UnowPriceless hyped garbage

SteinMo What a freaking movie. So many twists and turns. Absolutely intense from start to finish.

Aiden Melton The storyline feels a little thin and moth-eaten in parts but this sequel is plenty of fun.

Tayyab Torres Strong acting helps the film overcome an uncertain premise and create characters that hold our attention absolutely.

terkoss Recorded on the DVR, I've probably watched it six times already. The Bag Man quite obviously isn't for everybody. Maybe expectations. Maybe there's just something missing with some who "didn't get it", or don't have that *something* inside them that finds the allure.Analysis is tough on this one. It's not a sophisticated storyline. The script only has moments of clever dialogue. Mostly, it's the overall mood, I suppose. It's in directing, the soundtrack, cinematography, etc. that gives it its appeal for me. I gave it a "7" rating, because I don't abuse and overreact. An 8 has to be exceptional. A 9...genuinely phenomenal. I've never yet given a film a 10. Conversely, a 6 still has some merit. A 5 is so-so, but some definite cringe-worthy moments. And so forth. Point being, I saw quite a few 1s in the reviews (and 2s and 3s). A 1 is virtual static on the screen in my mind, or something that looks like a 2nd Grade movie project that somehow made it to the big screen. IMDb raters...sigh. Well, a rating is in the eye of the rater. For those of us who "get it", I bet we'd agree that those who didn't just don't have the receptors to pick up on the Director's vision.Cusack's as an actor was my initial attraction. His roles in Identity and others drew me in. His performance in TBM was as intriguing as any of his other best films. Sorry, but Cell was a bummer. His acting was lackluster and the film was just weird (the ending was just funky, as hard as I tried to play along). But in TBM, he was at the top of his game. I didn't "see" acting. I saw what I love about him most; a natural born actor who takes me into the life of the character. Can't ask for more.De Niro: Another reviewer is correct to an extent - that he can play a gangster in his sleep. Agreed, but ol' Bob is also in major cruise mode in his career, being his Golden Years. I've seen the passion receding over the last 15 years. Even in more significant roles like Silver Linings Playbook, I've detected less than 100% from him like in his most impacting historical roles. That wasn't the objective here, to play a character like Leonard in Awakenings, or Rupert Pupkin in the King of Comedy. However, there was only a fleeting moment or two at best when I felt he wasn't fully immersed in the smaller role of Dragna. I got the impression he really liked this role. Interestingly, he looked physically better than I've seen him in years. He was tan, had super cool hair, slick and hip glasses, and he slipped right in to the image of that character. I wouldn't be surprised if that's why he accepted the part. I'm not convinced it was the script that captivated him. Even his opening lines are relatively straightforward. Yes, some of his later banter was medium-witty, but nothing that will leave one changed forever. Regardless, he was cooler looking than I've seen him in years. But don't get me wrong. I'm not interested in seeing De Niro look cool. His character's cool worked perfectly with the mood of the film.Crispin Glover was captivating. So smooth and believable as Ned, the motel clerk. If one thinks of the non-event checking into a hotel can be, Ned makes it the polar opposite of that. In short, the character of Ned is loaded with character. And while other reviewers speak for you and me, "...you can't help but think...", I'll speak for myself: I love Crispin in this role. I haven't seen him in a while, but I still remember his impact on me in his role in the movie Teachers. He was powerful then, and hasn't lost anything in his dedication to his roles.Rebecca Da Costa: A very intriguing choice in casting. An odd voice (accent), and at first, wondered if her acting was up to par. In the end, I believe her acting was fine. It was just her odd personality, which added to the unusual chapter of Jack's (Cusack) life. It augmented the realism of finding oneself amidst a troubled, yet fascinating person. Some people aren't attracted to those types. Maybe that makes the difference...the secret desire to live a chapter of Jack's life. That's what a film should do - take us inside it and live that life for a couple hours; have us wonder whether Rivka (Da Costa) was a cheap hooker, or someone we could fall in love with; a caring, smart and compassionate person. A foreigner who just so happens to be uniquely beautiful, awkwardly trying to seduce, yet too often showing her genuine self and sincerity as a human being.On the surface, if I didn't get "immersed", I'd probably give it a 5. But I got sucked in. I got it. A solid 7 for me. Bravo to those who made this film. I'll be watching it again.

CousinBagunca This ons is a weird one to review. Looking through other reviews, most people gave it negative reviews, calling it predictable or whatnot. First things firsts, I thought acting was fine. Nothing top notch, but fine. Cusack's role, Jack, is likeable and, even though he's some sort of hitman, you care for him.The plot is strange, to say the least, but I guess that's because everything is roughly explained. Some acts are odd and makes no sense. I mean, the beginning of the movie seems like the director lost part of the footage and had to come up with something. One act with De Niro and Hodge didn't fit the overall movie plot, to me at least.It was obvious that staying in motel room 13 wasn't going to be an easy task. What I thought was weird is that everybody is after that goddamn bag, even though none of them seems to know what's inside it.Of course every act is explained in the finale, and when that happens, it leaves a weird impression. De Niro's motives seems dumb and uninspired, but then again, if you come to think of it, it's pretty much the same with any mob boss impersonation in any movie.I thought it was an OK movie to watch. It kept me hanging, wandering what was in the bag, but I must say I wasn't overly attached to knowing what was inside of it, questioning every act and so on. I was only following the story and trying to make sense of it.It was a fine movie to waste some time in a quiet Saturday afternoon.

