Russell's fresh film passed quietly by the mass audience, and even in the tops of the best / worst films among bloggers was not noticed. So “nothing” that is strange, because the director is famous, and the bombardment cast.
David's statement is a loose retelling of events between the first and second world wars, based on a real case of a political conspiracy to overthrow Roosevelt and put a dictator in his place. The narrative is conducted on behalf of a veteran who, after the fighting, opened his clinic to help and treat people as broken as he himself. Together with a fellow soldier and a nurse, they were involved in a detective investigation into the murder of their client and her father and, without expecting it, got into the wrong place. In fact, we see the forerunner of Hitler’s “shobla” and the emergence of the “SS” as such, which here are elevated almost to the rank of the Illuminati. This is a patriotic and nationalist film that elevates Uncle Sam’s words “You need your country!” and speaks to you in understandable language about friendship and mutual help. The only problem is the script: it’s overloaded and poorly written. If the first half of the film still looks interesting and clear, then in the second - the confusion and "heap of small", from which you literally begin to hover in the clouds and little understand what is happening. Usually this is the prerogative of spy thrillers, but here it is extremely inappropriate.
Visually beautiful looking movie. Still, the setting allows you to show the 30s stylishly, fashionably, youthfully. To technical execution no questions - default for biopics. Acting work is beautiful: modern mastodons. All here: Bale, Washington, Robbie, de Niro, Joy, Malek and others on the second and third planes.
The biopic detective Amsterdam isn't working. It does not work either as an independent work or as a historical film. The fate of Banshee Inisherin was repeated: a very strong binding to the time of action, and if you do not know the real state of affairs, then you will be literally bored and not interested, because there is no expanded exposition or emotional attachment to the characters here. If the first half of the picture is even more or less clear and consistent, paying homage to noir films, then the second is a confused addition of second and third plan characters just to be. The film is from and to authorial, requiring a background to understand, so don’t expect it to be loyal to you. It is recommended to first read the documentaries and articles, and only then take up viewing this picture, otherwise you will not get into the target audience.
5 out of 10
Dreams are repeated only because they are forgotten. -
The career of director and screenwriter David Owen Russell, better known as David O. Russell, developed steadily. His films Liberation (1994) and Don’t Wake a Sleeping Dog (1996) went largely unnoticed and had no commercial success. Slightly everything changed with the release of the action movie “Three Kings” (1999) with a solid cast. And then David O. Russell for five years almost did not participate in new projects until the melodrama “Heartbreakers” (2004), but it suffered the fate of the first film Director. And then came the 2010th year, when Russell presented to the public the sports drama “The Fighter”, which produced a real furor, and the director began to collect nominations for “Oscar”. Critics enthusiastically accepted his subsequent works: My Boyfriend is Psycho (2012), American Hustle (2013) and Joy (2015). This proved to be a very fruitful period for David O. Russell, during which the circle of his regular actors was outlined. And among them was one of the main Hollywood perfectionists Christian Bale, whom the director invited to the lead role in his new film Amsterdam, the development of which Russell worked for seven years after the release of Joy.
And let’s say that at times, many viewers of David Owen Russell’s film were questioned, especially by critics who were so enthusiastic about his projects. The essence of these questions came down to the fact that the films are really good, but to nominate them for so many awards? But in any case, Russell's new work could not pass by the audience's eyes. Especially when you consider the fact that his film “Amsterdam” again gathered a great cast. In addition to the already mentioned Christian Bale, it involves one of the highest paid actresses of our time and a real sex symbol of the era of Margot Robbie, gaining momentum John David Washington, a little forgotten Chris Rock, the future of Hollywood Anya Taylor-Joy and many others, including the great and unique Robert De Niro. It should be added that David O. Russell’s films were never trivial or commercially advantageous. And although, as already mentioned, they caused ambiguous reactions, still did not want to miss Amsterdam, surely the director and screenwriter has prepared something interesting for us again, and the actors, as always, will reveal new facets of their talent.
I must say that these two characteristics are fully confirmed. Let's start with the actors. Christian Bale has always been distinguished by the fact that he was looking for new images in each of his films, to play something similar to him is simply not interesting, although sometimes this desire reflected on the actor’s body and not for the best. But in Amsterdam, he appears as Burt Berendsen, a war veteran and now a doctor with a glass eye. He feels inner strength, although he is rather closed from his loved ones, but the words honor and courage are not empty for him, besides, he is definitely not deprived of intelligence. John David Washington in the image of a former soldier, and now a lawyer named Harold Woodman, for the most part on a prank with Christian Bale, but the charisma in the actor is enough not to go into the shadows, and he is clearly attracted by the fact that he feels the notes of romance. Margot Robbie can’t help but please her admirers in another vivid way, where there is a place for the status of “femme fatale” with some deviations. Here is what can be said briefly about the main characters of Amsterdam, and this is only, I stress briefly, because their characters are very interesting to watch.
This is one of the main advantages of the new film by David O. Russell, and I would also like to note the strong work of make-up artists, hairdressers and costume designers who immerse us in the 30s of the last century. This work is really great. Now it’s time to talk about what I didn’t like about the movie. And that's the plot. Not that he is stupid or rude, shallow or uninteresting. The fact is that Russell decided to lay so much in the canvas of the plot that already in the first couple you feel like you are confused. It is not clear which way Russell decided to go: he constantly added new personalities that were somehow slippery and streamlined. The detective component of Amsterdam, and this film in the genre should be perceived as a detective, constantly goes away from attention and understanding. Yes, of course, everything is revealed at the very end, the ending is unexpected, but David O. Russell did it in such a way that it looks excessively pathetic and even too inflated, while losing all the taste of naturalism. So it turns out that the new film by David O. Russell is unusual, but the director and writer overdid it.
