brosnan for one moment convincing as a master thief -- in fact, he's even less so here, perhaps because his performance seems to have coincided with rehearsals for a new version of "Robinson Crusoe", such is the combination of haggard aspect and facial hair.
To mention any of the other contributors (well, apart from the product placement department, who must've worked overtime) would be to waste as much space here as the time "After the Sunset" wastes on screen.
It may not be one of the worst movies of the past decade. But it's pretty close.
Rating: 1 out of 10 (a point is earned for anaesthetic value: After the Sunset's ability to induce deep and sustained sleep amongst anyone sitting down to view it is greater than any known sedative).
This movie was enjoyable enough as summer television-like movie, but it doesn't go much deeper than that. There's not a lot of realism and art here. It was like a television movie.
I don't know what makes television movies different from regular movies. Is it the writing? The plot development? The acting? They have a certain cliché nature, don't they? At times this movie definitely had the cheesiness and artificiality of television shows like the Love Boat and To Catch a Thief. That's not necessarily a bad thing. A lot of people love that kind of thing. It's not too demanding. And it's fun. People were laughing.
I suppose part of the problem for me was, well, Pierce Brosnan and Woody Harrelson. I just couldn't see these two with Salma Hayek and Naomie Harris, respectively. Isn't the age difference a little too much? Is it wrong for me to point out that -- unlike the women they were with -- these two were (by 2004) no longer hot enough to generate heat in their love scenes?
I have seen these two actors deliver outstanding performances. They are strong enough to pull off a film like this in their sleep. However, I am just not interested in them enough to spend two hours watching their buddy antics (drinking, fishing, even in bed). They are not lovable fun characters to me, although I think that's the effect the director was trying to achieve. These scenes were too forced. I saw no buddy chemistry.
There was a good deal of wise-cracking (eg "I knew that when I married you. I knew that when I divorced you!") and slapstick (eg Stan gets hit in the head by a trombone.) The scuba scenes and the cruise ship scenes at the end were not believable, not that I think this movie's intended audience would care about that. It's all meant to be part of the fun.
The person I was with walked out of the film halfway through. I thought it was OK. I mean, I didn't hate it.
Ratner's gone on record in interviews in saying that this is a love story, not between Brosnan and Hayek, but between Brosnan and Harrelson, and if you look at the film that way, you'll probably enjoy it a bit more than if you were expecting a Bond film or a slam-bang actioner. Their relationship is the center of the film, and provides a few touching scenes as well as some good laughs.
As for the heist itself, well, it's kinda rushed, totally unbelievable, and VERY reminiscent of Brosnan's remake of The Thomas Crown Affair, but all in all, it's a quick, fun 90 minutes, with fun performances, lots of eye candy for the guys (and girls), and shows Ratner may be maturing as a film-maker.
This was a caper film right? We are supposed to go on this roller coaster ride of who's conning whom, coupled with lies, deceit, and a surprise ending that will make you want to re-watch from the beginning to experience anything that you missed. That is the focus, goal, and overall tone that a film like this should have followed. Instead, Ratner decided to just make a movie without any sort of excitement or drive. As I watched this film, I never once felt excited about the plot. Why? Because there was nobody getting me excited. The acting in this film was well below par for anything that Hollywood has released. Pierce tries, but just can't seem to capture the essence of the film. There is no little demon inside you rooting for anything. Salma's role was basically for eye-candy. She provided nothing spectacular either. I can literally say the same for Woody and Cheadle as well. Here we have strong actors doing absolutely nothing during the course of about two hours. These characters never drive the plot, they bring nothing but clichés to the table, and by the end we really don't have any true grasp as to whom they are. Honestly, cardboard cutouts could have replaced the actual actors and After the Sunset would have been a better film. There was no depth to the characters, no emotion, no structure, just the simple direction of "step here, say your line, step here, look surprised". It was embarrassing for all that were involved.
I think a major flaw to this film was that Ratner did not fully understand, or was prepared, for the caper genre. From the opening moments until the end of the film, you can tell that Ratner is just trying to use his friends in the industry and show the world that he has some power as well. I say this because I saw no true direction or moment of impressiveness where he defines himself as a director. He reuses the same ideas throughout the entire film, he doesn't give anything strong to his players, and nothing stood out in this movie. Sure, it was a beautiful location, but am I to believe that Salma spend a majority of the film building a deck for them to sit on? Am I to believe that Pierce is still a sex symbol even with a HUGE gut sticking out? Am I to believe that Cheadle is a bad guy/imported American who is at the top of the community? Finally, am I to believe that Pierce could still move as quickly as Ratner defined? I swear that in the final unclimactic moments of this film, I could hear Pierce doing some heavy breathing to get from point A to point B. Maybe he isn't ready for the next Bond role.
So, without a good story, or decent characters, maybe there was some humor in it that could pull us away from the sour sensation cultivating in your mouth. Well, guess who is placed in to do the humor element? Woody Harrelson. Now, I don't mind Woody, but in this role, he just wasn't believable and his humor was so cliché that I had trouble believing that he brought anything to this character. He literally plagiarized his entire role. Teachers, and film viewers of the world, should be very upset with him. Instead of bringing a new twist to his character, he resorted to weird sex humor, skimpy bully humor, and that ever-popular drunken humor while fishing that is sure to make that senile woman in the front burst out with laughter. To me it was pathetic and a worthless attempt to make a joke out of already dead film.
Overall, this was a massive disappointment. Here you had a decent director, some strong players, but the worst story ever written by a man who wrote for a game show. Which piece does not fit? There was this huge sense of apathy throughout this entire film and clichés riddled it that I just couldn't get past. Brosnan had trouble with this film, and I couldn't tell if it was because he just didn't care, or because he was working with such low-talent that his heart just wasn't in it. The ending hurt as well. There was no excitement or intensity, just plain "here it is like it or not". I personally couldn't digest this film with its poor acting and below-par story. This may be a good film for some that are not familiar with the caper genre, but for me it was just hogwash.
Grade: * out of *****