Motherless Sex With Women Wearing Their Dresses Videos
A Calm, Engaging Mystery
Edward Norton, by most film fans, has been and will always be known as one of the best actors out there. Appearing in classics like Fight Club and more modern masterpieces like Birdman, he's never been one to pick a bad project on purpose. Motherless Brooklyn marks his latest leading role, while also directing and writing. As ambitious and difficult as that is, he has pulled it off quite well. Motherless Brooklyn is a very well-made period piece.
Set in the 1950s, this film follows Lionel(Edward Norton) after the murder of his closest friend and colleague. Hellbent on discovering who the killer is, he finds himself on a paper trail across Brooklyn, never giving up on his plan. Being someone who also happens to suffer from Tourette Syndrome, he is a character that has a lot of depth to get behind. Personally, this particular character needed a great performance in order to be authentic, which is where this film shines the most.
It's been a while since I've seen Edward Norton this committed to delivering a powerful performance. There are hardly any instances where he feels like he doesn't actually suffer from this condition. His devotion is what kept me engaged because the overall story does slightly meander at times. At nearly two and a half hours, this film can feel its length at times, but that's simply due to the fact that this movie cares about its characters and spends a lot of time on long conversations, some of which do lead to revelations though.
Based on a book, this screenplay here definitely feels inspired and the voiceover work by Norton calms the viewers throughout, making for a sort of relaxing experience. In addition to that, the use of classical and jazz music is so much in the forefront that it nearly became a character of its own in the film. I really admired that aspect. Still, the overall movie doesn't leave too much for the audience to figure out, since the narration does lend a hand.
In the end, Motherless Brooklyn is a really, really solid crime mystery that has the perfect setting and feel for this sort of premise. I found myself completely engrossed in this world and was eager to see where the movie ended up. Edward Norton gives an award-worthy performance and his direction only adds to that, making for a great overall movie. Motherless Brooklyn may be meant for a more mature audience as it is quite niche in terms of the nature of the story, which may lend itself better to an older crowd. Even so, I quite enjoyed myself.
303 out of 355 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Gorgeous depiction of '50's New York in color & music despite dense plot.
If you couldn't keep up with Chinatown's and LA Confidential's plot and continuous placing and connecting of characters' names associated with civic and political corruption then Motherless Brooklyn will have you drowning in it.
That's why I give it a seven rating. It's almost 2 1/2 hours of figuring out what's going on and who's doing it, but at least the look and sound of the movie provides a huge respite with the best sounding Bee Bop jazz and lush background theme soundtrack I've ever heard in a movie.
As a photographer I thought the cinematography was stunning in color and composition, less film noir and more '50's style New York street Kodachrome photography with compositions of odd reflections and angles interspersed smoothly with the flow of the narrative master shots in a style similar to Winogrand and Vivian Maier.
The variety of vintage '50's automobiles in pristine and brand new condition with the rich look of Kodachrome color is another treat. The sound of the rattle of car doors slamming is even accurate.
141 out of 167 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
That was pretty darn good!
I went into this not expecting much but Edward Norton gave till it hurt. Overall, this was a great movie with some amazing performances by Norton and his fantastic ensemble cast. So well acted by such fine actors. It's a very good murder mystery. That classic gum shoe style was done perfectly. I love the art direction. He painted a great picture of 50s style New York. And the music was stellar. Those jazz numbers really blended in perfectly with the atmosphere. Then I had that one piece of music made by Thom Yorke of Radiohead (you'll know it once you hear). This was a really great movie.
90 out of 125 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
A heartfelt throwback to classic Noir
Motherless Brooklyn is a modern film Noir about a troubled man seeking answers, exploring new worlds within familiar ones, and going toe-to-toe with violent thugs and oppressive tyrants, in the heart of New York during its blossoming years. It also just may be Edward Norton's "Sling Blade."
Some of its most noticeable achievements, are the visual and audial elements. With the gloomy, yet bustling sets, and the somber, thoughtful soundtrack, the effective lighting and mood of each shot, it's a brilliant homage to the classic Noir style. It's not even just a throwback, but could eventually be considered a monumental addition to the genre.
