I felt rage. I mean this is a great script. It has all; action, comedy, a buddy-case where everyone affects the other's life finely. So why it was made in low production with no stars?!
In fact, this question is real hunting. When I run into good movies, like this one, I always ask the same question; why it wasn't made as Hollywood? But nevertheless, let me answer with refutation. For one reason, not all the movies have to be Hollywood. And for another, the makers of it had done a nice job. So why is the complaining from the start?
Maybe because we all were raised by Hollywood movies, with dazzling stars. But even according to that or not, while (David Paymer) did extremely good (look at the way he runs; so idiotic!), (Casper Van Dien) was lower than him. Aside from having little charisma, that guy just doesn't know how to be a persuasive action hero, or even a distinct actor. But some chemistry clicked between him and (Paymer), mainly due to that script before the physical differences. It made humans out of what Hollywood used to deal with as moving dummies!
There is a sharp dialogue all along; I liked the most the one of: "They robbed you, you robbed them, then I robbed you!". The last cadre with the whole town in depth actually meant something this time; where it is a criminal town in which you have to be slightly criminal yourself to be able to just live. According to it, honesty became a joke, and betrayal was the serious life. As you see, it's an entertaining movie with meaning as well.
It kept a hot pace all along since everything you don't expect hits you right on. The side characters worked too. The directing managed to be somewhat above average at points. Even the theme song "Headed to The Crying Town" served the movie's both funny and serious character well. I just didn't like some violence at the end, and the moment of "You want to be me" which was too philosophical to be said by that street hustler who we watched, as if the writer borrowed his character's voice, to declare frankly some of his own thoughts, concerning the movie's basic core about the necessities of the worried unadventurous inexperienced middle-class man in the world of today.
Take it from me, a buddy-movies' maniac, (Partners) ranks among the best buddy movies for its year, whether the action ones (Shanghai Noon), the cartoon comedies (The Road to El Dorado, and The Emperor's New Groove), the live action comedies (The Kid, and Dude, Where's My Car), or even the dramatic ones (Finding Forrester).
There isn't a small movie and big one. Only good and bad. This one could have been better with more quality elements. Hollywood has to not lose it again. So I just still hope for a remake with (Paul Giamatti) and (Brad Pitt). The thing is while I don't need to see (Paymer) doing it again, I didn't want (Casper Van Dien) to do it in the first place!
At any case, it's official; Hollywood permitted TV to win this time.
In fact, this question is real hunting. When I run into good movies, like this one, I always ask the same question; why it wasn't made as Hollywood? But nevertheless, let me answer with refutation. For one reason, not all the movies have to be Hollywood. And for another, the makers of it had done a nice job. So why is the complaining from the start?
Maybe because we all were raised by Hollywood movies, with dazzling stars. But even according to that or not, while (David Paymer) did extremely good (look at the way he runs; so idiotic!), (Casper Van Dien) was lower than him. Aside from having little charisma, that guy just doesn't know how to be a persuasive action hero, or even a distinct actor. But some chemistry clicked between him and (Paymer), mainly due to that script before the physical differences. It made humans out of what Hollywood used to deal with as moving dummies!
There is a sharp dialogue all along; I liked the most the one of: "They robbed you, you robbed them, then I robbed you!". The last cadre with the whole town in depth actually meant something this time; where it is a criminal town in which you have to be slightly criminal yourself to be able to just live. According to it, honesty became a joke, and betrayal was the serious life. As you see, it's an entertaining movie with meaning as well.
It kept a hot pace all along since everything you don't expect hits you right on. The side characters worked too. The directing managed to be somewhat above average at points. Even the theme song "Headed to The Crying Town" served the movie's both funny and serious character well. I just didn't like some violence at the end, and the moment of "You want to be me" which was too philosophical to be said by that street hustler who we watched, as if the writer borrowed his character's voice, to declare frankly some of his own thoughts, concerning the movie's basic core about the necessities of the worried unadventurous inexperienced middle-class man in the world of today.
Take it from me, a buddy-movies' maniac, (Partners) ranks among the best buddy movies for its year, whether the action ones (Shanghai Noon), the cartoon comedies (The Road to El Dorado, and The Emperor's New Groove), the live action comedies (The Kid, and Dude, Where's My Car), or even the dramatic ones (Finding Forrester).
There isn't a small movie and big one. Only good and bad. This one could have been better with more quality elements. Hollywood has to not lose it again. So I just still hope for a remake with (Paul Giamatti) and (Brad Pitt). The thing is while I don't need to see (Paymer) doing it again, I didn't want (Casper Van Dien) to do it in the first place!
At any case, it's official; Hollywood permitted TV to win this time.