Review of Snake Eyes

Snake Eyes (1998)
3/10
Good potential, terrible writing
10 July 2004
Warning: Spoilers
This movie caught my attention on cable as I was flipping channels. The mystery and the setup were great. The placement of suspicious events was great. At one point, I even commented to myself, "this is a good f---in' movie!" Boy was I wrong.

As the story unfolded, you wish it didn't. It's a good movie before you find out what's going on. Then the plot holes, cheesy dialogue, outrageously contrived situations, and just plain comical story progression spread like wildfire. It's almost as if someone came up with a great story idea and then left it in the hands of a high school scriptwriting hobbyist.

The investigation of the murder of the US Defense Secretary in front of 14,000 witnesses is left up to one city cop and one military security officer who are best friends? People are running around a casino and being able to stay hidden? I better stop there because if I start listing plot holes and stupid scenarios, we'll never get out of here. I'm trying really hard not to comment on the end. It's like whoever was writing the script got tired of writing and just threw something together so he could rest his fingers and get paid.

However, if you can not focus on the bad writing (kinda like not focusing on a speeding train heading towards you), the style of the film is quite interesting. I liked how the story (terrible as it was) unfolded through the different angles and points of view of different people. The timing and placement of action were executed well.

It's too bad that a movie has to rely on something as minor as a script in order to be good.

-----SPOILER-----

I like Gary Sinise. He's a good actor. But unfortunately, he's usually typecast as a bad guy, so I kinda suspected he was involved all along.
24 out of 37 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed