Twentynine Palms

Amazon.com,

No one can accuse director Bruno Dumont of taking the easy road. Dumont's Life of Jesus and L'Humanite are fascinating, but they test the comfort zone of even the most devoted art-house maven. Twentynine Palms serves up more of Dumont's uncompromising rigor, this time set in America. A couple scout locations in the desert around Joshua Tree, and spend most of their time fighting or having sex. The frankness of the director's approach to sex does not prepare one for the shock of the truly bleak final reels. This Last Tango in Zabrieskie Point has a lulling, creepy power before it reaches those shocks, although actors David Wissak and Katia Golubeva are perhaps not as compelling as Dumont wants them to be. Of course, he's showing empty people traversing one of the emptiest places on earth--so maybe it fits. In any case, this film will shake you if you stick with it. --Robert Horton

Description

From Bruno Dumont, one of the leading visionaries of world cinema, comes Twentynine Palms, a mesmerizing story of love, sex and evil set deep in the Joshua Tree desert. While scouting for a photo shoot location, an American photographer (David Wissak) and his Russian/French girlfriend (Katia Golubeva) spend their days engaging in impassioned fights, hasty reconciliations and frequent bouts of sex, until a shocking act of desperation leads to an unforeseen and brutal climax. DVD extras include: 5.1 Extraction, Trailer, Interview with Director, EPK, Making of Reel, Subtitle Control

Customer Reviews:

Surreal movie with a wacked ending.......2007-06-14

Lots of reviews of this film have noted its pointlessness and in all fairness, there's a lot of truth to these reviews. One of the most grating things is the director's incredibly high-falutin' ostensibly philosophical explanation/description of what he was trying to do when he made the movie, which he "reveals" (for lack of a better term) in an interview. Unfortunately, it's very pretentious sounding.

That being said, there's an interesting parallel here to another "two souls lost in a huge barren place" movie, "Gerry" by Gus Van Sant. "Gerry" is a really interesting film, I think, and there are some intriguing similarities. But the Van Sant film really probes its two same-named characters, while the Domont film, "Twentynine Palms" spends a lot of time with its two characters engaged in back and forth stuff.

So why the three stars? Good question. The back and forth stuff consists of alternating bickering and sex and, at least for me, it felt like there was some weird kind of atmosphere building up as a result of this. As in the Van Sant film, there are fairly long stretches of the two characters traveling (in "Gerry", by foot; in "Twentynine Palms", by car) with little else happening. It's during the traveling that we feel the complete emptiness of the relationship. The reason, though, that I gave "Gerry" four stars is that the relationship has some depth, is palpable, emotionally reverberates, while in the Dumont film, that's not the case.

In spite of this pronounced shallowness, though, there's something going on and it ain't good. There IS a slowly creeping malaise that you do begin to feel, minute by minute, and in fact, I think Dumont does a reasonably good job at this.

The problem is that this creeping malaise is shattered with a double blast (not literally a blast, as in shotgun, but referring to an outburst) of violence at the end of the film, making it, I would say, not so much pointless, but more like a huge doofy cartoon. The cartoonishness in particular is emphasized in the totally bizarre getup one of the characters sports in the penultimate scene.

It kind of feels like the reason Dumont chose this really wacked out ending was to emphasize how America is the land of random personal violence. But the problem with that is, that point's already been made in a bunch of films. I think what he should have done is to build on the creepiness he started and instead of hitting us over the head with an outrageously cartoonish ending, move the characters to some kind of bizarre climax that much more naturally develops as a result of the buildup. I guess he just couldn't control himself.

Too bad. This really should have, I would say, two and a half stars, but maybe I was feeling generous. The creepiness is done relatively well. But the ending totally destroys it.

Too pointless to review.......2007-05-08

This couldn't have been released in theaters. I couldn't imagine it.

If you find that you have to watch this movie, here are 3 points of advice:
1. Get control of the remote to fast forward through the long pointless scenes and the almost never ending static shots.
2. Watch it on a large TV. Apparently they blew all of their money on leasing the Hummer and didn't have enough left over for a zoom lens. There are plenty of static long distance shots where it's a mystery as to where one is supposed to be looking. Hint, watch for movement.
3. Bring something else to do while it's on.

I wasn't actually able to take watching all of this thing, so maybe I missed the "good" stuff. I can say however that ending isn't part of the possibly missed good stuff.

This movie made me feel a little guilty. After watching this, I think I owe Eragon at least another star. There was some nice scenery it that one at least. The amazon scale should go something like 1/5, 2/5, 3/5, 4/5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 stars in order to properly rate the trash.

If Blockbuster had a "Pointless" section (between Mystery & Romance of course), this movie would be in it.

