Here's looking at you, kid... for 3 hours

Barry Koltnow
The Orange County Register (MCT)

I have a friend who is a big movie fan.

As soon as I get back from a screening, she wants to hear all about the movie. We've had some lively and thoughtful discussions. Our most recent discussion was not one of them.

I saw an early screening of "American Gangster" the other night, and she couldn't wait to discuss it.

In the middle of my critique of how director Ridley Scott tackled the nuances of the gangster film, and how "American Gangster" fared against the best movies of that genre, I was rudely interrupted.

"Is Denzel worth looking at for three hours?" she asked.

"Don't you want to know if the movie's any good?"

"No, I want to know if Denzel is worth looking at for three hours?"

"Are you asking if Denzel Washington has turned in another Oscar-worthy performance as a Harlem narcotics kingpin in the 1970s?"

"No, I want to know how he looked."

"Aren't you interested in Russell Crowe's performance as the honest and dedicated New York City cop who tries to bring down the drug lord?"

"No, I want to know how Denzel looked."

As I said, this was not one of our most intellectually stimulating conversations.

By the way, the answer to her incessant questioning was an unqualified "Yes."

Then again, when is Denzel not worth looking at for three hours? The man is a movie star.

Movie stars make an obscene amount of money because they are worth looking at for two or three hours. One would have to be a really big movie star to be worth looking at for three hours, though. Denzel Washington falls into that category.

Of course, there are other factors at play when you engage in the "Who is worth looking at for three hours?" debate. The quality of the movie comes to mind. If a movie stinks, then nobody is worth looking at for three hours. And that poses an interesting question: "Which stars are worth looking at for three hours, and which stars aren't?"

Before you say it, allow me to point out that most of you don't think that any movie star is worth looking at for three hours because you don't think that any movie is worth three hours of your time. I understand that. Most movies are way too long these days. But once in a while, a movie comes along that I think is worth three hours of my time.

So, let's assume for the sake of this discussion that a movie is so well-written, so cleverly directed and so brilliantly acted that even you might feel it's worth three hours of your time. Whose face could you look at for three hours before you tired of it? And whose face has a shorter attention span?

Obviously, these are only my opinions. You might have a different opinion. One man's Denzel Washington is another man's Adam Sandler. In no particular order:

THREE HOURS: Denzel Washington, Leonardo DiCaprio, Clint Eastwood, Cate Blanchett, Morgan Freeman, Anthony Hopkins, Robert De Niro, Harrison Ford, Meryl Streep, Robert Redford, Tom Hanks, Jack Nicholson, Johnny Depp, Helen Mirren, Al Pacino, Gene Hackman and Peter O'Toole.

TWO HOURS: Clive Owen, George Clooney, Jodie Foster, Sean Penn, Matt Damon, John Cusack, Halle Berry, Mark Ruffalo, Joaquin Phoenix, Reese Witherspoon, Dustin Hoffman, Natalie Portman, Tom Cruise, Ray Liotta, Jamie Foxx, Nicole Kidman, Jennifer Jason Leigh, Paul Giamatti, Kevin Spacey, Robin Wright Penn, Will Smith, Philip Seymour Hoffman, Forest Whitaker, Laura Linney, Daniel Day-Lewis, Harvey Keitel, Geoffrey Rush, Jane Fonda, Don Cheadle, Christian Bale, Robert Duvall, Ben Kingsley, Claire Danes, Kevin Costner, Gary Oldman, Aaron Eckhart, Patricia Clarkson, Christopher Walken, Samuel L. Jackson, Alec Baldwin, Annette Bening, Mel Gibson, Michael Caine, Glenn Close, Laurence Fishborne, Jeremy Irons, Alan Rickman, Diane Keaton, Kevin Kline, Shirley MacLaine, Bill Murray, Vanessa Redgrave, Tim Robbins, Susan Sarandon, Kate Winslet, Dakota Fanning, Edward Norton and Sean Connery

NINETY MINUTES: Brad Pitt, Russell Crowe, Tommy Lee Jones, Charlize Theron, Ben Stiller, Steve Carell, Gwyneth Paltrow, Ryan Gosling, Kevin Bacon, Colin Farrell, Will Ferrell, Richard Gere, Ashley Judd, Jack Black, Renee Zellweger, Vince Vaughn, Angelina Jolie, Daniel Craig, Hilary Swank, Nicolas Cage, Keira Knightley, Michelle Pfeiffer, John Travolta, Chris Tucker, Jackie Chan, Rosario Dawson, Tobey Maguire, Orlando Bloom, Felicity Huffman, Elijah Wood, Kim Basinger, Eva Mendes, Salma Hayak, Drew Barrymore, Mike Myers, Bruce Willis, Jessica Alba, Demi Moore, Robin Williams, Catherine Zeta-Jones, Jessica Biel, Jennifer Lopez, Josh Hartnett, Mark Wahlberg, Martin Lawrence, Woody Allen, Sandra Bullock, Jim Carrey, Cameron Diaz, Steve Martin, Bill Bob Thornton, Uma Thurman, Owen Wilson, Luke Wilson, Jennifer Aniston, Jake Gyllenhaal, Heath Ledger, Scarlett Johansson, Sacha Baron Cohen, Shia LaBeouf and Keanu Reeves

TWO-MINUTE TRAILER: Dane Cook, Jude Law, Carmen Electra, Ewan McGregor, Woody Harrelson, Adam Sandler, Lindsay Lohan and Jessica Simpson.