It may be added that Amsterdam is somewhat delayed in timekeeping. Somewhere in the middle of the picture you can catch yourself thinking that the main goal of the characters of the film for some reason blurred, and we, as viewers, are more likely to watch the appearance of new characters, as well as the bright play of Bale, Washington and Robbie, but the plot has receded somewhere in the background. That is why the ending of Amsterdam does not elicit much emotion, including positive ones. I would rather blame David O. Russell for this. Many expected something different from him, despite all the ambiguous attitudes towards this filmmaker. But Amsterdam will definitely find its audience. At least because of the kaleidoscope of stars of the first magnitude, perfectly played in this mystery with the appropriate entourage.
Honestly, Amsterdam as a comedy do not want to perceive, despite the fact that the movie is declared as “Megalomaniac comedy noir”. With a serious face, you also have no strength to watch.
It seemed to me that everything that was happening was just a big rehearsal, and the actors were about to burst from the absurdity of the script one by one. It’s like they were told, ‘OK, guys, you have to play idiots, dumbasses and characters as professionally as possible. When they look at you, they don’t believe a word you say. You should be considered clowns and fools.
Wait a minute, what's the story? Three friends fell into the epicenter of a brutal crime. A man is being killed before their eyes. As witnesses, they give honest, candid testimony to the police, hoping for a fair punishment for the perpetrator. But absolutely unexpectedly, the guards of the law transfer friends from the status of witnesses to the accused with the threat of imposing imprisonment.
You are waiting for absolutely meaningless talk about birds, tea sets, military feats, none of which have committed. How does that affect the plot? How does this reveal the characters? Are you sure that this will help to find out the name of the real criminal?
Speaking of criminal. Do not be surprised, but yes, this is a worldwide conspiracy, secret organizations acting for the common good. If you want something funny, watch “Type of Cool Cops.” There at least the director himself giggles over the topic of the common good.
In all this story, they decided to compensate the raw plot with a star cast - here you and Christian Bale, Margot Robbie, and even Robert De Niro grabbed a piece of the role.
The actions of the characters are not motivated. Washington’s hero just abandons his friend to meet a girl he had an affair with for a couple of days. And the girl, I must say, is very unusual. Not like everyone else. A nurse collecting shards of iron that she pulls from patients' bodies. Unusually takes pictures, draws, does something else, in general everything is very unusual. Reminds me of someone. . David O. Russell, did you really want to turn Margot Robbie into Frida Kahlo?
She still has seizures, which she decided for the first and last time to show us at the moment when it is least necessary - when she and her friends go to ask for help from an important general. And yes, the general's wife, noticing her twitching, decides that the girl is an avid alcoholic. All! We do not see any more attacks on the screen.
Amsterdam is not funny, Amsterdam is not sad, it’s just absurd in the worst sense, with the most ridiculous dialogue I’ve ever heard. You're watching this movie, pulling your cursor every minute, hoping to see that those 20 hard-won minutes somehow turned into 1.5 hours. I fell asleep in the middle of the movie, but don’t think it’s boring. This is a heap of various ideas, jumping from one topic to another, none of which the director does not have the patience to stop his glance.
The film failed to make either pacifistic or declaring themes of love, happiness and friendship. You don't believe in morality, you don't believe in love anymore. The best of the worst here is the camera work, costumes and picture, conveying the spirit of the 30s and credits to “hurrah”. But to see them, you need to watch 2 hours of the film. Is it worth it?
I only sincerely hope that Bale at least scolded from his role - it's not every day you get offered to play a one-eyed doctor-addict who mows under Tesla and sometimes walks without pants.
After watching Amsterdam, I ask myself, like many others, a rhetorical question: how could one make such a dull, mediocre movie with one of the best cameramen in the world (Emmanuel Lubecki) and a cool contemporary composer (Daniel Pemberton)? Obviously, David Owen Russell is not the most talented and titled director in existence, but certainly not the last. Enough of the fact that he from project to project, like Hollywood Ryazanov, leads a whole scatter of stars, which would envy even more eminent directors. And the past works of the American, with some reservations, were on the ears of the audience and in the nominations / prizes of the Academy (we recall “Fighter”, “My Guy is crazy”, “American Hustle”, “Joy”). “Hey, here we are”: the film was a box office failure, receiving mostly negative reviews from critics who “considered it overly ambitious and inconsistent, and the script and directorship of Russell – weak.” It is also worth noting that with a production budget of $ 80 million and an additional $ 60 million spent on marketing, Amsterdam grossed only $ 31 million at the global box office. In total, producers suffered damages of about $97 million.
What's wrong with Amsterdam? Of course, this is primarily an unsuccessful scenario, formally positioned by the author as a historical comedy drama coupled with mystery, and in fact turns out to be an endlessly stretching ragged narrative, overloaded with completely unnecessary scenes and unnecessary episodes, from which you get tired already a minute to the twentieth. The film is supposedly based on a real event (European fascists in the 30s of the last century allegedly tried to win over the American General Smedley Darlington Butler to their side and thereby introduce loyal people to the US government), overgrown with a light hand by Russell with stupid fictional pendants, like the friendship of a Jewish doctor and a black intellectual, participants of the First World War, with a representative of a rich noble family, a creative personality - such a forerunner of future hippies - who was in Europe at that time in search of herself, and then under pressure of her relatives returned home. Of course, this international eccentric brigade will have to save the world in a local sense. Was it worth it to have a town for such a ridiculous story?
