Out of Sight

From Cinemablend

Ooh Santa! For this I can be as naughty as you want me to be! Featuring his second-best love scene, ever, this is a must-have.

Out of Sight is coming to Blu-Ray for the first time on March 1st, 2011, thus answering the question, “Remember when Jennifer Lopez was hot?” Oh, the days when Lopez starved herself to stray from curvy, and George Clooney looked…exactly the same. Well, except for this mishap that same year.

The 1998 romantic crime drama, directed by Steve Soderbergh, will feature commentary from the director and his screenwriter, Scott Frank. There will also be a featurette on the making of Out of Sight, deleted scenes, music highlights, production photographs, and the original theatrical trailer. The list price for the disc is $26.99, but you can preorder it on Amazon right now for $18.99.

I loved this movie. I don't have blu-ray, so I won't be ordering this, but it's still just an awesome flick!

What is considered to be his first best love scene?I also love this movie.

For me Solaris - nice bum

lucy wrote:What is considered to be his first best love scene?I also love this movie.

For me, it's Out of Sight, but for almost every other fan it's Solaris. And not just because of his bare bum, but it's a lovely scene.

But, I think with Out of Sight, the sexual tension and teasing makes it so much better. Solaris was great, but it didn't prolong anything, to me anyway. Even to the very end of Out of Sight, when they're heading back to the "glades", Jennifer gives George back his lighter and they touch fingers - wow the tension...

I do love the bit in the bath....but I hate the bit in the back of the car he's all muddy and icky and she keeps twitching and turning....

Henway found this video of George giving Access Hollywood a tour of the Out of Sight set. It's an oldie but a goodie!

I can't get over how different he looks. Those sideburns do nothing for him. His face now is much fuller and softer. His sense of humor is the same. He still uses some of the same lines. Thanks for the video, I had never seen it.

I hadn't become a GC-stalker when this was filmed,but OOS is one of my favs,so it was fun watching this, thanks Henway!

Even back then "I don't like these guys". She seemed to enjoy herself being with him though!

I just watched Out of Sight and liked it. Great love scene!

Cinders, luvvvvv when Gee's in bed and Jl crawls up him!!!! and of course when he's geeting his kecks off!

I love Out of Sight one of my favs like Solaris too but for different reasons. I think there is a style to out of sight and I even like J Lo in it. George stripping down to his boxers and the bath scene both great scenes.

Oooh, this is one of my fave films of his. It was such a smart film and like everyone else it seems, I loved the seduction scene in the bar. George in the bath wasn't bad either.

Katie, thanks SO MUCH for the video. BTW this love scene was rated as one of the best for that year. Not surprising!

Love the movie and the book.

Loved this.

From The Telegraph UK

Karl Killen on Out of Sight

Karl Killen, writer of The Beaver, starring Mel Gibson, explains why Steven Soderbergh’s under-appreciated 1998 crime caper Out of Sight is inspirational.

29 Sep 2011



Out of Sight feels under-appreciated for how inventive it was at the time. It’s a crime caper, but it’s the characters and the way they think and relate to each other that sticks with you. That’s what elevates it.

This was the moment when George Clooney became the George Clooney that you see in the movies today. This is where he began that throwback Cary Grant kind of swagger, where he oozes charisma. There’s a line in the film where Jennifer Lopez says, “You really wear that suit”, and that’s what Clooney can do: he’s a man who almost doesn’t even have to say anything.

Clooney and Soderbergh seem as if they have one of those partnerships where they take each other to another level. They both excel, and seems as if Out of Sight was the beginning of a career renaissance for Soderbergh – and it was the same thing for Clooney. I don’t think the number of times they have collaborated since is an accident.

There was one particular scene that was mind-blowing. It’s the love scene between Clooney and Lopez, which was edited in such a way that it created a whole different way of telling the story.

You had these two different scenes that were incredibly beautiful, and the editor realised that it was intriguing to get a glimpse of what happened next, even as you were witnessing what was happening in the present.

It was actually sexier to jump back and forth in time than to do the scene in a linear way. It put the act of physically making love on a par with verbal sparring, and I think that’s why that scene has such a smouldering quality.