So far J. J. Abrams and Rian Johnson resemble children at play, remaking the films they fell in love with. As an audience, however, we desire a fuller experience.

As recently as the lackluster episodes I-III of the Star Wars saga, the embossed gold logo followed by scrolling prologue text was cause for excitement. In the approach to the release of any of the then new prequel installments, the Twentieth Century Fox fanfare, followed by the Lucas Film logo, teased one's impulsive excitement at a glimpse into the next installment's narrative. Then sat in the movie theatre on the anticipated day of release, the sight and sound of the Twentieth Century Fox fanfare signalled the end of fevered anticipation. Whatever happened to those times? For some of us, is it a product of youth in which age now denies us the ability to lose ourselves within such adolescent pleasure? There's no answer to this question -- only the realisation that this sensation is missing and it has been since the summer of 2005. Star Wars is now a movie to tick off your to-watch list, no longer a spark in the dreary reality of the everyday. The magic has disappeared… Star Wars is spiritually dead.

Keep reading... Show less

This has been a remarkable year for shoegaze. If it were only for the re-raising of two central pillars of the initial scene it would still have been enough, but that wasn't even the half of it.

It hardly needs to be said that the last 12 months haven't been everyone's favorite, but it does deserve to be noted that 2017 has been a remarkable year for shoegaze. If it were only for the re-raising of two central pillars of the initial scene it would still have been enough, but that wasn't even the half of it. Other longtime dreamers either reappeared or kept up their recent hot streaks, and a number of relative newcomers established their place in what has become one of the more robust rock subgenre subcultures out there.

Keep reading... Show less

​'The Ferryman': Ephemeral Ideas, Eternal Tragedies

The current cast of The Ferryman in London's West End. Photo by Johan Persson. (Courtesy of The Corner Shop)

Staggeringly multi-layered, dangerously fast-paced and rich in characterizations, dialogue and context, Jez Butterworth's new hit about a family during the time of Ireland's the Troubles leaves the audience breathless, sweaty and tearful, in a nightmarish, dry-heaving haze.

"Vanishing. It's a powerful word, that"

Northern Ireland, Rural Derry, 1981, nighttime. The local ringleader of the Irish Republican Army gun-toting comrades ambushes a priest and tells him that the body of one Seamus Carney has been recovered. It is said that the man had spent a full ten years rotting in a bog. The IRA gunslinger, Muldoon, orders the priest to arrange for the Carney family not to utter a word of what had happened to the wretched man.

Keep reading... Show less

Aaron Sorkin's real-life twister about Molly Bloom, an Olympic skier turned high-stakes poker wrangler, is scorchingly fun but never takes its heroine as seriously as the men.

Chances are, we will never see a heartwarming Aaron Sorkin movie about somebody with a learning disability or severe handicap they had to overcome. This is for the best. The most caffeinated major American screenwriter, Sorkin only seems to find his voice when inhabiting a frantically energetic persona whose thoughts outrun their ability to verbalize and emote them. The start of his latest movie, Molly's Game, is so resolutely Sorkin-esque that it's almost a self-parody. Only this time, like most of his better work, it's based on a true story.

Keep reading... Show less

There's something characteristically English about the Royal Society, whereby strangers gather under the aegis of some shared interest to read, study, and form friendships and in which they are implicitly agreed to exist insulated and apart from political differences.

There is an amusing detail in The Curious World of Samuel Pepys and John Evelyn that is emblematic of the kind of intellectual passions that animated the educated elite of late 17th-century England. We learn that Henry Oldenburg, the first secretary of the Royal Society, had for many years carried on a bitter dispute with Robert Hooke, one of the great polymaths of the era whose name still appears to students of physics and biology. Was the root of their quarrel a personality clash, was it over money or property, over love, ego, values? Something simple and recognizable? The precise source of their conflict was none of the above exactly but is nevertheless revealing of a specific early modern English context: They were in dispute, Margaret Willes writes, "over the development of the balance-spring regulator watch mechanism."

Keep reading... Show less
Pop Ten
Mixed Media
PM Picks

© 1999-2017 All rights reserved.
Popmatters is wholly independently owned and operated.