betty_bech It's a good movie…there I wrote that. I just re-watched it to relive the experience but it is better the first time as some scenes are utterly surreal when you don't expect it. I would not be surprised if that movie would become a cult movie in the future.It's not like a big entertaining Hollywood movie like Titanic, those kinds of movies that happen once a year and I got motion sickness and needed to barf into my popcorn bag when the ship plunged into the ocean…great special effects only appreciable on a big theater movie screen.When I saw Earthquake (1974) as a teen, unbeknownst to people, the movie theater seats were rigged to shake when the earthquake in the movie would suddenly hit… Some people started screaming as Paris is not California and we have zero experience with earthquakes. That experiment was short lived as they were talking about enhancing the movie experience with smells and nobody wanted to see a corpse on the screen and smell decomposed flesh.Paris is the worldwide capital in movie experience in theaters. You get movies from all over the world. Last count I read was 620 theaters for anybody counting them. Most small movie theaters offer festivals about a particular actress/actor or a director so you can see John Wayne movies or the Marylyn Monroe ones or all the Hitchcock movies. You can buy L'Officiel des Spectacles, a small weekly magazine, a cultural guide for any cultural event in Paris and Ile-de-France (movies, theaters, concerts, festivals…) so you can find which theater will show up some particular movie that you want to see on a big screen, making note of the date and time…I re-saw The Misfits in a Champs-Elysées screen (I think it's the last movie both Clark Gable and Marilyn Monroe made together).In France, some movie theaters are neighborhood small ones with limited sitting but still having a big screen (and no food, drink or smoking). Some have one huge IMAX 3-D screen covering peripheral vision, like being under a dome-shaped planetarium.In The Bag Man, that Brazilian actress is utterly hilarious on some humor level that is not reachable by everybody, like peeling onion skins to get to the good part. She's dressed like a hooker and wearing super fake blue wig and then taking if off to show some fake blonde hair. Having super red lips that she does not seem to have the ability to close, huge big eyes full of pretend fear and sadness…she's a riot as you know she has no fear or sadness.De Niro, one of the best actors I would say, is utterly cast against type, like all the other actors, wearing ridiculous suits and super ugly glasses that are not even reading or glasses correcting vision…just there (real glasses makes your eyes smaller or bigger and you can see the break line on the side of the face). He's going over the top to play a stupid, ugly, mean character and he does a good job at it that will surely be unappreciated by the populace.Even John Cusack having the most dreamy, innocent eyes is wearing sunglasses on a private plane at night!! It's like "let's focus on the biggest asset of any actor and turn it upside down, smothering it". He plays a hit man just hired to retrieve a bag but of course, he'll kill a bunch of people who are after the bag too, for some reason and drive around with the clichéd dead body in the trunk and saying he's "Mr. Smith", short of being Mr. Incognito. Then you get squared jaws Dominic Purcell best known for playing the inmate Lincoln Burrows in Prison Break now playing the sheriff, verbally abusive (won't let you finish your sentence) and having physical stances (hands on the hips) to convey superiority and authority…it's a riot.Then you get Crispin Glover, the ultimate most intriguing cult-like actor, who can play both a madman and a genius. In The Bag Man, he's the motel clerk in a wheelchair but of course nobody is what they seem so don't be surprised if he stands up, you have to ring the bell to see him emerge from behind the desk, wondering what he's doing down there!!! His best line is "don't touch my wheelchair. You shouldn't have done that, Mr. Smith. No one touch my wheelchair. It belonged to my dead mother." It is very reminiscing about Psycho/Hitchcock and mother's issues and the Bates' motel.I won't say what it's in the bag as to avoid a spoiler but it's really a metaphor about trust that most people will not get anyway. What would be the Achilles' heel of a hit man? Would it be other people with a connection with love, family, friends, and kids? A loner hit man would be more reliable with no ties to anybody and not susceptible to blackmail and such. Then the story does a boomerang about revenge and if you severed my Achilles' heel, I'll kick you dead with my other heel.

Michael O'Keefe A touch of noir slips into this crime caper. A hit man named Jack(John Cusack)is summoned to a seedy motel deep in the Bayou by a dangerous crime boss named Dragna(Robert De Niro). Jack is offered a handsome compensation, but he must complete a slight chore of picking up a bag and wait in the Louisiana hotel. Jack is ordered to not open the bag. The hit man is hold up in room 13 and while waiting realizes that Dragna ordered a dozen more hired killers to do the same.A bit antsy, and you've already come to your own conclusion for a finale several times before closing credits. This movie runs about 1 hr. 49 min and Mr. De Niro is on screen almost 40 of those minutes. Who got their money's worth this time? Also in the cast: Crispin Glover, Rebecca Da Costa, Martin Klebba, Dominic Purcell, David Shambris and Kirk 'Sticky Fingaz' Jones.