That scene deeply influenced me. I would have been blown away by all the individual contributions to it: the director, the cinematographers, the actors, the score, but it’s not until you put it all together that it really becomes something. That is quintessentially what moviemaking is about – the sum of all those parts are infinitely greater than any one of the individual pieces.

I just love Out of sight and I should watch it again - it has been a while. The love scene really is mind-blowing like said on that article Katie posted.

i like Out of sight it's a nice movie ,and i like The Peacemaker too only because of clooney wear army uniform and NK is a sweet actress.

The Peacemaker was on AMC TV the other night. AMC gives little trivia notes on the bottom of the screen. Part of the trivia was the scene in the film when G's character said that the US educated most of the terrorists.

We did teach them here in US to become pilots.

Do you realize how many of them have gone to some of our most prestigeous Universities and Colleges - Harvard, Princeton,MIT, shall I go on?

lolo, you are right, he does look good in a uniform and NK is a sweet actress.

pattygirl wrote:Do you realize how many of them have gone to some of our most prestigeous Universities and Colleges - Harvard, Princeton,MIT, shall I go on?

Sad, isn't it?

Vilma! nice this one 2

who is kidding who?

OOS
a masterpiece

Again, the look on his face! I loved Don in Out of Sight too!

I'd forgotten how much I enjoyed this film, but I caught it on TV the other night and couldn't change the channel. The entire cast is wonderful, and since the love scene has been discussed (I'm going to call it a tie between OOS and Solaris for my favorite love scene), my other favorites are: Don, George, Albert Brooks and another actor in the prison library; the opening bank robbery; and pretty much every scene Steve Zahn is in. IMO, Jennifer Lopez peaked with this film. Elmore Leonard wrote a sequel that picks up where the original left off, with Jack in the back of the prison van heading back to Florida. I just started reading it, but it's fun to imagine these actors reprising their roles, although I'm sure it would never happen on film. Too bad, that would have been fun.

I agree Missa, but with everyone so much "older", I wonder how they'd account for that. Let us know how the book is when you're finished.

thanks for those too

Love that movie!!!!

'Out Of Sight' 15th Anniversary: George Clooney, Jennifer Lopez & Their Sexy Truck Scene (GIFS)

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/26/out-of-sight-anniversary_n_3492004.html

15 already!

Elmore Leonard who wrote the novel Out of Sight that the movie is based upon died today at age 87.  This reviewer reposted his original review as it was one of his first.  It is very comprehensive and a great tribute.  Elmore Leonard was a masterful storyteller.  RIP:

Goodnight, Elmore Leonard
Posted on August 20, 2013 by Walter Biggins
In honor of Dutch’s life and death, I’m reposting one of the first pieces I wrote for this blog, about one of my favorite movies, which is an adaptation of his novel.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
1998. Directed by Steven Soderbergh. Starring George Clooney, Jennifer Lopez, Ving Rhames, Don Cheadle, Steve Zahn, Viola Davis, Dennis Farina, Albert Brooks, and Michael Keaton.

As Out of Sight begins, George Clooney rips the tie off his neck and throws it to the ground. In a flourish both funny and poetic, Steven Soderbergh freezes the frame—just for a brief moment—exactly at the height of Clooney’s fury. The frozen frame shows a red blur (the tie) held high above the actor’s crazed glare, his body contorted to such a degree that we realize that every ounce of hatred he’s ever had is going into this motion.

It’s among the first of many moments in which Soderbergh will stop the movie’s propulsion, as if he’s telling you to keep alert and stay attentive for any flicker of movement—that cinematic blink might hold the key to a character’s soul. Right there, sixty seconds into the movie, he’s attuned your eyes and your mind to flickers, blinks, and quiet details that you’ll miss if you don’t pay attention. Like Clooney’s throw, it’s a belligerent, almost arrogant, challenge, but Soderbergh’s gesture is aimed directly at the audience.


It’s telling that, for all the smooth switches in time and narrative structure, the freeze frame is employed rarely in Out of Sight, and is used less and less frequently as the movie progresses. Soderbergh’s so light on his feet here that he’s trained you, at the movie’s outset, to freeze and absorb, so the movie doesn’t have to.

