Bugsy (1991) (mini-review++)

bugsy.jpg

(If you’re curious, my review process. It’s also pasted at the end of this post. I don’t believe in Rotten Tomatoes. I just believe in me.)

(***all-purpose SPOILER ALERT*** there may be some in this review)

acting 6

directing 6

effects 6

editing 5

writing 5

SW SCORE: 28

2.5 out of 5 🐙

++

I’ve been trying to watch every single Best Picture (Oscars as there are a billion orgs that do these kind of awards) nominee from 1970 to present. And there have been movies I really didn’t want to watch. I just knew I would hate them. But much more often than not, I have been happily surprised. It’s really amazing. It’s the best thing when a movie surprises me. Just the best. Unfortunately, sometimes I think I will hate a movie and I do. Bugsy is one of those times. I am not a fan of Warren Beatty. I just never found him to be a compelling or interesting screen presence. He’s got the matinee idol looks, lots of style, but not much range. He’s the Ben Affleck before Ben Affleck. Besides my beef with the lead, I found the dialogue to be cheesy and far too stylized. A period piece doesn’t need to be a parody of that time period. Harvey Keitel, Annette Bening, and Ben Kingsley, three usually strong and reliable acting forces, all acted oddly or overacted or just bizarrely acted in this film. This might be all three’s worst performance so that in and of itself is remarkable. Elliott Gould was good. He seemed to be the only one who wasn’t trying to act like a cartoon from Who Framed Roger Rabbit. The movie s actually based on a true story but it was so badly executed that I had to go read the Wikipedia article about the true story after I finished watching the movie. I enjoyed the wikipedia article more. I do not understand how this was nominated for any film award.

.

.

.

.

.

.

(1) Shark Wrighter (SW) Score: Based on a sum of 5 sub-scores (acting, directing, writing/story, effects: cinematography &/or animation &/or effects, editing) with 1 being terrible and 10 being terrific.

(2) Octopuses (0-5 🐙, with 5 being fantastic and 0 being feces)

(3) Octopuses are my unquantifiable feeling…not that SW score is scientific…but this one is even less so

(4) ++ This optional section includes any incredibly *brilliant observations that don’t fit into simple quantitative slices like the scores and octopuses *(they are likely NOT brilliant)

 

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.