And the acting. Expect nothing less from such a stellar, experienced, well thought out cast. Edward Norton nailed it especially, and shines a humorous, yet wondrous and even educational light on Tourette's syndrome. Excellent performances by all.
Story-wise, it's nothing groundbreaking. But it's certainly engaging. One can tell it's no cookie-cutter script, a lot of heart went into it. Sure some may find it boring, slow, presumptuous even. Others will find it exhilarating, and refreshing. Hopefully most will find the passion, love, message, and humor in it, and also discover that it could be that movie which so many people have been wishing Hollywood would make, instead of those dry, cash-cow blockbusters that stain the very heart and art of filmmaking itself. While also being unique in its own way, it's also familiar, without being too familiar if you know what I mean.
I wish Bruce Willis was in it more, and there are some plot holes and mildly annoying coincidences, cliches, etc. These are few and far in between. While it can be difficult to follow at times, it's still quite a fantastic movie.
Those who would enjoy this movie, probably also enjoyed other titles like Chinatown, L.A. Confidential, Road to Perdition, The Sting, Double Indemnity. See it in theaters, you'll find yourself driving down Nostalgia lane in a vintage 1950's Chevy.
120 out of 159 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Great Acting
Edward Norton has Tourette's Syndrome, which comes out when he is stressed, which does not include driving a car, or getting into a gunfight or walking into a strange location when you expect them to kill you. He works for Bruce Willis, who runs a detective agency out of Brooklyn. Willis gets kidnapped and shot, so Norton is the man in the shop who is supposed to track down the killer. This leads him on a tour of an alternate 1956 New York City, which seems to be populated by great actors like Willem Dafoe, Gugu Mbatha-Raw, Cherry Jones, Bobby Cannavale and Alec Baldwin as a megalomaniac closely modeled on Robert Moses. One of them is the bad guy. Guess which and why.... I had it figured out four minutes before Norton did, but then, I don't have Tourette's. Still, that means it's a fair mystery.... not who, but why.
Mostly, though, it's a chance for actors to strut their stuff, and none more so than Norton, who besides having Tourette's has an eidetic memory, smokes pot to control his symptoms, and will never be rich. No one seems to be put off by his tics, including touching women, making comments which are mildly lewd, making noises while jazz musicians play, and in one scene where he is trying to light a lady's cigarette, repeatedly lighting a match and blowing it out before it can get to the cigarette. Everyone is astonishingly enlightened, except, of course, Baldwin. Being evil, he hates poor people, and Blacks in particular.
Good acting, but when I want to visit 1956 New York City, I don't want everyone there to be from 2019. Still, some great acting, some great locations, and the CGI recreation of Penn Station revives my anger towards the morons who tore it down.
24 out of 34 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Great acting, excellent jazz score, good but loooong film.
Warning: Spoilers
In his second directorial effort, Edward Norton has cast himself as the "motherless" Lionel, a smart-as-a-whip film-noir "gumshoe" with a photographic memory who suffers from Tourette's. No surprise: He's excellent in a difficult role, having carefully studied the ticks and other idiosyncrasies Tourette's causes. Indeed, almost the whole cast is terrific, filled with great character actors -- Willem Dafoe, Michael K. Williams, Robert Wisdom, Cherry Jones, Bobby Cannavale, Leslie Mann. Bruce Willis has a great role as Lionel's friend and mentor. And with many street scenes, Brooklyn ably stars as itself.
Norton spent years working on this film, keeping intact his own character and the gang of detectives led by Willis. But Norton changed almost everything else, setting the film in the late '50s, and focusing it on a character based on NYC power broker extraordinary Robert Moses. It's perfect film noir fodder: power and corruption, progress vs. community, race and a bit of sex, all with a jazz score in the background.
The characters are great, and for the most part, the plot works well. The tight first hour devolves into a more muddled and "fat" second half that could have been cut by 10-15 minutes. And Alec Baldwin as the "bad guy" might have worked better if I hadn't had his SNL Trump riffs in my head. But good character development and a great film-noir "look" makes this film worth seeing.