Good thing, too—Out of Sight moves at a rapid clip. Its menacing, hilarious humor glances at you sideways, and comes from quick mutters and half-glimpsed facial expressions—only one actor, Steve Zahn, does much slapstick, and the broad humor he projects is the movie’s indication that the character is too moronic to act with subtlety. There are several plots being juggled—a heist, a prison break, a kidnapping, a love story, a reckoning with the onset of middle age—and the movie skips lightly through themes, and several time periods, without confusing the viewer.

Sheer hilarity is smeared with blood, and the bursts of violence are as startling as they are brief and muted. For all the speed of its action, Out of Sight swings lightly and casually, brimming over with the confidence exuded by its two leads, George Clooney and Jennifer Lopez. Clooney’s been called the Cary Grant of his generation, because of his easy-does-it physicality, his absurdly gorgeous face, and his complete comfort in his skin. He’s comfortable being a man and he radiates manliness—but not machismo. He’s that rare breed whose natural grace and sexuality doesn’t daunt him. He doesn’t hide behind it or feel ashamed of it, as did Marlon Brando, but he also doesn’t exude a sense of entitlement about it. He’s confident, but not smug. Like Grant, Clooney is a natural comedian, whether in broad cartoonery (see Oh Brother, Where Art Thou?) or here in Out of Sight, where the chuckles come from near-undetectable changes in inflection and near-invisible gestures. Despite the fact that he’s a bank robber and Jennifer Lopez is a federal marshal trying to catch him, it’s clear why she’s nuts about him. And vice versa.

Smart as a whip, tough without being sassy, steely without being soulless, Lopez is terrific here. Her wit is more brittle and acerbic than Clooney’s, fitting a character that chomps on Nicorette gum and who’s in an anxiety-fueled relationship with a married man. She’s sexy because she moves and speaks like a woman, as opposed to a teenage girl—she dresses stylishly and sleekly, but with an adult’s sense of taste. (Note how many American romantic comedies have their heroines bumping into things, having “wardrobe malfunctions” played for laughs, and generally acting like gawky, unsure teenagers.) Lopez loves her man, but has been around long enough to know how this relationship is likely to end. Like most adults, she’s immersed in her career and its advancement as much as her love life. (How often did the women of Sex and the City ever grouse seriously about their jobs?).

Even her body feels fully formed. There’s the much-discussed Jennifer Lopez ass, but it’s her entire presence as a volupté that resonates. Her body takes up space in the world, and she’s not trying to shrink it down or hide it. She understands how beautiful she is, and why. Her flirtations with Clooney ring true because the dialogue, with its hesitations and initial awkwardness, feels like a conversation between two adults, and not the sappy post-adolescent goo of most romantic comedies.

All of the dialogue, in fact, sings. Since the movie is based on an Elmore Leonard novel, this isn’t a surprise. Soderbergh plants great running jokes that build on themselves, so that the payoff for a joke often comes twenty minutes after its inception. Narrative twists and character revelations percolate, so that you have a firm sense of a character’s nature and the space s/he takes up in the movie. Even Zahn, the clear buffoon of the movie, is introduced through a hilarious phone conversation between Clooney and his ex-wife (Catherine Keener)—we’re prepared for him long before we actually see him.

What most impresses me about the movie is its conversation between races and genders. Clooney and Ving Rhames have a natural, rhythmic friendship that never devolves into liberal piety. Black character actors—among them are greats Rhames, Viola Davis, Don Cheadle, and Isaiah Washington—don’t all speak in the same narrow vocal register or level of diction; black folks, even minor characters, are allowed room to stretch out. When Lopez and Clooney woo each other, we don’t have to see them to understand how they feel—the tone is so thorough and well-conceived that Out of Sight could almost be a radio play.

