I just saw the so-called "critically acclaimed" film TRAFFIC yesterday night. So the critics said this was a good film about drug selling. Well, it seems like the critics were smoking it up while watching this piece of garbage. Basicaly, the plot goes off in a tangent and keeps changing from one setting to another with different characters and puts the films running time to about 145 boring minutes. TRAFFIC looks like it was originaly filmed in two versions and placed together to make it look like it is one complete film. It is always said that a film has it beginning and end. Well, TRAFFIC only had a beginning and had NO ENDING. The ending was completely out-of-it and dreadfully dull. Plus, even though Michael Douglas is top billed his presence is utterly wasted for he does nothing but walk around, say a few dull lines, and walks off as the film goes to it's next character and location. The only scenes that WERE INTERESTING were the ones that take place in Mexico.
The film tries to give the message that the War on Drugs can be stopped. But I beg to differ on that message. The message should have been the War on Drugs CANNOT be stopped.
TRAFFIC is a film that had potential, but if it were cut down to a 100 minute running time then it would have been better.
Questions or comments anyone?
Everyone I've talked to that has seen this film, hated it. I don't know what's up with movie critics. I think the public disagrees as well. Back in 1999, every film other than the Matrix, that the film critics gave a thumbs up or recommendation of, bombed. The films that the critics trashed, however did very well. And what was Roger Ebert smokeing when he said Little Nicky was Adam Sandlers best film. Since I liked Bulletproof and Happy Gilmore, I gave it a shot. The film was horrible. The only thing it had going for it, was trying to spot all of the cameos.
Some other films that the critics raved about that I thought were horrible:
How to make an American Quilt
Fried Green Tomatoes
Meet Joe Black
I don't even mess with critics anymore. I try to decide by checking around the web looking movies that do more to describe a movie, rather than praise or condem it.
Traffic the movie (I agree it's crap) is based on a UK tv series - Traffik - about the heroin trade, which was pretty good. Yet another case of a movie being much worse than it's source.
I can't believe there wasn't outrage that the fact that the precious white p***y is given up to "evil" black dick for drugs. What a bunch of s**t. f**k the drug war and Hollywood s**theads that churn that crap out for the consumption of the gullible masses.
The drugs war was lost all around the world years ago.
Well, I had mixed feelings on Traffic... And the reason it had such a blah ending was pointful - the war on drugs is never ending, and can not be won. It wasn't trying to say it could be won, didn't any of the character's speeches (like the guy in protective custodity) indicate that to you?
And the thing with the black guy - would it have been better if he'd been white? It wasn't the point that he was black, rather the point the story was trying to make was that she'd sunk to the lowest level to get drugs.
I gotta agree with Chris, this movie stunk. I still am having a hard time figuring out exactly what the point behind the scenes with Benicio Del Toro was all about since it looked the most promising. I too rented this dud hoping for once all of the "critic's" reviews were on point. I now realize they are being slipped cash or something to hype crappy movies. Not even worth the $4.00 and change for the rental price, believe me.