Apple iTunes

« Kneel before Zod | Main | REVIEW: Vertical Limit »

REVIEW: Revenge

I must admit that I always feel a sense of duty when it comes to fitting in. By that I mean, if I see that everyone has reviewed a Kevin Costner movie, I have to go and review one. Hence the story of why I rented the movie called Revenge, which shockingly is based on novel. (Given the soap opera quality of this movie, it was most likely a romance novel.) Anyway the cover pretty much boasts that the movie is going to be non-stop Kevin Costner mug. I mean look at the cover, his face overshadows the other co-stars in the picture. This proves the theory of Costner club very well. Revenge is a like watching a romance novel come to life and that is a sad thing to behold.

Anyway the movie is helmed by Tony Scott who has helmed some good movies (Man On Fire, Crimson Tide and Last Boyscout to name but a couple.) and some really bad movies (Domino,Top Gun and Days Of Thunder) Revenge is one of Scott's worse films, lacking his over the top ethusiasm or even the sturdy action that one would assume with the man's name. Indeed when it comes to revenge, Scott delivers far more satisfying results in Man On Fire. Of course Denzel Washington is a good actor and Kevin Costner is...well you know is Kevin Costner. What makes Revenge so irritating is that if Tony Scott had the balls to turn this into a hard edged vigilante action flick this movie would've easily overcome the Costner flaw. Sadly because Tony Scott actively resists the action element we end up stuck with a love triangle that just goes nowhere.

I'm not sure if this is possible, but can two actors pull off the Ironside agenda? Because both Miguel Ferrer (always a welcome actor) and Anthony Quinn are the only ones who play their parts well. Quinn actually creates a likable villain and really his charm and charisma easily overwhelms Costner and Madeline Stowe. While Ferrer creates a far more interesting characater than Costner, only sadly we learn little about his character because we have Costner's face to gawk at. Sadly these performances are in vain since the material is so ridiculous and because the movie is so dull. Another flaw is that the actors have such limited screen time (I mean come on who would you rather see Anthony Quinn or Kevin Costner?) that it's impossible to identify with characters, so what we have is a movie that is Tony Scott filming Kevin Costner at every waking moment. Costner of course contains very little screen presence so there is just nothing but folds of interminable tedium during the would be plot development.

Then there are the sex scenes, I'm somewhat puzzled now on why I didn't name the Van Damn after Kevin Costner, has there been any other actor out there who has showed his ass more than this guy? (Van Damme aside...) This guy from Dances With Wolves,this movie, Robin Hood:Prince Of Theives and Bodyguard (if i'm not mistaken) so we ended up with four years straight of Costner showing us glistening buttocks which only comes second to how much he shows his face in his movies. Believe me when I say that my colleagues hit the hammer on the head when they said that he weaves films with only his face. Revenge is literly nothing but that.

We do get some nudity from Madeline Stowe but really, these sex scenes show more Costner than her and this can only be seen as a tragedy. What's even worse is how the movie paints these two ridiculous characters, for instance Stowe comes off as a slutty drama queen, where as Costner comes off as an arrogant prick. So watching this, the audience feels no real sense of vengeance being served cold but rather served lame.

I mean after all, Costner sleeps with his best friend's wife and Stowe sleeps with her husband's best friend. Making them worthy of the severe beatings and comeuppance Quinn inflicts. Worst of all, this is all handled like a romance novel so any sense of vengeance is lost by the drippy romance, and the romance angle is killed by the stiff acting and unlikable characters.

In other words, Revenge is basically what you'd expect from an early 90's Kevin Costner. Which is lots of Van Damn!, tons of cameras focusing on Costner's mug, unlikable protagonists, and no real sense of satisfaction justifying the work out on your eyeballs. It's bad, it's melodramatic, it's simplistic and worst of all it's boring. But hey, Costner sure has a great face.

Hamlin Grade: 1

Ryan

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.badmovienight.net/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/247

Comments

I have to say this--Costner spared us the Van Damn! in Robin Hood. It was cold, so he had a stunt ass brought in.

I don't know what's worse--his ass, or his enormous ego that had to protect his ass.

But I bet that ass could do a better English accent.

Post a comment













Netflix, Inc.











46offer



What is a Bad Movie Night? Click here and we'll tell you!