But then we’d miss Soderbergh’s wonderful use of color. The Miami of the movie’s first half is drenched in sunlit oranges and pastel yellows, and the camera saunters like the overcooked populace. As the plot gets (slightly) darker in tone, so does the color tone. Out of Sight’s Detroit, cast in sludgy brown ice and stark blue hues, feels cold and foreboding. The contrast between the two cities is striking, and the film blessedly doesn’t try to make them move in visually similar ways.

When Clooney and Lopez sip bourbon and flirt wantonly in a hotel bar, however, the two strains come together beautifully. Lopez’s honey-skinned face, candlelit and lovely, looks out a window at white snowflakes and their pale blue reflections on the glass—they blend into the city’s night lights so that I can’t tell the difference between the two. It’s a gorgeous scene, most of all because it shows that Soderbergh could have made Detroit look warm and friendly, but decided not to. He’s always conscious and careful with his cinematic choices, and wants the viewer to be just as careful watching the movie, even though it’s supposedly just a genre flick. His style is so offhandedly graceful that I don’t mind. In fact, I’m grateful.

http://quietbubble.wordpress.com/2013/08/20/goodnight-elmore-leonard/

Very sad indeed

Sad, yes

But thanks for the article
Surely G was really happy to read it, at the time

BBC...."The Dickens of Detroit"...Cool...

Out of Sight is on now on Showtime and I JUST realized that Michael Keaton - "the first Batman" and George "the guy who almost killed the Batman franchise" as George likes to describe his turn with the black cape and winged car - are both in this film.

I wonder if George had anything to do with that (as in it was an inside joke) or if it was just kismet casting?

Don't remember Michael Keaton in it, what part did he play?

FBI man

Yes, he had a small part as Jennifer Lopez's boyfriend who wore (even off duty) a t-shirt with FBI emblazoned on it!

[Ray is wearing an "FBI" t-shirt]
Marshall Sisco: Hey Ray, do you ever wear one that says "undercover"?
Ray Nicolet: [pause] No.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0120780/trivia?tab=qt&ref_=tt_trv_qu

LornaDoone wrote:Out of Sight is on now on Showtime and I JUST realized that Michael Keaton - "the first Batman" and George "the guy who almost killed the Batman franchise" as George likes to describe his turn with the black cape and winged car - are both in this film.  

I wonder if George had anything to do with that (as in it was an inside joke) or if it was just kismet casting?

Michael played the same character in Jackie Brown, another adaptation of an Elmore Leonard novel that was released the previous year.  The character was also in the Out of Sight novel, so they just kept the same actor when translating to film.

It was deliberate but not from George's side - I think it's the only time when the same person played the same role in two totally different (ie unrelated) film productions.

Ah, thanks for the clarification! I saw that on IMDB but it just confused me didn't understand why the same character name was coming up under Jackie Brown too!

fainting

[size=49]‘Out of Sight’ Perfected the Art of Adapting Elmore Leonard

A new TV version of ‘Get Shorty’ is a solid translation of the author’s crisp, economical prose, but it’s got nothing on Steven Soderbergh’s masterpiece

BY [size=13]ROB HARVILLA  AUG 17, 2017, 1:11PM EDT[/size]
[/size]

•  TWEET
   
  
  
•  SHARE
   
  
  
•  PIN
   
  
  
•  REC
  
  

[size=15][size=15]Universal Pictures
Elmore Leonard hated it when writers used words other than said to convey dialogue. No he replied, or quipped, or shot back, or especially asseverated. This comes up third in his 10 Rules of Writing, a list so sacrosanct you can buy it in hardcover.
The deified Western and crime novelist, who died in 2013, also disliked adverbs (like especially), and prologues, and the word suddenly. And exclamation points. (“You are allowed no more than two or three per 100,000 words of prose.”) And florid descriptions of weather on the first page. (“The reader is apt to leaf ahead looking for people.”) And florid descriptions of anything, really. Short version: “If it sounds like writing, I rewrite it.” Slightly longer version:
[/size][/size]

A rule that came to mind in 1983. Think of what you skip reading a novel: thick paragraphs of prose you can see have too many words in them. What the writer is doing, he's writing, perpetrating hooptedoodle, perhaps taking another shot at the weather, or has gone into the character's head, and the reader either knows what the guy's thinking or doesn't care. I'll bet you don't skip dialogue.

