I remember hearing this review at the time and laughing then a few years later stumbling across this film on tv one night and it’s even worse than I could of imagined
Shared by the Kermode & Mayo's Film Reviews Facebook page today--pretty cool. I had a lot of fun posting all my favorite rants back in the day. Pretty sure this was the first one I uploaded.
Guessing you don’t have ‘sex lives of the potato men’ hanging about anywhere still, I keep hearing about it but it’s not on youtube or the web in general as far as I can work out.
Sadly, no. I e-mailed the BBC about it several years ago and they said they didn't have any podcasts archived before May 2005. I've scoured the internet and found a lot of Kermode deep cuts from his days with Mark Radcliffe but still no Sex Lives of the Potato Men. It's the Holy Grail of Kermode rants, heh.
Another reference to that horrific monstrosity that is "Sex Lives of the Potato Men"... I would LOVE to hear Mark Kermode's review of that film. I've been searching for it for months but only ever found written quotes from it.
I saw this at the cinema in Finsbury Park/Holloway. The film suddenly stopped and everyone thought there was a problem with the projector - but that was the end of the film.
"If I was a GP and someone came into my office and pitched Revolver, I would reach for the medicine cabinet, I would prescribe electroshock therapy, leeches, get men in white coats, take their shoes away..." LOL
I'm loving Kermode. Though I differ with him on many movies, his Tarantino critiques & Ritchie hatred mirror my own - the only difference would be I hated the Holmes movies. This is hysterical!
@Svelter I'm with you. Kermode admitted in another review that he liked elements of Lock Stock, particularly after the Americans branded it as a comedy. As far as mindless entertainment, Lock Stock, Sherlock Holmes and even Snatch are good fun. It's when he took himself seriously as an auteur that things went south.
"We will bleed you dry ,You will give us every penny you have got. Its only natural that you somehow thing you are being conned." *Somehow being conned!!!* I think the fact that you straight up told Jason to give you all his money was a bit of a give away.
To be honest, I like Lock Stock as well, and in my mind, Ritchie has yet to make something that good again. Snatch was an incoherent mess, Swept Away while still enjoyable was very campy & while the Sherlock Holmes films were good, they were just good mainstream films. I hope his next film. The Man from UNCLE may be that good, but I doubt it.
Andrew Tregoning True. I thought that Snatch was incoherent. It tried to juggle too many plots, and because of it, it becomes really incoherent. If people are calling Ricthie a Tarintino knock-off, and that Lock Stock was his Reservoir Dogs, Snatch is definitely not his Pulp Fiction, but rather his Four Rooms.
I remember reading a preview of this film in a magazine (probably Empire) describing the complex themes of this film and it said "He's read a few books that Guy Ritchie" Yeah, and it seems like he didn't understand any of them! Guy Ritchie has always struck me as being a bit thick.
I still remember Guy Ritchie said that the only people who would like Revolver are super intelligent. I thought it was an arongant statement and killing your audience. There was nothing clever about this film.
He's a critic! He has to watch films he might not particularly like. Also, 'critic' implies negativity but he praises films, directors and actors very regularly.
Critic, is short for engaging critically, meaning not blindly thinking everything is great/poor, though thinking about how personally relate to and understand. Critic does not imply negative, this is a common misconception.
He's always been a ratchet Tarantino, but part of me wants to watch this movie just for the commentary. Which I hear is DREADFUL. But 7(?) years on I still can't bring myself to part with my money.
+cx1735 Search for Adam and Joe Revolver so you can hear little bits of it. It's hysterical. Ritchie genuinely seems to believe that he's the first person to come up with the notion that chess is analogous to life.
Believe it or not, I actually think he's pretty good in Revolver. The one redeeming feature. And he's also good in a movie called London. He just needs to step out of his comfort zone every once in a while.
@Svelter I'll take your word for it. I haven't seen it in years. And I agree on Snatch, but I still enjoy it as disposable entertainment. Plus, I absolutely love Brad Pitt as a mumbling Irish gypsy.
This film is a masterpiece. It is Truth staring back at you. Look in the mirror, face your demons and stop caring what other people think of you. It's not about cheap thrills and funny jokes it's a letter from the Director telling you to WAKE UP! "If we knew this we wouldn't be doing it" After watching it for the first time literally today I'm surprised to find out it isn't well received. I personally think it's up there with the Matrix Trilogy as one of the most thought provoking films of all time and if people can't get the topics it touches on then they just aren't ready to contemplate life and are more interested in films that offer an escape from reality opposed to a film that chooses instead to confront it.