On the other hand, there is a frankly weak direction. Such a feeling, most scenes were shot if not from the first, then from the second take, because of which the naked eye sees an obvious dissonance in the play of the actors. I don’t know how, but for me personally, the episodes where Christian Bale, John David Washington and Margot Robbie got together in the same frame resembled some kind of parody (which “Amsterdam” is not), uniting completely different characters from three different eras and three different paintings that have nothing in common. What's the point of Bale trying his best to prank a disabled veteran when she sparkled as if she had just broken out of a fancy disco, Robbie? Add in a whole squad of black actors, as a tribute to Hollywood’s famous mandatory limit, and the discord is truly comical. It’s as if No Change on the Western Front were merged with The Great Gatsby. I don’t know what he wanted to portray in general, but it seems that he has not decided whether to duplicate Wes Anderson, or do something in the spirit of the Coen brothers. In the end, neither of them worked, and the puzzle did not work out.
Well, Russell's ambitions are his problems. One successful project is not another. It is time to work on mistakes and continue to approach productions and scripting more carefully. But to Emmanuel Lubecki and Daniel Pemberton, my sincere wish is less of these experiments on the side and more collaborations with those directors with whom they climbed to the top of their personal success.
New York, 1933. A military doctor (Christian Bale) and his lawyer friend (John David Washington) take on a strange case - the autopsy of a famous representative of the American army. As a result of the autopsy, a strange fluid is found in the body of the deceased, someone was intoxicating a man a week before his death. Thus, two young men get into a history connected with politics, fascism and conspiracy.
I was really looking forward to this movie, the trailer promised a decent picture with an incredible cast. But the picture looks like a bad performance, with unrehearsed banal dialogues and clumsy camera work.
I want to celebrate the performance of Christian Bale and Margot Robbie, they hold the whole film, although they did not show anything new, but incredibly good. Yes, there are other cool actors in the cast, for example, Robert De Niro, Rami Malek and Anya Taylor Joy, but they seem to be out of place, do not work, do not believe them. I don’t like John David Washington in any movie, I think he’s still a very raw actor, and I don’t understand why he’s being put on the same rank as the cool actors like Bale and Robbie, and I also don’t understand why he’s being given the lead roles. For me, he's no fish, no meat. Does his father’s work help him in his career? Or is it really talent? Maybe I just don't see that talent.
I liked the surroundings of the picture: costumes, scenery, frame processing, colors, shades, light. I liked the part about three friends in Amsterdam, from which apparently the film was called ' Amsterdam', the place where a beautiful strong friendship and love formed.
The plot of the picture is predictable in places, in places outside, and thank you for that. The film is about love, politics, or war. It's all mixed up, no accent. Although the plot of the film is built around a real conspiracy story.
What we have in the end: a weak incarnation, which was pulled by Margot Robbie and Christian Bale.
If you like Robbie or Bale, you can look at them, but they don’t show anything new. But in general, the tape is controversial, tedious and not very successful.
America before the World War. A good old president wants to be replaced by a charming dictator. Conspiracy. Murder. Investigation. A strange triangular mark and a falling eye on participation in the cause of secret societies.
In the picture, a whole scatter of true stars. There is one of the best actors of our time - Bale, and the legend of de Niro, many characteristic actors from Myers to Shannon. Critics declared the tape stylish. Numerous prizes and nominations seem to be in abundance.
Logic dictates that the ribbon should have become noir. But the style stopped between the concepts of Wes Anderson and Joel Cohen. We were offered a clumsy elegance, pretentiousness, lace grotesque.
Conjuncture. Commerce. Kitsch, it all comes together. And in it, in my opinion, more synthetic clumsiness than author's elegance. It's a tortured, heavy story. Margot Robbie’s wide-open eyes freeze in a monotonous cute smile. Should a star be a good actress? It echoes Rami Malek’s monosyllabus. At filigree work of the operator there is not a single bright, memorable scene.
But in general, with the favor of criticism, the tape seems to be an author's essay. In my opinion, this is nothing more than a fake. Others will probably like it.
Today, this film is a significant part of the political agenda, but will it be remembered in a few years?
5 out of 10
David O. Russell may never have been my favorite director, but his work certainly aroused interest. Fighter and My boyfriend are crazy, albeit not the best, but definitely exemplary pictures in their genres, so I was expecting something worthwhile from Amsterdam, and many critics at the beginning of 2022 called this movie almost a likely favorite in the future award season. However, after the release of the film, something went completely wrong. Devastating reviews turned out to be much more than expected, and all the awards, even the smallest ones, were safely missed by Amsterdam. In fact, not to say that this was a complete surprise. The last major work of the director came out in 2015, that is, after a seven-year break. During this time, it was possible to lose the grip. And the last of this work was the film Joy with Jennifer Lawrence, who, although not bad, but definitely suffered from script problems and came out ordinary enough to fly out of his mind in a couple of days. Even when viewing this work, there were concerns about the creative abilities of O Russell. They were confirmed after seeing Amsterdam.