113 out of 150 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Edward the Great
After the end of this film, I was very grateful to Edward Norton. For the wise craft of each piece of the film. For atmosphere, music, cast, for the story and , sure , the New York of 1950. And for his Lionel Essrog. A seductive film for details, performances and for something defining a fine director. Sure, many lines of plot, to generous perspective and the end as a sort of compromise. But the good use of Alec Baldwin, Bruce Willis and Willem Dafoe is just a noble virtue. Not ignoring the job of Edward Dafoe himself and good jazz, smart use of interracial problems, the abuses for urban solutions and the reasonable solution for a delicate case. So, very subjective, a film reminding the art of Edward the Great.
15 out of 20 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Norton is working it
Actually more than working it, because he's doing multiple things or has multiple layers. So it's not just the acting and directing (and whatever else he did on set and behind the scenes), it is that his character is quite - colorful and diverse to put it mildly.
He also is someone who swears a lot. It is a condition but try to explain that to someone. Norton does a wonderful job portraying something that is not easy. But he knows his way around outside/inside and more than one layer of character in his roles. This is a love letter to detective movies and movies of the past. It is also a matter of taste. Some will like it and some will question the pacing (which for what it is, is perfect and in tune with the theme it portrays) - all in the eye of the beholder - or detective I guess
16 out of 22 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Entertaining noir throwback
I love old detective movies, and at its heart, Motherless Brooklyn is an old detective movie, with the strengths and weaknesses common to the genre.
Ed Norton is excellent as a detective with Tourette's hunting the people who killed his boss in 1950s Brooklyn. People are surprisingly understanding of his surprising shouts and taps. The book (which I haven't read) was set in the 90s, so perhaps people are 90s tolerant, but *50s* tolerant?
The story is somewhat confusing, which is typical of the genre but could easily have been fixed here. One of Norton's strengths is an amazing memory, so why not, when he hears a name or sees a face, illustrate that with a quick flash of memory. It would have kept viewers clear while offering a window into his mind.
Still, it's got a good cast and an engaging story, so if you're a fan of film noir it's well worth checking out. For a rating I'm torn between 7 & 8 but I'll go with 8.
7 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
A tight and gripping movie
The movie recreated the 1950s NY in an amazing way. Great cast who portrayed their roles with authenticity. It had a nice leisurely pace but held on to the suspense till the end. Saw during the NYFF premier ... it was a great choice to end the 2019 festival. Would recommend the movie for anyone who can appreciate good meaningful cinema.
Motherless Brooklyn is the kind of movie Hollywood almost never makes anymore, and a complexly conceived, robust evocation of a bygone era of New York that speaks to our present moment.
184 out of 242 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Chinatown with Tourette's
It's 1950's New York. Private detective Lionel Essrog (Edward Norton) has Tourette's Syndrome. His boss and best friend is murdered while on a case. He intends to solve it and find his killers. It leads him to a series of urban gentrification efforts against the black and Latino population. A mystery man (Willem Dafoe) directs him to all powerful developer Moses Randolph (Alec Baldwin) who controls everything including the politics. He falls for Laura Rose (Gugu Mbatha-Raw) who is fighting for the minorities in the city.
I really like the story of corruption and power in city politics. It's Chinatown all over again. I wish that Edward Norton played it straight with a little more clarity in the beginning. Mostly I wish that he could get out the Tourette's. I haven't read the book and I'm not saying that he's doing it wrong. The story is so dense that more than anything, the Tourette's is distracting. It's unnecessary and it doesn't serve much. There are obvious mistakes that Lionel makes but I buy them for his character. He's smart but this is not Sherlock. All in all, I really like the crime noir story but I still want some changes.
