Last weekend, my teenage sons and my husband and I watched the three "Ocean's" movies (11, 12 and 13) featuring that glorious Hollywood trio of George Clooney, Brad Pitt and Matt Damon. Well, to be honest, hubby and I only watched the first two. The first movie is well paced, entertaining, and all the confusing bits get explained soon enough to not be annoying. Not so with the second. It was overly-muddled, under-explained and, frankly, boring. I didn't care for the flimsy plot, which seemed an obvious excuse to bring back a star-studded cast and not much else. The only thing I actually enjoyed was the evolution of Damon's character, Linus. In the first film, the character was young. The films were made in 2001, 2004 and 2007, so through the course of the movies, Damon ages 6 years total, and it shows. He is adorable in the first movie, attractive in the second, and hunky in the third. I love that his character is the go-to guy with the fast hands. This entry is quickly devolving into an "I heart Matt Damon" schlop and that's not what I had in mind. I intended to increase your cinematic intelligence with a thoughtful discussion of the three aforementioned "Ocean's" films and not sound like a 13 year old girl with a celebrity crush. But I can't do it.
So I won't.
Enjoy some Damon-flavored "eye candy" instead and go watch the "Bourne" movies, "Good Will Hunting", "Invictus" and "Ocean's 11".
1 comment:
Nice musings, Steph. The 2nd two "Oceans" are definitely inferior (although 3 is better than 2). You really should watch the 1960 "Oceans," though. True, some of it is dated and your kids may not like it. But I'm telling you that the twist ending is worth it! (The Mormon twins aren't in the old one, but there is a cowpoke member of the gang who is obviously a Utah Mormon, though they never say so.)
Post a Comment