Movie Review

Film Review: Smokin’ Aces

Original Review Date: 3/6/2007

smokin-aces-poster.jpgSmokin’ Aces is a film in the vein of True Romance and other superiorly written Quentin Tarantino flicks minus any of character detail, character development or inventive prose, save for a scene involving a lawyer and three bounty hunters in a hotel room. Aces is a Tarantino film in desperate need of Tarantino or his protégé Robert Rodriguez. This film is the severely mentally handicapped third nephew of a good film inspired by what Tarantino has done in the movie industry. Wayne Kramer’s Running Scared and Paul McGuigan’s Lucky Number Slevin were films that may have “borrowed” structure and other elements (i.e. unique characters converging on one another) from Tarantino films but they smartly made them their own and added to the equation at the same time. Aces started off as good as its brethren with all of the character introductions but got stuck in first gear during its second act and never recovered.

I read a review for this film in the New York Times that started off with something like: BLAM, BLAM, BLAM. Head explodes, BLAM, guy sits on chainsaw. BLAM. End credits. If this film was that adrenalised, I would have actually had a good time. Much like Crank, this film was so lackluster I just wanted the film to end or at least get good and interesting. We know going in that there is going to be a gun fight or two or three but ninety percent of the ones that transpired in this film had no basis in reality. There is a part in the film that involves an assassin with a assault cannon (A) in one hotel filled with civilians and FBI agents (B) in another hotel filled with civilians. (A) fires at (B) but precisely and accurately with the aid of an eye patch and sniper scope and you know what? Guess what happens? You will never guess. The FBI agents blindly return fire into hotel (A); filled with the aforementioned civilians, without even knowing what floor the cannon shoots came from. They just fire at the civilian building repeatedly, emptying whole handgun magazines in the process. Guess what else? The director, Joe Carnahan, never shows the effect of the FBI’s returned fire. It is never even broached, mentioned or brought up in the remainder of the film. Brilliant, realistic and well-thought out are the words that come to mind at the conclusion of this intrepidly scrutinized scene and all the others of its likewise quality.

Smokin’ Aces is a film that could have been great with more tweaking and development. Unfortunately, just like Crank, the trailer for this film was actually better and more entertaining than the film it was advertising. Did you notice that I did not mention a single character or actor’s name during the course of my review? That is because they are all interchangeable. No one planted his or her flag as an actor in this film and no one had anything memorable to contribute. Smokin’ Aces is a construct of vapidness where big name stars and their talent disappear into the black hole of a film that goes no where. Joe Carnahan showed a lot of promise in 2002 with Narc but his two follow ups, Ticker and this film, have failed to bring that glimmer of burgeoning and qualified directorial talent to fruition.

Rating: 5/10

If you enjoyed this review, subscribe to our full RSS feed or by e-mail to get informed when we post new ones.

 

About the author

Rollo Tomasi

A Political Science and MBA grad who started FilmBook during an eCommerce B-School course in 2008. Cinema and TV addict. Former writer at Empire Movies, Blogcritics, and Alternative Film Guide. In addition to writing for FilmBook, he also edits the copy published on the website, manages its writing staff, manages the back-end operations, site finances, its social network accounts, and works with publicists, actors, and companies on press coverage and promotions. He has also created ProMovieBlogger.com and Trending Awards.com.

  • I agree, the film felt like it had some sort of promise as it started out, but it just went all downhill. I think two characters had the potential to “leave their marks”: Ben Affleck’s (who exited the film prematurely) and Matthew Fox’s (whose role was minor, but just too funny. Something about that guy chewing gum just makes me laugh).

  • I agree, the film felt like it had some sort of promise as it started out, but it just went all downhill. I think two characters had the potential to “leave their marks”: Ben Affleck’s (who exited the film prematurely) and Matthew Fox’s (whose role was minor, but just too funny. Something about that guy chewing gum just makes me laugh).

  • You know, I only saw the film from beginning to end once. I totally forgot about Matthew Fox. That bright point can’t bring up the rest of this film though.

  • You know, I only saw the film from beginning to end once. I totally forgot about Matthew Fox. That bright point can’t bring up the rest of this film though.

Mega Menu

Send this to friend