As always, the main problem is in the script. The director undertook a large-scale task in his film to touch on the theme of the relationship between Nazism and capitalism, and the problem of disabled veterans, and a metaphor for the ideal place where there are no wars in the form of Amsterdam, and to reveal the paranoia of Americans of that era and much more. But none of this works together. On the contrary, it seems that you are watching several completely different films, which separately would have turned out good, but through careless editing, they were clumsily woven into one mass. I don’t even know what genre the film is. This is a comedy, the noir detective, the anti-war agitation, the melancholy melodrama. If Amsterdam were skillfully toying with genres like Tarantino’s work, there would be no questions, but again, they interact extremely poorly with each other and this affects perception.
And the dialogue here is clearly not Tarantinian. They are not interesting at all, neither when the characters talk about something important, nor when there are conversations on external topics. Actors are trying hard to make their lines alive, but even the talents of titans like Robert De Niro and Christian Bale are not enough to bring the initially dead dialogue to life. And they are presented in some strange comedic way. Who has seen George Clooney’s movie Treasure Hunters? So, in that picture, too, there was a powerful cast, good topics and ideas touched upon, but they were submitted in the form of a naive military comedy, which caused dissonance and to take that movie seriously lost all meaning.
This is largely due to the fact that the cast in this film was too diverse. In addition to the above Bale and De Niro here you and Rami Malek, and Anya Taylor-Joy, and Margot Robbie, and singer Taylor Swift and quite comedic Chris Rock and Mike Myers. And that’s not all the celebrities in this movie. In order for actors so different in terms of their play to look harmoniously, a truly huge directorial talent is needed. But that's not what David O. Russell did. While Margot Robbie seriously plays a mysterious beauty, in another scene, Myers is crooked in the manner of Austin Powers, or while there is a serious moment of interaction between the characters of Bale and Washington, Chris Rock cracks jokes about white supremacists, as in Jay and Silent Bob. Again, all the actors here have their own charm and each of them has a wagon of different degrees of worthy roles behind their shoulders, but they banally prevent each other from playing in their own way. Why does the quality of the result suffer?
Because of the script and poor directing becomes especially sorry for the picture, because worked on it is far from amateurs. The cameraman Emmanuel Lubecki is literally one of the best operators of our time with an excellent track record, and here everything is done at the highest level. The production artists have worked on many Oscar-nominated films, and then again, everything is just fine. The scenery is good, the makeup is convincing, the entourage is believable. What spoils all this is that David O. Russell seems to have taken on an impossible task even for a director of this level. The film is disappointing, and it’s now clear why the awards were ignored. The director should also thank the higher forces that the Golden Raspberry did not pay attention to the movie, as, for example, to Cats. We can only hope that in the future there will be no more such mistakes neither for the acting ensemble, nor for O Russell himself.
Amsterdam is a ridiculous tragicomedy or a fresh look at a historical event?
The search for new movies led me to the film 'Amsterdam' directed by David O. Russell. Viewing this work caused me mixed emotions, which I wanted to immediately understand.
The film combines many, if not polar, then extremely diverse details. On the one hand, the work seems like a funny comedy with fun, seemingly childish music, bright colors and very comical characters, ranging from the experimental doctor with his ridiculous behavior and facial expressions to bombastic villains with an important expression. On the other hand, it is a rethinking of a real historical event – the tragic situation that arose in America in 1933 around the existing government. The story told in the film looks like an easy story about a company of friends and their love relationships, and as a serious plot, gaining momentum with every minute.
In my opinion, the picture deserves a positive response. The author managed to combine both comedic and dramatic components in one film, leading to the necessary catharsis in the epilogue of the film. It is important to note that the film carries with it quite a deep meaning and tries to answer questions about what is right and good, and what is wrong and wrong. Moreover, David O. Russell very accurately places accents in his work, lobbying morally competent choice.
Turning to the finer details, it should be said that the work relatively accurately conveys the atmosphere of America of the 1930s. ' Amsterdam' does not seek to reflect the events in documentary accuracy, but only tries to take a new look at the event taken as a basis. The characters of the work found no less response in me: although strange and ridiculous characters, played by a dozen very famous and experienced actors and actresses, convey their emotions to you, very well fit into the director’s narrative.
However, the work has several significant shortcomings for me. One of the main disadvantages of the film can be called the images of the characters. They are unrecognizable in modern life and raise doubts about their possible existence in reality, which undoubtedly adversely affects the work claiming to be documentary. I would also like to note the predictability of the plot and its twists. The director of the film failed to show a story that holds attention throughout the timeline.
Summing up, I would like to rate ' Amsterdam' above average and mark it as a solid, but not perfect work. The film deserves attention both from fans of the director and actors and actresses who played in the film, and from viewers who do not know them.
7 out of 10
A new detective, sort of satirical comedy by David Owen Russell, whom I don't really like. But the cast is certainly impressive. I wanted to see it for him. In fact, the same dubious pseudo-liberalism turned out to be in the atmosphere of Wes Anderson. Also, such a surreal irony. But really interesting humor is not enough, the characters look too wooden, the plot is simpler than it seems, and the finale is like a bland soufflé. The actors themselves cannot be blamed. It's the only way to stay.
The story of three friends who survived the First World War, with partial losses. Fate separates them, but then suddenly brings them together and they swirl in a detective story reeking of a fascist government conspiracy.
I didn’t regret watching, but I don’t want to advise.
