Pawn (2013)

Let's be realistic.

Just what I expected

Absolutely brilliant

The story, direction, characters, and writing/dialogue is akin to taking a tranquilizer shot to the neck, but everything else was so well done.

Truly...All I can figure is that there MUST be some reason or agenda to take a perfectly good, well made, gripping, and most of all FUN Crime Thriller like this and then for some unknown cosmic reason, just P*$$ the hell all over it. And what really gets me about THESE particular reviews concerning this film is the unmitigated arrogance of the comments...Anyway, that's not why you called... : )Clearly, at least *I* thought it was a great and very entertaining film. I frigg'n LOVED the main bad guy (Chiklis - who also was one of the producers) He was VERY Guy Ritchie, which is ALWAYS fun! Seriously, right from the clever way the film opened and then the way the film makers kind of bent your mind around by sort of rewinding it and replaying it differently (I STILL honestly don't quite get the specific logic of why they did that) it honestly REALLY grabs you by the nuts and does NOT let you go until the end.Now, *IF* this were indeed the cheeeeezy, poorly done, quickie Crime film that others here are bloody SAYING that it is, there is NO frigg'n way that it would have been this sharply put together. Everything truly was done very well. In a film like this, you would think that maybe the writing, dialog, and acting might suffer; that maybe the characters or what they say would not come across as believable. But actually, it was all quite well done. Even though ALL of the primary elements that make up this film were executed extremely well, I feel that the editing was particularly good. The one scene where Ray Liota is telling the story about the clock makers was an outstanding example of this. Crap movies don't do that. Pure and simple...Soooooo, I have NO bloody idea WHAT these knuckle-dragging Cretans are talking about with all these negative comments, but if you like Guy Ritchie's films (this one is not QUITE up there with his though) and you just enjoy REALLY fun Crime films with lots of twists and turns, then there is absolutely NO reason why you shouldn't completely enjoy this movie. It does PRECISELY what it sets out to do, and it does so splendidly. And that is a solid '8' in my book...

When a botched heist on a local bar takes a gruesome twist, three armed robbers led by Derrick (Michael Chiklis) are forced into a hostage situation. Amongst those locked inside are police officer Will (Forest Whitaker) and recently released ex-con Nick (Sean Faris). The robbery however has much more at stake than just money, leaving both corrupted cops and mobsters on the outside feeling jittery. While a mysterious man in a suit (Ray Liotta) tries to sort out stuff from the outside, negotiator Jeff Porter (Common) attempts to diffuse the tense situation.Featuring a multitude of flashbacks and other even less welcome film tricks (including a gratuitous blood-splashing sequence, where one of the hostages thinks out in his head, what would happen if he acted 'the hero'), muddles the movie way beyond what the actual plot requires. Making simples actions and situations seem more intricate initially works, but as the story unravels, so does that paper-thin ploy. Featuring some disinterested performances by several people in the cast (most notably Ray Liotta) and one above average outing by Chiklis, this adrenaline-driven ride makes for a passable watch, rife with some action and hints of tension, but never truly make it worth your while. None of the dialogue exceeds general actioneer banter, while the story itself is simplistic, despite the attempts to obscure it. On the positive side David A. Armstrong never flinches, when its necessary to dispose of the character of any of his more recognisable cast members.

STAR RATING: ***** Saturday Night **** Friday Night *** Friday Morning ** Sunday Night * Monday MorningOfficer Will (Forest Whitaker) wonders in to an all night diner, and soon becomes aware that all is not as it seems- that, in fact, a robbery being staged by Derrick (Michael Chiklis) and his cronies is in progress. In to the equation comes Nick Davenport (Sean Faris), a recently released con trying to go straight, who ends up being used as a go between/patsy for the criminals. But is everyone who they seem? Is everything as it seems?With an all star cast of hardly A list, but still quality actors, Pawn has it's sights set higher than it's made for DVD limitations, aiming for a high concept approach to a traditional hold up drama. Pretty early in, it soon becomes clear it's going to be yet another of these 'reverse plotting' thrillers that was edgy and experimental when it first started but are getting a bit tiresome now, with each one trying to be cleverer than the last one, making you yearn for a good old, simple dramatic thriller like they made in the old days. As it gets going, you start to write it off as a boring latest addition to this fad, but thankfully if you stick with it the plot isn't as needlessly complicated as it could have been and manages to be intelligent without being over indulgent.Pawn is the latest in what is quite a popular trend at the moment. It's a style that is becoming a bit weary and tiresome, and it hardly explores the concept in any really new or challenging way. But it does so in an efficient, competent and satisfying one, and is intelligently short so it doesn't stretch your patience any more than it does a little at the beginning. ***

It should be illegal for this "director' to ever get near a camera again. Chock full of stars, this 'thing' never gets off the ground. The erratic, haphazard cutting of the narrative makes this a complete mess to watch. The values are all over the place. I figure they had a pretty flat movie when they finished cutting it and figured 'what the hell?' might as well chop it up using a lot of elliptical cuts. The problem is that there has to be a reason - not just for the hell of it. Seeing the same scenes over and over again is just boring.It looked like it was shot on video. Really bad, horrible lighting; non existent production design; and no sound design. This needed a good music bed pretty badly! The performances were hampered by the lack of it. It's a shame since there is such a waste of fine talent. The story could have gone through a few more rewrites. A little too much needless exposition in the dialogue. If you go out and sit next to people you learn how they talk so you don't write lines like "I've made mistakes and I've paid for them." Oi vey! It's like someone coming over to your house and greets you by saying "I'm going to shake your hand and say hello."I could be wrong about this movie since it made a whopping $2,000 at the box office.