This is Guy Ritchie's second feature film, made in 2000, two years after
"Lock, stock and two smoking barrels". It was criticised by film critics for being too similar to the first film.
Is that really such a big deal? What's wrong with a director having his own
style? I've put the two films next to one another in my top 100 list, because
it's difficult for me to decide which one I like more. Maybe "Snatch" is
slightly better, but there's hardly anything between them.
"Snatch" actually tells two unrelated stories. One story is about a boxing
promoter who's struggling to make money from a rigged bare knuckles fight. The
other story is about a giant diamond that's repeatedly lost and found and stolen.
The main characters in the two stories don't meet. They're only
connected by the minor characters. And the dog.
The film's plot (or plots) isn't difficult to understand, but it's difficult
to explain. There's less comedy than in Guy Ritchie's first film, but there
are still a few amusing scenes. Brad Pitt's ridiculous accent is comical in
itself. He's unable to mimic a gypsy accent, so he's invented his own accent
for the film.
Staffordshire Bull Terriers are beautiful dogs, but one thing they're known
for is their lack of loyalty. They're undiscriminating in their affections, so
if they're stolen they make no attempt to return to their previous owners.
That's shown in the film. When the robbers are being arrested by the police
they look up in amazement as they see their dog passing them in someone else's
car.
This is a marvellous film that has to be seen to be believed. Unfortunately,
after his first two films Guy Ritchie was never able to reach the same high
level again. He's made nine films since then, some better than others, but
he's lost his magic touch.
Success Rate: + 6.4
 |
Order from Amazon.com |
| Order from Amazon.co.uk | |
| Order from Amazon.de |
No comments:
Post a Comment
Tick the box "Notify me" to receive notification of replies.