Two friends witness a murder, but everyone thinks they are the criminals. In order to clear their honest name, the heroes themselves take on the investigation of a complicated case.
Sounds like a detective. But the movie is completely different. At one point, I thought cinema was so full of a hidden philosophy, 39, that people just didn’t understand it. We have a detective thriller with elements of comedy and melodrama. There is enough time for veterans of the First World War, a lot of socio-political statements, enough references to the beginning of the Second World War, there are references to different genre trends of modern art, there are satire, metaphors and dialectics. The film involved many famous actors from Rami Malek to Robert de Niro. This is a parable based on pseudo-quasi real events. Everything is pretty beautiful and spectacular. But who would say they really liked the movie?
For me 'Amsterdam' as a 1,000-page philosophical treatise. It's getting boring on page 10. They try to tell you something, joke, raise important topics, and you like an indifferent bastard miss everything. The painting overplayed itself and destroyed it. It has a pretty low rating, but I won’t call it a bad movie. It could have been ' a fresh look' but it became a stuffy production. The movie is just dull. The magic of this movie is that I’m not angry at it, I’m not happy, I’m just indifferent. I don’t think you should pay attention to this movie.
I don't know where to start. From watching the film in my head there was some semolina of leading dances of famous actors. Who is not in this film – Christian Bale, Margot Robbie, Rami Malek, Anya Taylor-Joy, Michael Shannon, Michael Myers, Taylor Swift, Chris Rock, Zoe Saldana and of course, Robert De Niro! The head spins not only from the cast, but also from the many storylines that intertwine with each other and barely keep up to catch the meaning in this detective, comedy, or historical drama with elements of film noir. And what about Amsterdam? The film is not about Amsterdam but about New York. Everything is very confusing and after watching for a long time you try to understand what it was, but in the end you spit and give up.
The plot is too twisted and not that it is directly difficult to understand, it is just indistinct due to a pile of brilliant tinsel that prevents you from getting to the bottom. Play actors at the highest level, and the picture is beautiful, all in their places, but too much extraneous noise. The story of Amsterdam as a kind of magical world where heroes can be the best versions of themselves and live in an endless holiday is ridiculously fit into the mosaic of the film somewhere between the reality of World War I and New York City in 1933 with fascist conspirators in the American government.
Bale plays a eccentric doctor who helps war veterans like him deal with illness and injury. His friend and colleague drags him into an adventure with the autopsy of the body of their commander, who seems to have died an unnatural death. All would be fine, but suddenly quite natural death dies this daughter and our heroes, once at the scene of the crime, are the main suspects in the murder. To somehow restore their good name, they are drawn into an even more slippery adventure with ornithologists, eugenics, fascists and a shadow government. All this is certainly not without jokes, songs, dances and a drop of romance.
Despite the abundance of themes that are relevant in the modern world, one of the main themes in the film is an escape from the ordinary. The main characters of the film immediately after the war ended up in Amsterdam, where they wove for themselves a safe world in which it was always easy and fun, but soon one by one they had to return to New York, where, missing Amsterdam, they tried to find an outlet for themselves, whether in work, medicine or art, but this did not make anyone happier.
All the characters of the film to some extent try to find a way out of the harsh reality. A naval scout and MI6 spy are passionate about ornithology, Bert's wife and her family find delight spinning in the secular circles of New York, war veterans seek salvation from Dr. Burt, General Dillenbeck finds peace in the walls of his home where a loving wife and dog await him, Tom Woz and other members of the conspiracy found the meaning of life in the idea of fascism and the organization of a coup d'etat. We all have our own Amsterdam movie, and it’s primarily about finding a balance between a seemingly boring and uninteresting life and a dream or memories of a place or time when we were or could have been happy. You should not balance on this verge and wait for the right moment, you need to live in the present day, so that later you do not regret the years spent in vain in despondency.
“Amsterdam” could well become the main film of the past year, worthy of all the awards and praise, but the overload of famous persons who do not have time to reach their potential, the chaotic jump from one storyline to another, sometimes not quite appropriate jokes and the duration of the film exceeding two hours – all this played a cruel joke with the director. I wonder if the Academy will celebrate any of the actors of this film with a nomination or award this year.
The film is based on the same detective. Firmly follows the plot of the book, but excluded almost all the lyrics. Starring investigator Christian Bale, Edgar Poe is Harry Melling. Just like the book, everything is rather boring at first, but (Gothic) from the second third the action comes to life and becomes fascinating. And the ending is unexpected.
Few would argue with the fact that “Amsterdam” directed by David R. Russell can be safely called one of the most anticipated and potentially interesting projects of the year, which began to intrigue viewers at the stage of the announcement. Especially due to the stunning and almost phenomenal cast, which can only be compared with the upcoming Oppenheimer by Christopher Nolan. However, no sensation unfortunately did not happen and from one of the most anticipated films of the year “Amsterdam” turned into one of the main box office failures of the year, which was coolly received by both critics and audiences. But is the film really that bad? Let's figure it out.
The film takes place in New York in 1933. Veteran First World War Burt Berendsen runs a small clinic and helps the same war-crippled poor like himself. One day, he and his best friend and colleague, lawyer Harold Woodman, are hired by the daughter of their former commander to perform an autopsy on his suddenly deceased father, who had just arrived from Europe and was going to give a speech at a meeting of fellow soldiers. Getting involved in this case, Burt and Harold had no idea how far it would take them, and that they would meet again their soul Valerie – a nurse from a French hospital, with whom they spent unforgettable time after the war in Amsterdam.
