No Sudden Move is a crime-thriller with noir elements that's directed, photographed and edited by Steven Soderbergh. Ed Solomon wrote it. But it's very much a Soderbergh film and for good reasons as he got the chance to create the film he wanted to make, thus making the good crime film we have in front of us. The film features an ensemble cast including Don Cheadle, Benicio del Toro, David Harbour, Jon Hamm, Amy Seimetz, Brendan Fraser, Kieran Culkin, Noah Jupe, Craig Grant (in his final appearance), Julia Fox, Frankie Shaw, Ray Liotta and Bill Duke. There's plenty of great performances but Don Cheadle, Benicio del Toro, David Harbour and Amy Seimetz all give phenomenal performances.
In 1954 Detroit, Michigan, gangster Curt Goynes and a group of criminals are brought together under mysterious circumstances and have to work together to uncover what's really going on when their simple job goes completely sideways.
Though I really liked how character driven it was, I think for more casual viewers, they might find the pacing to be too slow. How it was photographed almost exclusively with a wide-angle "fisheye" lens which creates distortions around the outer edge of the frame, I think most will find it odd and not to your liking, but also how the plot isn't as important as the personal affairs and of its well written characters. David Holmes's musical score isn't mind blowing, but it sets the tone and atmosphere, the old noir vibes. If we're going back to the cinematography and how Soderbergh mostly used a wide-angle lens, it takes some time to get used to as it has this unique look but the huge amount of stuff shown in each scene makes most of the shots worth it. With us being able to see more of the sets, more of the characters and it's executed perfectly. But again, the wide-angle probably won't win everyone over. Though Steven Soderbergh have an eye for cinema and a vision, I think he didn't make it gripping enough, most of it has to do with Soderbergh trying to say too much and how the plot can be confusing. Though I really liked his direction, I felt the more action heavy sequences could have been better, but as a slow paced crime-thriller, the direction was phenomenal. I just wish the second half of the movie would have held up as much as the first half, as I loved the first half.
In 1954 Detroit, Michigan, gangster Curt Goynes and a group of criminals are brought together under mysterious circumstances and have to work together to uncover what's really going on when their simple job goes completely sideways.
Though I really liked how character driven it was, I think for more casual viewers, they might find the pacing to be too slow. How it was photographed almost exclusively with a wide-angle "fisheye" lens which creates distortions around the outer edge of the frame, I think most will find it odd and not to your liking, but also how the plot isn't as important as the personal affairs and of its well written characters. David Holmes's musical score isn't mind blowing, but it sets the tone and atmosphere, the old noir vibes. If we're going back to the cinematography and how Soderbergh mostly used a wide-angle lens, it takes some time to get used to as it has this unique look but the huge amount of stuff shown in each scene makes most of the shots worth it. With us being able to see more of the sets, more of the characters and it's executed perfectly. But again, the wide-angle probably won't win everyone over. Though Steven Soderbergh have an eye for cinema and a vision, I think he didn't make it gripping enough, most of it has to do with Soderbergh trying to say too much and how the plot can be confusing. Though I really liked his direction, I felt the more action heavy sequences could have been better, but as a slow paced crime-thriller, the direction was phenomenal. I just wish the second half of the movie would have held up as much as the first half, as I loved the first half.