Post by: Dragonfire on August 01, 2010, 10:09:06 AM
Evelyn Salt is an agent with the CIA who is planning her anniversary with her husband Mike. Just as she is leaving for the day, someone claiming to be a Russian defector - Orlov - shows up claiming to have information. Evelyn ends up talking to him and he talks about someone being a spy for the Russians. Evelyn becomes the prime suspect after Orlov gives her name. Worried about her husband, she decides to run to clear her name and find Mike.
My Thoughts
I enjoyed this movie overall, though it is a bit different than I expected. It is good and entertaining, though not as good as Inception. The plot is fairly simple, though there is an attempt to make it more complicated. A few things happen that are probably intended to be surprising that really aren't. The movie isn't completely predictable, though I did figure out something fairly early. There is a little bit of mystery and suspense to what is going on.
The action scenes are what really stand out in the movie. It seems clear that more attention has been given to that instead of more fully developing the story or characters. The action scenes are impressive overall, though not that believable. Salt bounces off the top of trucks and is in other accidents and can walk away without any injuries. That is stretching things a bit. Also, that highly annoying shaky camera work is used in many of the action scenes, especially any that involve fights. I really hate that.
Evelyn is a somewhat interesting character, though she would have been a stronger character if she was developed more. Angelina Jolie does well with the part. Ted Winter works with Evelyn in the CIA and he is involved in looking for her once she goes on the run. Liev Schreiber does really well with the part. Orlov is only in a few scenes, but it is clear that he isn't a nice guy. Peabody works for another government agency that has some kind of control over looking for a suspected spy. I can't remember who he said he worked for now. Chiwetel Ejiofor does well with the part.
This movie works as a decent action movie that has a bit of mystery and suspense to it. It is entertaining and fans of the cast may find something to like. It does remind me a bit of the Bourne movies in some ways.
I did post a review at Epinions if anyone is interested in take a look.
Salt (http://www0.epinions.com/review/Salt_98530075/content_519619841668)
Post by: Critter on August 02, 2010, 05:38:24 AM
Post by: Dragonfire on August 02, 2010, 05:42:07 AM
Post by: Jimmy on August 02, 2010, 06:05:04 AM
I don't have exceptionally high hopes, but I still want to see it nonetheless.Don't take it bad Sophie, but what's the point of spending a lot of money to watch a film you think it won't be good? It's kind of like saying to the studio : I know your movies are bad but I don't care, continue to not improved them since you will have my money anyway :shrug:
Don't tell me that nothing interested you actually in your theater and is more worthy to get your money...
This isn't a comment on the movie itself since I haven't watch it, but I know this genre of movie aren't my cup of tea.
Post by: Critter on August 02, 2010, 06:49:05 AM
I don't have exceptionally high hopes, but I still want to see it nonetheless.Don't take it bad Sophie, but what's the point of spending a lot of money to watch a film you think it won't be good? It's kind of like saying to the studio : I know your movies are bad but I don't care, continue to not improved them since you will have my money anyway :shrug:
Don't tell me that nothing interested you actually in your theater and is more worthy to get your money...
This isn't a comment on the movie itself since I haven't watch it, but I know this genre of movie aren't my cup of tea.
I'm more the type to see every movie before I judge it. There have been times when I was really looking forward to a particular film, only to be quite dissapointed and let down with it. And other times when I haven't had high hopes at all for a film and been blown away by it. I came to the conclusion that I really can't know whether I will like a film or not based on marketing, so I try and see as many films in the cinema as I can, whether I was dying to see it or not. With obvious exceptions of course, like horror films.
Post by: goodguy on August 02, 2010, 06:58:29 AM
Don't take it bad Sophie, but what's the point of spending a lot of money to watch a film you think it won't be good?
Well "good" is relative. Something like Salt isn't my usual cup of tea, but occasionally I'm in the mood for an action flick and this one seems to have that certain something that makes it enjoyable without pretending to be something else - an "intellectual" blockbuster, for example.
Post by: Najemikon on August 02, 2010, 07:13:06 PM
Anyway, I saw the trailer for Salt and it seemed like a similar idea.
Post by: Dragonfire on August 02, 2010, 11:44:06 PM
Post by: Najemikon on May 15, 2011, 04:59:57 PM
Post by: goodguy on May 15, 2011, 05:13:07 PM
Post by: Najemikon on May 15, 2011, 05:13:55 PM
Post by: samuelrichardscott on May 15, 2011, 05:16:52 PM
Post by: Alien Redrum on May 15, 2011, 05:59:26 PM
Post by: Rogmeister on May 15, 2011, 08:15:45 PM
Post by: Dragonfire on May 15, 2011, 09:35:57 PM
Well, Marie, I'm blaming you for something at last. You got me a bit more interested in Salt, enough to finally watch it. :voodoo: It is awful! I'm really surprised you found such good things to say about it. I wonder if Matthias has seen it yet? He often feels let down by my recommendations and it would be funny if he liked this one! :D
:laugh:
Well I suppose I deserve it after all the purchases I've blamed on you..and will blame on you in the future. ;)
It does have problems, but I thought it was entertaining overall.