The script of this tape definitely makes a slightly ambiguous impression. On the one hand, we have really interesting and colorful characters, each of which stands out for its individuality and does not repeat after the others. In addition, the narration of this tape successfully dilutes the humor subtly implanted in the film with funny dialogues that are sustained in the spirit of Shane Black’s “Good Guys” with the same ironic view of the detective genre. On the other hand, all this spoils frankly weak plot. To give this plot weight, Russell deliberately manipulates flashbacks and confuses the narrative. But only achieves that the story seems overloaded, most of the screen time, the story literally tramples on the same place and is simply perceived as very long.
From a director’s point of view, this film makes a similar impression. On the one hand, David O. Russell very interestingly crossed the genres of comedy and noir detective on the screen. At least it was an interesting film from the point of view of stylization. However, there is no soul behind all this and, unfortunately, Russell is unable to keep the unified pace of the story. Reviving only in the last 20 minutes, when all the storylines are intertwined and all the participants in the narrative are in the same place.
As mentioned above, the best thing in this film is a stunning cast, which is trying to pull the film on their shoulders. All the actors without exception demonstrated a great game and watching them throughout the screen time is a pleasure. However, I want to highlight a few in particular. Christian Bale suddenly showed his comedic talent, Rami Malek finally came out of the “duty” for himself freakish image, Timothy Oliphant created a very bright and colorful image of one of the main villains of this tape, and Taylor Swift’s participation is associated with a really cool and unexpected plot twist. John David Washington is very much lost in the background of his colleagues. He did not have a bad performance.
5 out of 10
Amsterdam is a very controversial film, which rightly and deservedly became one of the main failures of this year. Stylistically directed is not bad, but there is absolutely nothing behind it. History has potential, but only shows stomping in the same place. The picture itself gives the impression of a very sterile and empty movie, which pulls for the most part only a phenomenal and star cast.
Amsterdam is the noir story of how an American general defeated fascism, where there are more stars than meaning.
Each one of us is given a tapestry, our own opera. This person and this person. Thinking about it... love is not enough. You got to fight to protect kindness. You get attached to people and things. And they might just break your heart... but that' being alive.
Once there was a great American director David Russell with big Hollywood actors Christian Bale, John D. Washington, Margot Robbie, Rami Malek, Robert De Niro and Anya Taylor-Joy. We are here to make a very indistinct film. This is what the most honest synopsis of this creation would look like.
In the center is the story of American General Smedley Butler. The veterans of the First World War were led to the role of the American Mussolini, and the campaign on Washington was seen as an analogue of the fascist march on Rome. As a result of the civic position, adherence to the Constitution and a number of ridiculous and eccentric heroes, evil lost. Fascism did not pass, and Pastor Cofflin’s ideas became marginal. Really? More than that.
Russell turns a semi-historical plot into posthumous. It fills with metasense. The film is based on a lot of this actually happened. Victory over fascism = victory of empathy over indifference, mercy over justice. But that's just the background. The main thing is the love story of three friends, their story ' Amsterdam' After the war, black and white colleagues meet Valerie, a nurse babbling in French and creating art objects from shrapnel from the bodies of the wounded.
Friends go to Amsterdam, where they spend the best time in their lives. A time of freedom, youth and a completely Neslingian drive. The film-farce for some reason walks the path of metamodern meanings. Russell tries too gracefully to insert moralizing in comedy, and then gets carried away playing other directors. Here he is Wes Anderson with his doll houses, and here he is a brutal American in the style of the Coen brothers.
And the actors are great. Margot Robbie blinks sexually and at the same time in a naive way stupidly, Christian Bale goes on new experiments with appearance (now he is one-eyed and chipped disabled), and the couple Rami Malek and Ani Taylor-Joy are just an object for studying neurasthenia. But you will not go beyond the material.
Russell made a mistake, overloading the film. 'Amsterdam' from a light farce and colloquial comedy goes into the wilds, in which the viewer is very difficult to understand. Aesthetics are secondary, though temptingly masking canon noir into theatrical mise-en-scene. The unsolvable problem of any comedy is the absence of funny jokes. There's zero in this movie. ZERO.
And 'Amsterdam' is an example of how clumsy it is to talk about racism and feminism. The fictional passage about black soldiers being dressed in French uniforms is something from Chris Rock's stand-up. He's in the movie, by the way. He laughs and opens his mouth.
As a result, 'Amsterdam' is an obvious contender for the failure of the year. With a flash royal, Russell managed to lose the game. Let's not be offended by old David. There's Margot Robbie in the movie. Best metaphor for a movie. You remember. Beautiful blinking. Stupid and naive at the same time.
Throughout the film, I couldn’t figure out whether it was a serious film or an attempt to sniggle? Without spoilers and revealing the plot, I will tell you about the inconsistencies in this picture.
The expression of the main character’s face pulls on the comic character, he is a great actor and performs, as you can see, his role as a slut specially with a light idiocy, the expression of the face of a stupid slacker. His grins and jumps, small puncture jokes starting with the morgue, the stress of the car door and the loss of an eye, looking around the corner in the hospital, well, does not contrast with extremely monstrous scars, and certainly not comic situations with throwing an unfortunate woman under the car.
