Before the Devil Knows You're Dead (Lumet, 2007)

[X.]

Before the Devil Knows You're Dead
(Sidney Lumet, 2007)

I was beginning to suspect it, but now I know for sure: 2007 is the best year for cinema since 1999.

And how can I say this with certainty? Because after "Assassination of Jesse James," after "I'm Not There," and several other great films of recent months, I just saw what could be the very best film of 2007: the underrated maverick of American cinema, Sidney Lumet's "Before the Devil Knows You're Dead."

An absolutely astonishing piece of filmmaking and tour-de-force of acting, this is not only Lumet's best film in two decades, but also and the coldest, meanest, bleakest crime thriller you'll see this year. A great character-piece and a first-rate narrative.

I don't want to talk about the story, or the circumstances that lead our characters into a vortex of crime, murder and chaos. But I will say that the film is about the selfishness of people -- children and parents, husbands and wives, brothers and sisters -- and how a single incident can strip away the perfect veneer of adult normalcy. Vanity and guilt are other themes the film skilfully explores, without ever resorting to melodrama.

And if that doesn't do it for you, this will: "Before the Devil Knows You're Dead" is brave and honest about sexuality: it opens with Marisa Tomei getting pounded in the ass non-stop, for thirty seconds. (Not that I need to justify such a beautiful sight, but there's a very precise reason why Lumet chose such a graphic opening scene. Let's talk about it when you've seen this masterpiece.)

[madali]

maybe its time for a best of 2007 list?

[X.]

Yes, I've been using the available time to catch up on my watch-list: have "Hot Fuzz" to see. Besides, I think I'll wait till second week of January, when I'm back in the US, and finally see PT Andersen's "There Will Be Blood."

[kaytee]

I wrote a whole page on how I loved this movie and how this movie shows Lumet is an ace director but I lost everything due to a bad connection. Im not going to write the whole thing again but I have to say that this movie is special.

Lumet's energy and passion for movies transcends on this movie. Philip Seymour Hoffman proves he is one of the best character actors out there. The scene with him and Hawke at the restaurant after the robbery goes wrong is brilliant. Hawke is great as usual, Tomei is a firecracker though she only gets one seen to show her acting chops but she is very able in the nude scenes. Albert Finney is his usual mumbling self. But the cake goes to Sidney Lumet for the style of narration, for showing every scene from a different person perpective and a different angle. Great style of story telling. The movie is about greed making people takie certain choices and how relations are spoiled or made when that greed goes bad. I loved the Husband-Wife relation, it was handled with great maturity from both actors and it didnt involve cursing or screaming at each other. Brilliant stuff.

Loved the movie. Another fine addition to Lumet's great movies.

[madali]

I guess, I'll have to watch this soon as AK & KT have both said goodt hings about it

[kaytee]

Its not your cuppa tea. You will give it a 2.5/5

[ozzylogic]

The last paragraph from AK's review will be my incentive to watch it, lol.

[madali]

Before the Devil Knows You're Dead (Lumet, 2007)
IMDB Link

“The world is an evil place, Charlie. Some of us make money out of that. Others get destroyed.”

A reasonably well-made movie that I could not enjoy at all because it was so utterly cold and lifeless. Andy (Philip Seymour Hoffman) and Hank (Ethan Hawke) are white, middle classed brothers plan on robbing a small jewelry shop, and in what seems to be a perfect, nothing-can-go wrong plan, which if you have seen more than one such movie in your life, know that is exactly the opposite. Things go from bad to worse to fucking insane goddamn shit.

Heard a few good things about this movie, but I can’t see why. The story itself is sort of done to death, but I guess I can admire that director Sidney Lumet has taken a closer approach to it. The focus here is not the robbery or what leads to the robbery, but how their own deed affects them and the people they care about.

Fine, brilliant idea, but as I mentioned, in this cold and lifeless movie, I could not give a fuck. First, let me get this out of the movie. I do not like Philip Seymour Hoffman. Your average layman moviegoer does not know or care about this guy, but he is somehow like some kind of hidden gem among younger, more knowledgably movie buffs. For a while, sort of got pulled in the fandom myself, but his recent bigger roles just proves to me that PSH is only good in small roles. Give him something serious and big, and he overacts to death. His two emotions, anger or sadness, seems to be about how red and sweaty he can make himself. Plus, for some reason, I kind of want to punch his puffy face whenever I see him.

Ethan Hawke is a bit better, but he does not impress me here. He is supposed to be this weak baby brother, that can’t stand up to anyone, and I am not entirely sure if I should blame Hawke, PSH, or the script, but I could not buy it. I was getting annoyed by how he allowed PSH to push him around, but mainly annoyed, because it did not seem to be working for me. In some movies when a weak character is bullied by a stronger (personality wise or physically), you find feel sad for the weak character, but you can emphasize. Here, I could not.

2/5

[madali]

Man, I cant believe how KT knew what I would feel about this movie. Posters in this forum are starting to really get to know each other.

[X.]

From your review it seems to me that your issues are more with the acting than the film itself. And about it being "cold and lifeless"...this is a neo-noir.

I liked how the film played on some of the subtleties to build characters and their relationships to each other, to make its point -- (Spoiler warning!) like Marisa Tomei's character is fucked in the ass at the beginning; her husband treats her like a trophy wife, like an object he possesses to maintain his social appearance; when she leaves him, he even gives her money for the cab, alluding to her being akin to a whore.

Then there are brilliant compositional elements such as the scene where Phillip Seymour Hoffman and Tomei argue in the car: and the camera pans from one to person to the next, never showing both of them in the same frame. They are living in separate worlds, and cannot exist in the same plane. I could on and on about how Lumet uses simplicity as a spring to build the tone and characterization. Besides, I thought the acting (all around) was absolutely riveting.

[madali]

Were you not annoyed by the back & forth? The story could very easily have been told in a linear fashion.

[X.]

Were you not annoyed by the back & forth? The story could very easily have been told in a linear fashion.

I wasn't! Infact, I quite enjoyed the jostling point-of-views. Besides, this way Lumet was able to tell -- what really is -- a simple, straightforward story in a much more interesting way.

Besides the narrative form, I also love this film for its technical accomplishment. The film was shot in HD, using the new Panavision Genesis camera -- it looked very film-like.

[madali]

How about how utterly unlikable everyone was? What fucking white scum!

[X.]

How about how utterly unlikable everyone was? What fucking white scum!

Ha ha, at its deepest core, that's what the film is about: how selfish this people are!

It was also interesting to note how Lumet depicts law and order as totally ineffective systems. That last scene is a direct attack on the absence and uselessness of the police.

[shariqq]

I would like to emphasize:

First, let me get this out of the movie. I do not like Philip Seymour Hoffman.

I will be watching this for Sydney Lumet but it drops on my "To-Be-Watched" list.