[size][size]
You sure don’t skip it when Elmore Leonard wrote it. And you sure don’t tune it out when Jennifer Lopez and George Clooney deliver it while crammed together in the trunk of her car.

The experts tell us Steven Soderbergh’s 1998 crime thriller Out of Sight is the best of his nearly 30 movies; other experts tell us the 1996 novel on which that film is based at least makes the top 10 of Leonard’s 40-odd novels overall.
Hollywood will probably get around to adapting all 40-odd of them eventually. Past high-profile attempts to bring Elmore Leonard’s work to one screen or another have resulted in TV shows both transcendent (the mighty 2010-2015 FX series Justified, based off his Raylan Givens novels) and forgotten (the short-lived 1998 ABC sitcom Maximum Bob, starring Beau Bridges, based on the 1991 book). Film-wise, too, you’ve got your duds (two separate shots at Leonard’s early 1969 novel The Big Bounce, the second a 2004 turkey starring Owen Wilson) and your qualified successes (John Travolta starred in 1995’s hit Get Shorty, based on the 1990 book).
Get Shorty is now available on both screens: Chris O’Dowd and Ray Romano lead a grim ‘n’ gritty Epix series that started earlier this month. It’s bad, or at least it certainly makes you long for John Travolta, or Timothy Olyphant as Raylan Givens, or even Beau Bridges. But it does remind us why Leonard is adapted so frequently and devoutly, and who does it well, and how they do it. Start here.

Out of Sight’s trunk scene is immortal in both mediums; you could read it—or watch it, or analyze the relationship between both versions—for hours. This is a real why don’t they make the whole plane out of the black box situation. Jack Foley (that’s Clooney) is a suave bank robber who just made a daring prison escape; Karen Sisco (that’s J.Lo) is a federal marshal who by chance witnesses that escape and gets physically scooped up and dumped into the trunk with Foley, where there is no room for weather, for adverbs, for florid descriptions, for asseverated, for hooptedoodle of any kind. No exclamation points either, though one could argue the whole scene is one giant exclamation point.
In terms of Book vs. Movie, the chronology is scrambled a bit, for starters. The novel saves Foley telling Sisco, “You don’t seem like you’re scared” for the end of their long, casual, bizarrely sensual conversation about convicts and movies; in the film version, he says it immediately. Several lines are direct lifts: “If it turns out I get shot down like a dog it’ll be in the street, not off a goddamn fence,” Movie Foley says, quoting the book and dropping only the if it and the downand swapping it’s gonna be for it’ll be.

“You must see yourself as some kind of desperado,” Book Sisco says; Movie Sisco changes desperado to Clyde Barrow, just to get a Superstar Charisma awkward-pause joke out of Clooney’s reaction. The film Network comes up in their conversation in both versions, but again, the movie wins by virtue of Clooney getting to actually ham his way through a Peter Finch impression. You could light a whole city’s power grid off of Lopez’s slow-blooming smile in reaction.
There was a play in New York City back in 2010 called Gatz where people just sat around reading The Great Gatsby out loud for seven hours; Soderbergh’s Out of Sight is the slicker and sexier and more compressed version of that, plus it has better dialogue. Scott Frank wrote the screenplay, but his fealty to Leonard’s text is near-absolute. He adds a little timeline trickery and beefs up the parts for Don Cheadle (as the home-invasion specialist and nominal Bad Guy) and Albert Brooks (as the Wall Street villain whose home gets invaded). But dialogue-wise, there are other scenes where the wording is so exact the actors might as well have paperbacks in their hands. (“You wanted to tussle. We tussled.”)
And then you get here.