15 out of 21 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
This movie isn't perfect, a masterpiece or will go down as one of the best movies of our era, but it is entertaining and worth a viewing
Motherless Brooklyn (2019) is a movie my wife and I recently watched on a flight back from Italy on Finnair. The storyline tells the tale of a man with Tourette's syndrome, and a group of men he grew up with that now operate a private detective firm. When the owner of the firm is murdered, despite orders from new leadership, the man with Tourette's syndrome will stop at nothing to uncover who killed his boss. He finds a trail that leads straight to the top of New York City that puts him and his friend's lives at stake as he digs deeper into the case. This movie is directed by and stars Edward Norton (Keeping the Faith) and also stars Bruce Willis (Die Hard), Alec Baldwin (The Departed), Ethan Suplee (Mallrats), Willem Dafoe (Platoon) and Gugu Mbatha-Raw (Beauty and the Beast). The storyline for this is very intricate and well told and reminded me of a poor man's Usual Suspects in some ways. The settings, attire, props and cinematography are absolutely outstanding. The depiction of New York and the complexities of the rich and politics at the time are brilliantly depicted. The writing is also very good as I loved the dialogue, metaphors and interactions between characters. The various subplots do a good job of weaving together and leading to a solid conclusion. Overall this movie isn't perfect, a masterpiece or will go down as one of the best movies of our era, but it is entertaining and worth a viewing. I'd score this a solid 7.5/10.
4 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
'I got somethin' wrong with my head. That's the first thing to know.'
For those indelibly impressed with Jonathan Lethem's 1999 highly awarded novel MOTHERLESS BROOKLYN, rest assured that the impact continues with Edward Norton's superb adaptation for the screen and excellent direction - and acting! This is a triple-header for Norton and one deserving of multiple awards.
Though the story is well known because of the book's success, the plot follows: Brooklyn's very own self-appointed Human Freakshow, Lionel Essrog (Edward Norton) is an orphan whose Tourettic impulses drive him to bark, count, and rip apart our language in startling and original ways. Together with three veterans of the St. Vincent's Home for Boys - Coney (Ethan Suplee), Danny (Dallas Roberts), Tony (Bobby Carnavale) he works for small-time mobster Frank Minna's (Bruce Willis) limo service cum detective agency. Life without Frank Minna, the charismatic King of Brooklyn - who in his role as an investigator is following the beautiful Laura (Gugu Mbatha-Raw) - would be unimaginable, so who cares if the tasks he sets them are, well, not exactly legal. But when Frank is killed, and Lionel and friends investigate his death. Lionel's world is suddenly topsy-turvy, and this outcast, who has trouble even conversing attempts to untangle the threads of the case while trying to keep the words straight in his head, uncovers the greedy machinations of Moses Randolph (Alec Baldwin), meets the raggedy Paul (Willem Dafoe), discovers the roots of the attempt to 're-structure' Brooklyn and Harlem by Randolph, and many more mystery secrets that would be spoilers to relate. There are superb supporting cast members such as Robert Wisdom, Michael Kenneth Williams, Cherry Jones, Josh Pais et at - a finer cast would be difficult to assemble.
This is most assuredly a timely release as we are in the support of BLM: the story is a hint at some of the situations that must be addressed. Engrossing and spellbinding, MOTHERLESS BROOKLYN (btw, that is Frank's moniker assigned to Lionel) is a worthy expansion of Jonathan Lethem's novel. Recommended.
10 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Looks great and is well acted, but the pacing is turgid
Jonathan Lethem's 1999 novel Motherless Brooklyn may appear to be an old-fashioned private-eye noir, but in reality, it's about gentrification, institutionalised racism, political corruption, and how such things are woven into New York City's historical fabric. It's about how the city of today was built on the cruelty, prejudice, lies, and unchecked power of yesterday. The novel is a quintessentially postmodern narrative, fracturing the relationship between the physical and the temporal by taking the sensibilities of 1950s gumshoe noir and supplanting them into an end-of-century milieu. On the other hand, the 1957-set film is more literal, less interested in playing with form. Written for the screen, produced, directed by, and starring Edward Norton, this two-decades-in-the-making passion project asks how much corruption are we willing to forgive and whether truth and ideals even matter in a world in which there's a direct confluence between power and amorality. However, far too in reverence to films such as Chinatown (1974) and L.A. Confidential (1997), Motherless Brooklyn is never anything more than your average noir mystery - a likable but flawed protagonist begins what seems like a fairly straightforward investigation, only to be led down a rabbit hole of corruption and power games, until he's in the midst of an elaborate political conspiracy. And whilst it's aesthetically impressive (the period detail drips off the screen) and the acting is universally excellent, the film can be spectacularly on the nose and didactic. It also moves at a snail's pace, and Norton is never really able to generate any sense of urgency, making the whole thing feel laborious, and, ultimately, rather pointless.