It seems like a tragedy, like scary should be, and then dissonance with a small comic situation, and it is filmed in a comedic way, without focusing on tragedy. But it's not a black comedy where it's very simple and clear with things like that. But even more dissonance is caused by the main character.
In 1918, she's in hospital as a nurse, pulling scary pieces of metal out of people. There is blood, death, pain, it is pure and beautiful. She's very beautiful and very clean. In monstrous bandages on the head I believe, they are natural, in the same disgusting bandages and bandages on the other limbs I believe. This is the beginning of the 20th century. I don't believe in her 21st century makeup. It is straight from 2022, it is not in 1918, it is constantly filmed close-up and you can see that it is from today, it is only from a beautician, 2022, well, it is unnatural there, it is the wildest dissonance.
Her game apart. She's gone. Same facial expression. Everywhere. Any situation. Joy. Sadness. Woe. One face. She is clean, she is beautiful, she is dazzlingly beautiful, she does not fit completely into the visual range of men with her, especially in the hospital. I will say again about beauty - it is very good, but the director did not force it to give out any emotions at all, and with modern makeup it all looks especially good, for beauty, for its emphasis, but bad for the film.
I know when they say in a light movie, "Did you go there?" Let's go! And what to live on, where to live, what to eat, drink - it does not matter for an easy movie or comedy, these are unnecessary details on which the main characters will live. And in a more or less serious film, it is impossible to lower the payment of bills in any way, this is a whole layer for plots and sub-plot turns, where to get money, what to earn your daily bread for? What kind of shishishi did you dance on there, enjoying life, forgetting about your wife, family, and other trifles, it is not clear how you left the front? Who paid for this welfare? Spies? (also extremely non-comic characters). Instantly, maybe they were given money in the disability war and stuff (a lot of laughter in the audience)? Free travel to Amsterdam, free food, dance training and more? It is very doubtful and does not attract this genre.
And languages? Is English spoken in Europe in 1918? Clean? Or does any American doctor know all languages, and I don’t talk about black people? Again, in the light genre, you can look at it through your fingers, but in any other genre - even if the accent is small, there would be a translation somewhere, an interpreter or a misunderstanding, no, everyone speaks perfectly English everywhere, eats, drinks, dances, beautiful girls bloom and smell, everything is fine. Idyll. Which is hard to look at.
Dissonance. Beauty, cosmetics from the 21st century with dirty torn bandages from the first world war. Tragedy and some kind of grind. The style itself, the genre of the film is also difficult to identify - not comedy exactly, but with a weakly comedic bias, completely inappropriate, detective - well, perhaps not, politics - well, back and forth with admixture - and where without it - BLM - is also somehow understretched, some kind of mishmash, throwing from genre to genre, understretched everywhere, and do not pull celebrities invited to the film anything, absolutely. The plot is confused for something, a lot of unnecessary, completely unnecessary, drawn out strongly.
3 out of 10
'Amsterdam' was without exaggeration one of the most anticipated and promising releases of 2022. However, it turned out to be one of the strangest and most disappointing films of this fall.
The public's interest in 'Amsterdam' was not unfounded. After all, it was directed by David O. Russell - one of the brightest filmmakers of the 2010s, invariably receiving high ratings and numerous awards with his colorful and energetic tragicomedic tapes ' Fighter', ' My boyfriend is crazy', ' American Hustle' and 'Joy'. His last film came out 7 years ago.
The cast promised something special - the film starred Christian Bale, Margot Robbie, Anya Taylor Joy, John David Washington, Chris Rock, Mike Myers, Taylor Swift, Zoe Saldana, Rami Malek, Robert De Niro and others.
And the very basis of the proposed plot is more than valuable and fascinating. Amsterdam 39 is based on real events and tells the controversial story of a political conspiracy that took place in America in the 1930s. Then a group of military and wealthy industrialists plotted to carry out a military coup, overthrow President Roosevelt from power and establish a dictatorship in the country. Not surprisingly, David O. Russell was given the green light to offer studios and actors a film based on this entertaining story. But he did not manage it for some reason.
'Amsterdam' - a sad tragicomedic historical tape, lasting more than 2 hours and making viewers look forward to its completion. David O. Russell has long been known as the creator of unique colorful stories, playing real boring stories and turning them into fascinating theatrical adventures of strange characters. However, when filming 'Amsterdam' he seems to have lost all his directing and screenwriting abilities. His characters turned out not strange, but ridiculous and completely devoid of realism. His script does not add up to a coherent logical narrative, but falls into ridiculous episodes. The rhythm of the story is constantly inhibited by some awkward dialogues, moreover, trampling on the same place. . .
No, 'Amsterdam' David O. Russell definitely didn't. And the brilliant actors in this film only further emphasize the wretchedness of this film.
The film's rating is condescendingly high at 6.1 in IMDB and Kinopoisk. Although probably much more fair to call 'Amsterdam' one of the worst films of 2022 and quickly forget about its existence.
What's the movie about?
America, 1933. World War I veteran Burt (Bale) and his comrade Harold (Washington) receive news of the death of their former staff general Bill Meakins. The General's daughter, Liz, suspects that her father was killed, and the three begin to kidnap the corpse for an autopsy. Then more.