Post by: goodguy on September 20, 2011, 06:01:28 PM
http://blogs.suntimes.com/scanners/2011/09/in_the_cut_part_ii_a_dash_of_s.html (http://blogs.suntimes.com/scanners/2011/09/in_the_cut_part_ii_a_dash_of_s.html)
Post by: Achim on September 20, 2011, 08:17:22 PM
Points very well made. Although, he says himself that it doesn't make Dark Knight a bad film, it sure shows that the action sequence is a bt of a mess. I think I have seen it three times so far and have noticed any if it :headscratch:
I look forward to watching part 3 (http://blogs.suntimes.com/scanners/2011/09/in_the_cut_part_iii_bullitt_th.html) later.
Post by: Najemikon on September 20, 2011, 10:52:39 PM
Nolan understands rhythm better than any other action director working in the mainstream today. The fluidity between scenes is superb in the Batman films and Inception. I don't like Salt, as you know, but I love Noyce's work in general, which is why I was so disappointed with Salt. He directed it like he was merely hired. It is a perfect action scene that he highlights. Too perfect, dispassionate and cold, contrived like a video game. And in any case it's in the middle of a very poor story. For the man who gave us Clear and Present Danger, this was unforgivable in my eyes. Perhaps I'm being picky? Shit, after seeing this jerks video, I don't even know what picky is any more!
I love how Emerson quotes Scorcese! Scorcese's work is littered with little "mistakes" because the rhythm of the whole is more important than the parts; he's got a great grounding in Italian Realism cinema where they felt it was important to not hide the cuts and even leave in accidents. If Mr Emerson analysed, say, Mamma Roma to this level his head would burst when he realised just how many of his precious rules had been broken. Like Nolan, I love Scorcese's work for how he sustains a heartbeat in the films.
I got annoyed when Emerson was trying to prove the image of Harvey Dent breaks the Reverse Angle rule and I turned it off as soon as he said that the Joker's brief, random appearance "achieves nothing". There are possible reasons for both of these choices, but he's so far up his own arse, he can't consider the possibility that Nolan and Lee Smith knew what they were doing.
Hell, maybe they didn't and actually did get lazy, while Noyce's clinical approach is perfect-o, A1 film-making 101! I don't know. But I do know I noticed a similar problem with that Dark Knight sequence and my first thought was, "what if...". His was, "I shall prove I'm right and Nolan's wrong". Interesting. Very interesting. Starts to explain why I've always been rather uncomfortable with Ebert's brash style of criticism.
Post by: Achim on September 21, 2011, 12:58:55 PM
Jon, you are taking this too literal. He is not saying that The Dark Knight is a bad film for this and Salt is better, quite the contrary. He is merely pointing out that some of Nolan's action lacks clarity which Noyce's shows in almost every shot. At one point he literally says, that the video is not about debunking The Dark Knight, which he seems to think is actually a great film, but to make people understand why some reviewers said Nolan's action was messy.
Post by: Najemikon on September 21, 2011, 10:03:31 PM
If you're going to so precisely over analyse one sequence from a film, with the intention of proving it's bad, then you'd better be damn sure of your position because you already look petty. To then go on and claim to like it, despite its faults that you just spent 20 minutes de-constructing? Wow. Really? No excuses. He's out of order.
What am I supposed to do? Bow to his superior intellect and admit how wrong I was and then thank him for being so gracious that he accepts it's enjoyable? If I could snort on the Internet, I would, so please assume I just did!
I probably feel about The Matrix the way he does about Dark Knight. I really like it, but I don't think it's even half as good as what most people seem to think it is, but beyond broad observations and encouraging people to watch Ghost In The Shell and spare a thought for Blade which pre-dated it, I keep quiet because I do like the film and don't even want to prove to myself why I have reservations. Here's the rub: I might be wrong about The Matrix, so those who genuinely enjoy it and can talk about it, have more of a right than I do to analyse it.
I enjoy listening to someone who is passionate about a film that I don't actually like so much or even understand (Jimmy could probably convince me to try Last House On The Left again because he is confident about why he likes it). It's far more enriching than listening to someone trying to prove a film you like isn't as good as you thought. Especially when they claim to like it as well! That's just odd.
By the way, I should say that although this guy has genuinely pissed me off, I don't blame Matthias for posting it. At least he's honest about not liking Nolan's work.
Post by: Achim on September 22, 2011, 12:45:37 AM
He did it to look clever.
Quote
What am I supposed to do? Bow to his superior intellect and admit how wrong I was and then thank him for being so gracious that he accepts it's enjoyable? If I could snort on the Internet, I would, so please assume I just did!
I see where you are coming from and particularly those to points above I agree with.
I was surprised myself that he took 20minutes for Batman but only 10 for Salt :laugh: So, let's stop talk about him now ;)
Post by: goodguy on September 23, 2011, 06:50:17 PM
I tried to watch the video on Dark Knight and gave up after five minutes.
I only zapped through that one too, albeit probably for different reasons. :laugh: Also, if memory serves me right (and if he doesn't suddenly say differently in the clip), Jim Emerson never liked TDK - it was Roger Ebert who raved about it.