New York City, 1957. World War II veteran Frank Minna (Bruce Willis) runs a small PI firm staffed by men whom Minna rescued from an abusive orphanage when they were still children. He's most fond of Lionel Essrog (Norton), who suffers from what we know today as Tourette Syndrome, but who also has a photographic memory. As the film begins, Essrog is listening in on a clandestine meeting between Minna and unidentified parties. When the meeting becomes contentious, tragedy strikes, and although none of Minna's staff know who he was meeting or what he was investigating, Essrog determines to get to the bottom of the case, slowly unearthing a labyrinthine conspiracy involving local government, urban redevelopment plans, and housing relocation programs.
Anyone familiar with the novel will recognise that Norton has made sweeping changes, not just in terms of relocating the story to 1957 (thus making explicit what was so indelibly postmodern in the book), but so too in terms of plot and character. The most significant addition is Moses Randolph (Alec Baldwin), a corrupt and powerful real estate magnate who's clearly based on New York's so-called "master builder" Robert Moses, the man largely responsible for the city's high-way infrastructure, the departure of the Brooklyn Dodgers to LA, the development of Long Island, and whose controversial philosophies regarding urban redevelopment continue to be implemented all over the world. Operating with almost complete autonomy from regulatory oversight, Moses was a narcissist obsessed with power, and an amoral , and so too is the character in the film. Indeed, although the film is ostensibly based on Lethem's novel, it contains more than a hint of Robert A. Caro's Pulitzer Prize-winning biography of Moses, The Power Broker: Robert Moses and the Fall of New York (1974).
Motherless Brooklyn's most obvious strength is its aesthetic, about which I really can't say enough. Beth Mickle's production design, Michael Ahern's art direction and Amy Roth's costume design are all exceptional, contributing to the nuanced and immersive period-specific tone, with the milieu feeling lived-in and completely authentic.
Norton's direction is, for the most part, straightforward and unfussy, but one visual motif he uses several times is shooting directly from Essrog's POV. First-person shots in cinema are infrequent enough that when a director uses the technique a few times, it stands out. What's most interesting here is when Norton uses it - three scenes in which Essrog is lying on his back either currently being beaten up, or having recently been beaten up. It's a nice (if somewhat unsubtle) directorial choice, drawing us directly into Essrog's experience, but only when he's at his most vulnerable. On the other hand, the tonally inconsistent use of dream scenes is far less effective, feeling as if they're from another film entirely.
In terms of the decision to set the film in the 50s, it actually makes sense. One of the reasons the novel works so well is because the modern setting clashes with the mannerisms of the characters, the style of the dialogue, the cadences of the plot, all of which are straight out of classic 40s and 50s noir. The effect of this is quintessentially postmodern - a self-reflexive pastiche that's drawn from both the 50s and the 90s, and yet which belongs to neither. And although this works tremendously on the page, Norton argued (correctly, I think) that to try to replicate this on film - have the story set in 2019 (or even 1999), but told in the manner of a classic noir - wouldn't work, as it would send mixed and confusing messages to the audience.
And so, he simply relocated the story to the time-period which underpins the style of the novel. With this in mind, the film features many of the trappings of classic noir - the world-weary private eye, the laconic voiceover speaking directly to the audience from an unspecified point in time, the seemingly important clues which ultimately lead nowhere, the seemingly irrelevant clues which ultimately lead somewhere, the smooth (so smooth) jazz score, the smoky (so smoky) jazz clubs, the chiaroscuro lighting (albeit very restrained), the antagonist who seems to see all, the political corruption. There's even a scene in which Essrog finds an address written on a pack of matches. About the only thing missing is a femme fatale, although there is a woman who may (or may not) know more than she's letting on.
