LOCK, STOCK, AND TWO SMOKING BARRELS
A film review by Bradley Null
Copyright 1999 Bradley Null
filmcritic.com
LOCK, STOCK, AND TWO SMOKING BARRELS has been described as the British PULP FICTION, and on the surface, that would seem like an accurate depiction. It's got the usual cross-section of characters with witty tongues involved in varied illegal activities, that get themselves into very peculiar situations in which no one really survives unscathed. Nonetheless, the film seems to be missing something that characterized its predecessor. And right now, you're getting the feeling that I'm about to quickly file LOCK, STOCK as another Tarantino homage/copy-cat crime, but that's not quite it either.
LOCK, STOCK is in fact, probably the best film since PULP FICTION in which there are no really good guys. Like PULP FICTION, LOCK, STOCK begins with what would seem to be a simple story, that quickly careens out of control. In this case, four buddies; Tom, Eddie, Bacon, and Soap, pool their money together to back can't lose Eddie at an unbeknownst-to-them rigged game of cards. Of course they get fleeced, and end up in heavy debt to the local heavy. What follows is a madcap plan to recoup the money by intercepting a heist Eddie has fortuitously discovered his neighbor is carrying out. The interrelation of the problems with the original heist, along with the interception of it by Eddie's gang, and a couple of other local illegal activities result in a frantic circle of destruction.
Though the web of illegal activity is obviously reminiscent of PULP FICTION, where LOCK, STOCK most significantly strays from its de facto blue print is in theme. In Tarantino's masterpiece, the theme was essentially that there was no theme, no morality. In the gritty underworld, outcome is random. While Samuel L. Jackson is divinely saved and given a second chance to "walk the earth like Kane in Kung Fu," his partner in the guise of John Travolta is sentenced to death on a toilet. In this incarnation, the badder they are, the worse their fate seems to be, which often is death.
The real question now, is why have I rambled on without making much comment on the quality of the movie. The answer of course, is that I don't have much to say. LOCK, STOCK is end the end one of those films that pretty much leaves you when you leave it. You can talk about the witty plot, and the funny lines, but in the end, I guess a movie with o one to really root for (I guess we do root for our four pals a little) leaves you in the end without too much invested. So we leave it like we left PULP FICTION before it, by walking out of the theater and saying, "Wow, that was pretty cool," and not thinking of it after that. (Of course, as with PULP FICTION, some could always take a deeper shine to it.)
RATING: ***
|------------------------------|
\ ***** Perfection \
\ **** Good, memorable film \
\ *** Average, hits and misses \
\ ** Sub-par on many levels \
\ * Unquestionably awful \
|------------------------------|
MPAA Rating: R
Director: Guy Ritchie Producer: Matthew Vaughn Writer: Guy Ritchie Starring: Jason Flemyng, Nick Moran, Jason Statham, Vinnie Jones, and Sting
http://www.lockstock2barrels.com
-Christopher Null / null@sirius.com / Writer-Producer / http://www.filmcritic.com
The review above was posted to the
rec.arts.movies.reviews newsgroup (de.rec.film.kritiken for German reviews).
The Internet Movie Database accepts no responsibility for the contents of the
review and has no editorial control. Unless stated otherwise, the copyright
belongs to the author.
Please direct comments/criticisms of the review to relevant newsgroups.
Broken URLs inthe reviews are the responsibility of the author.
The formatting of the review is likely to differ from the original due
to ASCII to HTML conversion.
Related links: index of all rec.arts.movies.reviews reviews