I enjoyed this movie very much. It is not top-shelf drama by any means, and the central idea of the film is overcooked, but the actors are charismatic and engaging, the cinematography and editing are wonderful, and the movie is just plain fun, not a boring scene in it. I never saw Swept Away. I mean, why would I, it had fucking Madonna on a deserted island, anyone who saw that deserved what they got. You were supposed to know better than to watch that movie in the first place. But Lock, Stock and Snatch are classic, and Revolver is a pretty good effort, and worth seeing if you like Guy Ritchie movies.
@ 5:04-5:15 is why, regardless of how much I dislike Guy Ritchie or his appalling movies, I will always have more respect for the person who risks something by creating a film(or a song or a book or a game or whatever) than for the critic who risks very little, sometimes nothing at all, by giving their opinion on it. I quite like Kermode - he's entertaining in a frantic sort of way, and...prolific, I suppose(I can always find a YT Kermode review of any film - which is cool) - but that quote perfectly, and unintentionally, crystallises the difference in terms of honesty, guts, risk, etc. between artists(or Guy Ritchie) and their critics.
guy Ritchie has lots of money though so it's not much of a risk and if he made a good film Mark would endorse it like he did with sherlock homes. I do understand what you mean about the critic not having made a film themselves however anyone could probably do better job at making revolver.
kermode is an artist in his own right ... his review are elevated to artistic status, plus which hes a prolific musician and writer, hes a cultural entity with contemporary validity and relevance
When I first started watching "Revolver" it was the philosophical stuff that I really liked about it because it did feel different and clever. I felt like I was watching a new take on things which is always kind of exciting. Now I feel like an asshole. Thanks for that.
How can you not like Lock, Stock & 2 Smoking Barrels or even more Snatch? One of the best comedies of at least a generation? I actually liked Revolver, and still do, but now I question Me Kermode's taste and what seems a huge ego.
I feel like he's trying to defend it artistically at first, by saying that you shouldn't look at it as a typical Guy Ritchie movie. But then almost everything he says from then on contradicts that.
@marasmusine I agree with you! Mark Strong was amazing in this turd of a movie. Those glasses! The sinister quiet! It was the first movie I've seen him in, and I was really impressed. The rest of the movie was stunningly bad. When Ray Liotta snapped up in bed and PULLED ON A HAIRNET, I lost all respect. And THE NERVE of Ritchie, to get philosophers on at the end to try to legitimize that rubbish. Ick.
I thought it was campy but really quite enjoyable and different. Mark Strong was fantastic. I think a big part of how you like it depends on which cut you see- I can't remember how many different cuts there are, but I saw the one with the 'pool' ending. The other versions are shit and about 20 minutes shorter.
NP! If you've ever experienced depression, anxiety, or any other mental suffering, there's a greater chance you'll be able to appreciate the underlying message.
@Ballowall Theres a difference between being clever and making a movie that goes back and forward to past and present events that all tie in at the end
I just saw it (the cut version on the Region-1 DVD) and found it quite enjoyable. Sure it's pretentious and leaves a bunch of plot strands and characters loose and hanging, but it's twisty, well performed, and beautifully shot. Mark Strong is in it and he steals the movie whenever he appears. His character, a soft-walking hit man, is good enough to lead one movie. Mark Kermode, an intelligent middle-brow critic, tends to hate a lot of stuff for very small-minded reasons.
I actually love this film and think it's, as of yet, an unrecognised masterpiece. Yes it has flaws but the theme is fascinating, the problem is most people get too caught up in the "former" to dig deep enough to get to the "latter".
Heres proof that people have no idea what constitutes fimmaking anymore. No one understands anymore that films tell stories. The caller liked it bacause he thought that the visuals were a bit clever.
The film was painful. I didn't think I was going to be able to finish it, but watched it over 2 days. Terrible, bad acting, poor construction....seemed like a 16yr old film student thinking he was clever but not realizing his own worst enemy was his stupidity. I'm surprised this got any funding, surprised Liotta would be in such low quality nonsense...and it seemed like they could only afford one American, couldn't afford special effects and make up so filmed it all in a garage in Soho, mixed with cartoons and mirrors!