For all its thematic importance and laudable aesthetic aspects, however, I found Motherless Brooklyn disappointing. For one thing, there's the pacing, which is so lacking in forward-momentum that the story is practically somnolent. The narrative is unfocused and flabby, needing at least one more editorial pass, occasionally doubling back on itself and wasting time giving the audience information we already possess. Partly because of this, it's a good 20 minutes too long (at least), and much of it feels like padding - characters that do nothing, clues that lead nowhere, scenes which don't advance the story or develop the characters. I understand Norton wanted to let the material breath (the novel is around 300 pages), but there's a difference between giving the characters and themes room to develop and stalling for the sake of it, and so much of the film feels like the latter.
There's also a significant disconnect between the politics and the detective story. In Chinatown, everything feels organic - the personal and the political are intertwined, with the political elements never feeling artificially shaped so as to fit a generic template, or the genre structure never feeling artificially bolstered with extraneous political elements. In Motherless Brooklyn, however, Norton is never really able to integrate the two, leading to a kind of identity crisis, with the film unable to find a comfortable middle ground - in trying to be both a noir mystery and a societal commentary, it ends up as neither. Another issue is that because the novel features 50s values displaced into the last years of the century, the endemic racism is deeply disturbing - society today is more enlightened about such things, but here's a novel in which characters are acting like it's 40 years prior despite being set in a modern milieu. This is a vital part of Lethem's postmodernist deconstruction of power structures. However, with the film set in the actual 1950s, the racism just comes across as period-appropriate window dressing, losing virtually all of its thematic potency.
An old-fashioned detective story with a lot on its mind, Norton's passion for the material is self-evident. However, that passion hasn't translated into an especially good film. Void of almost any tension, although it looks great, Motherless Brooklyn fails to unify its genre elements and its political preoccupations, resulting in a film unsure of its own identity and unable to make us care about much of what it depicts.
119 out of 190 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Entertaining and Relevant
Motherless Brooklyn (opens Friday Nov 1) My friend won advance screening tickets tonight for Motherless Brooklyn, which turned out to be a rather deluxe affair with wine and food served beforehand in the "VIP" cinema area of a cinema in Vancouver, Canada.
We needn't have worried that all these emoluments were buttering us up for a bad movie-it's a really good one and likely to get Oscar nominations for Edward Norton, who not only stars as Lionel but also directs and co-wrote the screen adaptation from a novel. When I was grasping for the real world connection I thought I saw in this feature drama, my husband prompted me the sociopathic mogul, Moses Randolph, depicted by Alec Baldwin in the film is only a thinly papered over Robert Moses. That smasher of neighbourhoods in the name of grand schemes had a leading role in the 2016 documentary Citizen Jane: Battle for the City, about Jane Jacobs and her fight for the soul of New York City. (That soul, I'm hearing, has suffered some blows of late.)
This 1950s period film has an instant classic feel to it. It has enough Hollywood dynamics and star power in it to pull in a larger audience but there's some very nice cinematography and lots of social relevance, both in the good old USA and in satellite nations like good old Canada, where I live, with regard to present-day politics and power-wielding at various levels by wealthy people. This is particularly the case when it comes to who runs city hall and gets to force out large numbers of people from the communities where they belong.
The city where I live has an ongoing struggle for which Motherless Brooklyn has relevant things to say. Even as I travelled to the cinema in question, I was distracted by the ugliness of the rapid-transit corridor it sits on which has been heavily redeveloped since the line went in for the 2010 Winter Olympics. The construction cranes are still plentiful, the featureless higher density buildings lining the route have an oppressive, mountain-view blocking dominance. Robert Moses/Moses Randolph or whoever wears their snappy shoes would love it.
Almost the only thing I was indifferent to in the film was the "brain thing" affliction of Norton's character, which seemed like some kind of cross between Tourette Syndrome, Obsessive Compulsive Disorder, and a revisiting of Dustin Hoffman's Rainman character, at times. The syndrome had relevance to the story, though, and there were some nicer moments in how it was depicted.
In addition to Ed Norton's strong performance and Willem Defoe's decent contribution, I enjoyed seeing Michael Kenneth Williams as a mellow jazz musician (I always think of him as Omar in The Wire.) Alec Baldwin was convincingly evil, though I think some real life power mongers prettify their harsh decisions, to themselves and others.
