Simply A Masterpiece

Fanciful, disturbing, and wildly original, it announces the arrival of a fresh, bold voice in American cinema.

It’s not bad or unwatchable but despite the amplitude of the spectacle, the end result is underwhelming.

The film never slows down or bores, plunging from one harrowing sequence to the next.

The Sting3 Out Of 5The Sting is a heist thriller about two con artists whose plan to take down the impossible might just be possible. The scrutiny in here isn't as convoluted or glorifying as the makers think but is undeniably impressive and breezy to encounter which comes with cons too, like the characters never seems to be in trouble and has a way out of every calculated conflicts; primary reason why audience feels disconnected with the viewers. It is short on technical aspects like sound department, cinematography and editing although has amazing costume design and background score in its favor. The writing is weak yet gripping with varied tactics of heists that helps keep the audience engaged in it. The screenplay by David S. Ward pitches an impactful heist tale that is unforgettable in its own way. George Roy Hill; the director, has done a marvelous job on executing the script which could have easily come off as a hoax. The performance is decently acted out by Paul Newman and Robert Redford in their parallel roles and Robert Shaw in a supporting role. The Sting has a viscous bite that spreads like fire in a forest for despite of being loosely written it certifiably makes it entertaining.

I feel like I'm not quite as high on the Newman / Redford movies as I am on the two actors themselves; there's an undeniably natural charisma between them, and that's what really pushes this film forward. Not that this movie is bad. It's not at all. It's quintessential "bad-guys-who-are-actually-good-guys" that's a whole mess of effective cons, a couple of which are being played on the audience.

The Sting, 1973, is the sort of film that gave rise to the grifter /crime type that has since proliferated and taken such forms in the modern day as your Oceans Eleven Twelve series where the whole plot relies on a giant scam which as it progresses reveals smaller sub-plots or sub-scams, like mini twists that keep the movie alive all this time. It turns out this one here is a bit silly in concept, but as a film why not - the only problem is as much as the movie demands a great deal of indulgence from the viewer, it doesn't in turn offer, well, all that much fun. You can do with a couple of inaccuracies and play the role wearing a thick lens for a film's time, but this here is two hours and ten minutes, it just goes on and on and there isn't enough to cover that length.Now some parts are funny, maybe a couple (the painter trick in the Western Union office with the guy randomly giving the secretary a phone message was good), Redford and Newman do well, Shaw is very good as the trustless perpetually wary villain... but it's just too long, oddly paced and neither great fun nor terribly serious, but it's probably one of the first films that started this trend which gave rise to a great comedy like "Dirty Rotten Scoundrels". 4.5/10.

It is the 1930s and Johnny Hooker and his friend Luther Coleman are a pair of conmen running short cons in Joliet, Illinois… until one day they target the wrong man. They think they were lucky to get away with several thousand dollars but it is mob money and mob boss Doyle Lonnegan wants to make an example of anybody who crosses his organisation. Soon Coleman is dead and it looks like Hooker will be next. Hooker isn't intending to run though; he wants to get revenge for his friend's death. To this end he teams up with Henry Gondorff, a specialist in the long con. Lonnegan won't be an easy mark though; his only known weakness is his enjoyment of high stakes poker… but as he cheats he won't be easy to beat. The poker will just be the hook; to really hurt him they must persuade him to place a very large bet where he thinks he is the one cheating and when it is over he mustn't know that he has been conned… it might not be easy but it will be worth it.This film is rightfully considered a classic and for numerous reasons. Robert Redford and Paul Newman are on top form as Hooker and Gondorff and Roberts Shaw impresses as the villainous Lonnegan; the rest of the cast were good too. The film nicely captures the feel of '30s Chigago, or at least how it looks in films of that era. Of course this would mean little without a good story and this has a great one; the 'good guys' may be criminals but they are likable and the 'bad guy' is clearly far worse; there are also some really good twists. These twists are neither too obvious nor are they too far-fetched. There is some action, some a bit surprising for a PG rated film. Also surprising for a PG is the use of some racist language; probably less than would have been expected in the '30s but still a bit surprising in 2017… it doesn't detract from this great film but some patents might be uncomfortable with showing it to children. Overall a really good film that all film viewers should check out at least once.