Not For Everyone.......2007-05-03

Let me preface this by saying that I am not keenly familiar with the work of Bruno Dumont. I know he's experimental and he could care less about narrative or content guidelines and all that fancy indie cred...I get it, he is a guy who makes movies on his own terms. The problem with that is if one of your films gets some of the attention that Twentynine Palms has from the uninitiated, or those of us who are accustomed to more conventional movies, and you have a whole bunch of people pissing on your misunderstood work. I think of a conversation I had with a film student about Peter Greenaway's The Falls. They saw it and hated it, but unfortunately for them it was the only Greenaway film they had seen, so they sort of missed the point...actually, they didn't even get the context Greenaway was making his point in. I suspect that is what's happened here.

Twentynine Palms has a narrative and it is somewhat palpable to a mainstream audience...especially one that it is eager to be shocked. Dumont tells the story of Photographer David and his French girlfriend Katia having sex and examining the beautiful landscapes of southwestern United States after leaving Los Angeles. The pacing of the film and the pretty consistent nudity and sexual content allow us to engage the characters on an intimate level and sort of enjoy the peace, or at least silence, they exist in during this road trip (mind you this is not nearly as explicit as people say it is...its just two naked people who don't even look really great naked anyway). They seem disconnected and somewhat isolated throughout. It actually reaches a level of character depth I don't think dialogue can often reach...to me it's kind of the advantage movies have over other mediums. The content during the film up to this point is what makes the film so real and believable and it did this without me really noticing its purpose. Everything is pretty ordinary with these people, but why is Dumont showing us this?

He is setting the stage for what turns out to be a very disruptive tragedy that befalls these two people. The way we are set up is what makes the film so filthy and profoundly dark. You have to really watch these characters the whole time to get the full effect, but I'm not so sure everyone in the audience wants this film to cut that deeply. There is a clear a message here and every scene assists in giving the conclusion deeper meaning.

Dumont has not created an anti-American film necessarily and he definitely doesn't set out to conquer Hollywood. He's simply made a film that tries to simulate tragedy and gives us the rare opportunity to empathize. This film is probably only really worth experiencing for a select few who can appreciate it. The rest of us should probably pass.

Aghghhhhh, this is awful!.......2006-10-07

This has got to be one of the worst films I've ever seen. The characters are pointless and one-dimensional. The guy is a jerk and inspires no sympathy. They have sudden fights over apparently nothing. In fact, there is no cause-and-effect in this movie at all! Things just happen randomly for no apparent reason. There's no real story. The takes are boring; most scenes hum along endlessly making for quite boring viewing. The violent ending wasn't even believable! Instead of inspiring any kind of shock or sympathy, I was left just thinking "what the...???" Really, really pointless all around.

Just think of.......2006-08-01

From very start slow, boring as a desert the sex-sick pair hanged around, this all-its-duration soft porn rather than a drama movie has at the very end climaxed into a cinematographic gem by unexpected actions of a rarely depicted rape and murder having inevitably brought about sophistication and value to a low budget production.

Average customer rating:

WHO'S GOT THE BAG
poorly edited and poorly paced indie thriller
Enjoyable a la Pulp Fiction or Snatch
Better than pulp fiction
Some Worthwhile Character Performances

29 Palms
Starring: Jeremy Davies , Michael Lerner , Litefoot , Russell Means , and Chris O'Donnell
Director: Leonardo Ricagni
Manufacturer: Lions Gate
ProductGroup: DVD
Binding: DVD

Crime | Action & Adventure | Genres | DVD | Video

General | Action & Adventure | Genres | DVD | Video

General | Mystery & Suspense | Genres | DVD | Video

4-for-3 All DVDs | 4-for-3 DVD | Stores | DVD | Video

DVDs Under $9.99 | Today's Deals in DVD | Special Features | DVD | Video

All Deals | Today's Deals in DVD | Special Features | DVD | Video
Similar Items:

ASIN: B00009YXEO
Release Date: 2003-08-19

Product Description

An undercover FBI agent working as a legal clerk at a casino uncovers illegal gambling activities in the small California desert town of 29 Palms, but before he can turn in his report, his boss turns on him and hires one of the best hit-men in the business to take him out. With the deal sealed and payment in hand, the hit-man is on his way, but loses his bag of money to a crazed security guard looking for a quick score. Now the hit-man has to track down his target and get his money back. The bag is stolen from one pair of greedy hands to another including a corrupt State Trooper and a waitress that he loses his heart to.

System Requirements:
Starring: Chris O'Donnell, Jeremy Davies, Rachel Leigh Cook, Michael Rapaport, Bill Pullman, Keith David, Michael Lerner, and Jon Polito.
Copyright 2003 Artisan Entertainment.