58 out of 87 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Excellent, classy film noir-ish thriller
New York, 1950s. When his boss is murdered by the people who hired him, private investigator Lionel Essrog sets out to find out who the killers are. His investigations uncover a thick tangled web leading all the way to the most powerful man in New York.
Written by, directed by and starring Edward Norton, Motherless Brooklyn is a superb throw-back to the film noir classics of the '40s and '50s. It also reminded me strongly of Roman Polanski's Chinatown, a '70s film noir classic, in many respects.
Very intriguing and engaging with a plot that is wonderful in its complexity yet not gratuitousnessly and unnecessarily complex. The unpicking of the plot makes for a very compelling journey, so enthralling that you hardly realise the film is nearly 2½ hours long!
Solid performance by Edward Norton in the lead role with good support from Gugu Mbatha-Raw, Bruce Willis and Willem Dafoe. Alec Baldwin shines in the sort of role that has become his strong suit - the all-powerful mogul. Think Jack Donaghy but in the 1950s.
Brilliant.
9 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Overlong- Give This A Miss!
Motherless Brooklyn
There were several distinct problems with this movie and many good things.
What was good
Edward Norton gave a strong and faultless acting performance as did the rest of the cast.
The atmosphere of 50's New York and musical score was immensely evocative and comprehensively realised.
What was problematic
The narrative drive ran out of steam as so much of the labyrinthine plot had similar repetitive scenes, it was unvarying.
Overly long led to viewer exhaustion, of the 50 people in my viewing 20 had walked out by the 80 minute marker.
The subject matter of municipal corruption, sibling jealousy and Tourette's syndrome was hardly designed to get the juices flowing.
Ultimately it was overlong and repetitive it could have been so much better with some editing and some more action.
69 out of 132 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Magical experience
One of the best films of the year! A comforting thrill ride with very well written dialogue, ambient soundtrack, and beautiful cinematography! I have been fan of Edward Norton for a long time and for good reason he's incredible in every scene. This is one of the best performances of Alec Baldwin and Willem Defoe. I respect people with Tourette syndrome being that I have ASD So I feel I relate to some extent. Last thing is I really hope Motherless Brooklyn gets nominated or better win something.
21 out of 39 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
I enjoyed it and recommend it
#MotherlessBrooklyn has the authenticity of a period piece like Road to Perdition combined with the corruption & intrigue of The Departed. Writer/director/actor Edward Norton paid homage to the classics in this movie. Featuring an All-Star cast, there was no way he could lose with the characters' performances. I think that is the one drawback of the film, with such a stellar cast he had to give everyone time and the movie boasts a runtime of 2:24 minutes. A bit lengthy for a crime drama/who done it because there will be slower portions of the film. However, it was never boring and the dialogue is spot-on with the snappiness of Sin City but it doesn't come across as a caricature. A very entertaining film and please don't be emo like me and cry after the opening scene.
59 out of 88 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
An Extremely Tedious Passion Project
Motherless Brooklyn is the long awaited passion project from writer/director/star Edward Norton that tells the story of a NYC Private Investigator who with Tourette's who tries to solve the murder of his mentor. It is based off of the 1999 novel of the same name and after 20 years in development has finally made it to the big screen.
Right off the bat Motherless Brooklyn boasts an incredible cast of A list actors including Bruce Willis, Willem Dafoe and Gugu Mbatha-Raw who all do a terrific job as well as our lead played by Edward Norton himself who manages to pull of this role of a man dealing with Tourette's flawlessly. If this was 1999 I could see him winning for best actor for sure.
The movie is also wonderfully detailed. Norton manages to bring the 1950s to vibrant light through the costumes and the cars and the looks. The cinematography is also fantastic. It's a beautiful looking film managing to capture the 1950s perfectly on screen. However for me this is where most of the positives end.
Motherless Brooklyn has problem with flat uninteresting characters and dialogue as well as a pace that moves incredibly slow you at times feel like your watching a 3 hours movie rather than a 2 hour 20 minute film. The films runtime and pacing completely destroy any excitement that could be found in the film.