Opinion
In addition to the main three actors, whose names are above, this film contains a serious number of Hollywood actors: equipped with funny mustaches Rami Malek, rude Anya Taylor-Joy, buffy-eyed Chris Rock, meek Zoe Saldana, unexpected Taylor Swift, funny Mike Myers and typical Robert De Niro. But more or less prescribed only two: Christian Bale and Margot Robbie - the first has a constantly falling false eye and experiments with drugs, the second smokes a pipe and creates bizarre sculptures from shrapnel fragments. At some point, almost all of the above artists are even present in one scene, but the impression is sad, as if a crowd of people is vying to tell you an unfunny joke.
That's the main problem with the film - it's both overloaded and underfed. Offering ambitious ideas, packed with charismatic actors and featuring individual moments of genius, Amsterdam is never more than the sum of its impressive components. And the main complaint to the actor Washington: why he again asked the director to use a plastic dummy instead? It seems devoid of emotion, static and false. Sorry, Danzel, but nature has deprived your son of talent.
Russell is one of my favorite directors ("Three Kings" and "The Fighter," in my opinion, is just the gold fund of cinema), and so it's a shame that now you have to experience more than two hours of Spanish shame when watching his "Amsterdam."
3 out of 10
- Oh, wonderful Amsterdam! How beautiful and mysterious you are!
I wanted to say such words at the end of the film, but, alas, I hasten to upset, most likely this will not happen. Unlike many other films, where the scene is also an indirect character, or helps develop the storyline, in Amsterdam. Amsterdam will be shown for 1/2 minutes. The main action will take place in New York in the 30s. That is painfully loved and colorful New York with retro cars, men in costumes, and fashionable girls. But this will not prevail in the frame. Most of the time, the camera is focused on the close-ups of the actors and their slicked faces, only simultaneously capturing the street romance of the past.
So, the film tells us about a New York doctor who helps recover from the injuries of American veterans of the First World War. With his former colleague, and now his companion, a lawyer, he successfully practices until one day he is called to perform an autopsy of a man. During the autopsy, it turns out that the man, who recently arrived from Europe, was poisoned. And that’s why he was poisoned, the main characters, and it is necessary to find out, crawling through a series of incoherent facts, meetings from the past, and a large dose of painkillers. After all, the wounds of the first world still make themselves felt.
The creators did not want to pamper the plot or could not, but the star cast - at least spare! Christian Bale, Taylor Swift, Robert DeNiro, and even Chris Rock. The rest are no less expressive, but the ones listed above are those that can be called by name, without looking into a piece of paper.
The plot is incredibly protracted and oversaturated with a large number of names and secondary characters, some of which either little or practically no influence on the course of the plot. I will say for myself that trying to fit all the new “acquaintances” in my head and simultaneously unravel the plot was tense.
The idea of the film boils down to the fact that the characters miraculously prevent the arrival in a free America, a former military man, on whom a group of influential people - owners of large industrial enterprises, who in turn pursued the goal of uniting with dictatorial Europe: Italy and Germany. It is natural to establish profitable business partnerships. That's the conspiracy theory, that's the "cream brulee."
In the end, it is difficult to guess what moved the creators. If you remove the decor and entourage of the 30s, and place the usual musicians, comedians, and Hollywood stars in our time, then you will not even get a movie, but cutting cinematic shows with familiar actors.
Add to that a very modest love story, a couple of self-made jokes from Chris Rock, a switch to inner storyteller Christian Bale, and you get the Amsterdam recipe. I am not sure that such a mixture of supposedly historical detective, seasoned with comedic wit, is waiting for the audience, but, as they say, “eat served, sit down to eat, please.”
Seven years after the film, Joy did not flicker in the cinematic sky the star of the multiple nominee of the award ' Oscar' D. O. Russell and here he presents his new project to the audience. As controversial and somewhat one-sided as the previous one.
It's 1933. One-eyed doctor interrupted by experimental pills. The story begins with the autopsy of an old man’s body. I touched on a strong detective story in the spirit of the best Hollywood noir films of the 30-40s captivates from the very beginning.
The director has trump cards up his sleeve in the face of the ladies of witnesses who get under the wheels of the car, flashbacks of the great war, where we meet the main characters of the picture (a nurse and two soldiers), who will be destined to unite for an intriguing story that too quickly and clearly turns into banal fantasies about anything: behind the scenes politics, about the government of the United States, closed clubs supporting dictators around the world. A kind of Parallax conspiracy for 2022. But the problem is that the film lacks lightness due to the heaps of different twists.
The director leads us by the nose, presenting Amsterdam as a kind of love at first sight - where art conquers the hardships of war. The investigation of two friends is more like a masquerade with interspersed freakish characters. Remember only the ornithologist performed by Malek, and the stupid detectives did not go far in development from him.
Russell successfully manages to register the characters of eccentric and nervous characters. When the puzzle slowly begins to take shape, Russell combines a conspiracy theory with the terrible truth of human nature.
Whether the script was inspired by the events of two years ago and the resonant storming of the White House mixed with the fantasies of the director himself will remain unclear, but Russell clearly concludes that the United States will eventually come to a dictatorship and joining the General’s game as bait is the most justified appearance in the whole film.
The conclusion that the director makes from this story about almighty love looks like an implausible excuse designed to brighten up all the shortcomings of this strange story.
From the flashing stars on the screen, it is a pity that, in addition to this pomposity, Russell forgot about a worthwhile and strong story.
The main thing is not to engage in self-deception before acquaintance with the film, looking at the names of the actors involved in the film comes to the conclusion that this is at least the second serious blunder of the director and that in the best form, times ' Fighter', he never came.
Margot I love you