Format: DVD MOVIE

Customer Reviews:

WHO'S GOT THE BAG.......2005-05-04

Quirky and potentially interesting crime movie that loses its fizzle after its first two thirds. Using a plot we've seen dozens of times before: a hitman's bag of loot is stolen by a frenetic security guard, who the hitman was able to shoot before he got hit in the head with said bag; security guard crashes his car and crooked cop steals the money; crooked cop mails the bag to a bus station in 29 Palms. The hitman's target happens to end up in 29 Palms after evading killers and he steals the bag from the whacked out bus clerk. Target picks up a girl who is having car trouble and she takes the bag too. Problem is the target has bought several like bags and who knows which one the money is in?
All of this would work fine, but by the end of the movie, we're given so many flashbacks that don't make any sense and we're left wondering what in the world happened in those final minutes. The talented cast includes Jeremy Davies as the target; Chris O'Donnell as the pretty inept hitman; Jon Polito as the security guard; Rachael Leigh Cook as the car trouble girl; Michael Rappaport as the dirty cop; Keith David as a marijuana smoking lawman, and a deliciously insane performance from Bill Pullman as the bus clerk. Started out with high expectations, but somewhere along the line, the wind knocked the 29 palms over!

poorly edited and poorly paced indie thriller.......2005-03-19

in a sense since this was a straight to video production as far as visual wise it was surprisingly solid. But the intrigue ends there since the movie feels like it was left on the drawing board. The movie wallows in headachey camera edits and chrachters that are never draw out. The plot line feels familiar and rehashed. the shear confusion of the storyline and awkward charachters difuse any sort of interest in whats going on.The performaces are patciualrly poor by Chris Odonnell in faux cool mode and acting as hollow as ever. Jeremy Davies adds a slight bit of unabashed levity and understated acting though and Bill Pullman acts cracked out. But ultimately the experience is forgettable.

Enjoyable a la Pulp Fiction or Snatch.......2005-03-04

This movie is quite enjoyable and the characters are quirky and eccentric. The plot keeps your interest and you find yourself drawn into the drifter's world. You can feel his pain and long to see him move forward. The acting is first rate and I was particularly surprised by Chris O'Donnell's role as a hitman. I had to look twice before I realized it was him. There are many twists and the scenery is wonderful. I recently visited Twnetynine Palms on a trip to Joshua Tree Nat'l Park. While the town isn't depicted as it truly exists, the overall desert scnenery is right on target. So grab some popcorn and sit a spell in the desert of California.

Better than pulp fiction.......2004-09-25

What a bunch of cry baby idiots! For one, this movie was not about all the ppl of 29 palms or 29 palms in general. It was about ppl in particular inwhich this movie portrays very well, it doesnt matter if these ppl were in Atlantic city. Notice that most of the negative reviews only point out what the movie isnt about, geesh! one can only feel that maybe these viewers are mad because they werent in the movie are no one showed their neighborhood. lol Anyway, moving on to the movie itself, O'donnell gives a superb and somewhat comedic performance as a bad guy hitman who runs with the money, Michael Rappaport plays a crooked cop whos out for a little reward of his own when he comes across the other characters and their struggle for possession of the money. Jeremy does a good job with playing the innocent guy role as well as cook playing a valley girl gone bad, and Bill pullman as a goofy weird clerk at a bus station. This movie does what pulp fiction didnt and thats keep the pace with all of its characters and how they interact and cross each other paths. I also like the Indians in this movie and their whole buy back the land casino gig. I won't go into detail about the movie because Im not into spoilers but to be brief this is a movie revolving around a bag full of money, and what ppl will do to get their hands on it. Great acting, good plot I would reccomend this movie to anyone who wants to see something that doesnt drag in the wind.....................nuff said!

Some Worthwhile Character Performances.......2004-06-20

The storyline was old and tired to me. I did like the fact that it was filmed in 29 Palms, which is close by to where I live. I liked that it used a take on the Indian Casinos, which are all the rage here. I like Jeremy Davis and he has a cool subtleness in the way he performs, very sensitive and creating a depth to his character. I liked O'Donnell who plays against his cast type and does a good job, he really looks the part. My favorite was Bill Pullman, that guy can really act tripped out. I think he acts really freaky in this film and I liked that. I wish he had more scenes. Rappaport who is also good is in the film. I like him, its seems like he can play a cop good in any film. The other characters were over the top and I couldn't get into them, except Cook who plays her character pretty straight. I loved the ending, that was funny. The rest of the film was too predictable and I got bored with it. Anyways, for me it was probably 2 stars.
Lisa Nary

DVD:

DVD

DVD