However, with some genuinely good acting beautiful cinematography and a committed performance from Edward Norton Motherless Brooklyn ends up being a very disappointing film with some good components throughout the rest of the mess.
82 out of 138 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
CHINATOWN=L.A. WATER...NYC=HARLEM LAND...ED NORTON=BIG IDEAS UNLEASHED
One has to Wonder whether Star-Writer-Producer-Director Edward Norton Wondered if it would All End Up this Gigantic when He first Idealized this Behemoth.
The Film is Nothing if Not Grandiose in its Vision...
A Reworking of a "Chinatown" (1974) Story
A Neo-Noir Set in a Noir Era
A Slick and Glossy Patina of Stylish Icons
A Complex Story Unraveling by way of a Tourette Syndrome Gumshoe
and the Beat Goes On for Two and a Half Hours.
Not to say that it is Failure of Fulfillment for the Viewer.
It is Filled with Watchable Admirable Images of a Time when the Dodgers were in Brooklyn (at least for the short term), and NYC was Bursting at the Seams and in Need of Land, Land, Land.
Norton Succeeds in most of what He Aspires in a Daunting Task, Wearing so Many Hats it is a Wonder the Movie is as Good as it is.
But Greatness Eludes the Film-Maker.
It Collapses Under its Own Weight with so Much Going On, and so Many Characters that in The End the Denouement is a Diluted Disappointment.
Getting There is a Tad Confusing and at times a Tad Understated, leaving the Audience a Tad Bewildered by it all and the Wrap-Up Unremarkable.
But the Hubris of Norton's Unbridled Dream is Worth a Watch.
5 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Just One Problem
I found this film satisfying overall, but one anachronism distracted me and pulled me out of the 1950s setting. Lionel's symptoms of Tourette's syndrome, repetitive verbalizations of a rhyming nature, were accepted equanimously by everyone he encountered. No one displayed annoyance, made fun of him, or called him insulting names to cast aspersions about his intelligence. His repetitive touching of people on the shoulder as he faced them ought to have caused women to back away and men to knock his block off. They did neither. It was as if these 1950s characters had been taught the acceptance of people with disabilities that was not really commonplace until the 21st century. This is the biggest mystery in the movie.
283 out of 413 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Really gripping
Really good story fantastic performance by bruce Willis and the rest of the cast it's a must watch
51 out of 96 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Totally Underrated
I think this movie is an underrated movie. I watched this movie with my friend at the cinema. He also liked this movie very much. It's like you're reading a book. Acting performances were also good.
5 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Boroughtown
Employing at least half a dozen incidentals and characters from Chinatown (1973) Ed Norton saddled with a case of Tourettes channels Jack Nicholson's Jake Gittes in this overlong detective that supposedly takes place in the late 50s while borrowing liberally from other periods. Wearing many hats both literally and figuratively the auteur/director draws a split decision with his excellent choice in hats.
Sam Spade's partner is whacked by triggermen who may be in the employ of legendary NY planning commissioner Robert Moses (Alec Baldwin) who is destroying black neighborhoods when Miles Davis (Michael Williams) comes to the rescue, kind of; the players are all very reasonable facsimiles. It makes for the film's greatest mystery, how do they pull it off without being sued?
Norton's direction is sluggish as the film plods along with overlong scenes at a club and a pace killing heart to heart with the female lead. He even seems to sabotage his suspenseful moments by being repetitive in situations while his vintage autos convey an artificial look with their with showroom glow still in tact as they tool around Queens and Brooklyn. A smarmy, obnoxious music score does not help matters.
Norton's tic is like a scratch on an album you're expecting after a few listens as he overloads scenes with introspective close-ups of himself, the film's meter running into overtime. Baldwin as the bellicose Moses blowing smoke through his nose is all flat bluster. Wilhelm DaFoe playing his brother is a hammy crank while the rest of the cast looks dull, acts depressed. Motherless Brooklyn is a moody mess.
42 out of 89 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Source: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0385887/reviews
0 Response to "Motherless Sex With Women Wearing Their Dresses Videos"
Post a Comment