Sisco and Foley finally have another conversation in a hotel bar in Detroit, and Soderbergh fires off every cannon in his arsenal (the lights, the twinkling snow, the quick shock cut to convey how close they’re sitting to each other) to make downtown Detroit look like Shangri-La. Their conversation tracks Leonard’s precisely—they start off pretending to be different people, Gary and Celeste, and their back and forth is ridiculous and electric. “Tell me, Celeste, what do you do for a living?” Foley asks, and Sisco immediately steals a line from an anonymous ad-exec doofus at the bar who’d hit on her a few minutes earlier.
[/size][/size]

Sisco: “I’m a sales rep, and I came here to call on a customer, but they gave me a hard time ’cause I’m a girl.”
Foley: “Is that how you think of yourself?”
Sisco: “As a sales rep?”
Foley: “As a girl.”
Sisco: “I don’t have a problem with it.”
Foley: “I like your hair. I like your outfit.”

[size][size]
Then he gives a speech, lifted directly from the book, about someone passing a stranger on the street and looking in that person’s eyes and seeing some sort of recognition, and how rare that is, and how you’ll think what if for the rest of your life if you don’t stop and say something, and then this happens.

Let’s not be the sort of people who sit around ranking love scenes, but let’s acknowledge that this works for The Obvious Reasons and also a few that are less obvious. The quick freeze-frames. More Shangri-La snowfall and lighting. But also the quick cuts back to the bar, for more Leonard-driven conversation, about their meeting in the trunk, about the gun he took from her, about their mutual idea to take a “timeout” from what they both actually do for a living.
None of the actual amorousness is gratuitous, on the page or on the screen; same deal with the violence in Elmore Leonard productions, most of the time. He likes his characters, the heroes and villains alike, and wants you to like them, and of course you do. This line from the Get Shorty movie sums it up; it’s in the book, too, of course.
MGM
This helps explain why Justified is my favorite show of the prestige-TV era: Because it’s action-packed and yet deceptively light-footed and -hearted, with the Bad Guys every bit as noble and magnetic as the good guys. Literally everyone is fantastically witty, and almost everyone is armed.

The show was inspired initially by the Leonard short story “Fire in the Hole.” But with three full Raylan Givens novels to draw from—including the last, Raylan, published in 2012, while the show was still going and a year before Leonard’s death—it had a wealth of deliriously great source material. The show also might’ve come closest to capturing Leonard’s essence without just reading aloud from his published work: The final two-line dialogue exchange of the series, which for spoiler-proof fans is worth revisiting, is as wonderfully macho as tear-jerkers get.
Get Shorty, as both a film and now its own peak-TV affair, is a stranger beast. The 1995 movie is mostly tolerable: John Travolta, a year after Pulp Fiction, is riding high as cuddly loan shark Chili Palmer, traveling from Florida to L.A. to track down a late payment, and break into the movie business while he’s at it. (Pulp Fiction comes up briefly in Out of Sight, the novel—Leonard liked the mysterious glowing briefcase. And Quentin Tarantino’s first post–Pulp Fiction movie, 1997’s Jackie Brown, was adapted from Leonard’s 1992 novel Rum Punch.)

Directed by Barry Sonnenfeld, the ’95 Get Shorty is a bubbly, colorful, and silly affair. It’s awfully nonthreatening given that there’s like 12 people running around going, “Where the fuck is my money?” (As on Justified and in most of Leonard’s stuff generally, the only Actual Bad Guys are those who attack or threaten women or children.) Think of this movie as the successful version of Gigli, a slightly less effective J.Lo vehicle that historically botched the same Whimsical Gangster vibe.
Leave this stuff to professionals. Get Shorty’s cast is absurdly loaded: Out of Gene Hackman, Rene Russo, Delroy Lindo, pre-Sopranos James Gandolfini with a ponytail, Out of Sight vet Dennis Farina, and Bette Midler, it’s Danny DeVito who plays the movie star. Plotwise, things get confusing and a little tiresome, but there’s plenty of Leonard’s DNA to keep the deterioration of audience goodwill to a minimum, including a wealth of book-verbatim lines like Chili Palmer’s early vow that “I won’t say any more than I have to, if that.” Clearly he owns Leonard’s 10 Rules of Writing in hardcover.

The Get Shorty Epix series—created by Shameless executive producer and former Mighty Mighty Bosstones keyboardist Davey Holmes—has aired only two episodes thus far, and it’s hard to figure out this show’s angle or its fealty to Leonard. Unlike the movie, it has no interest thus far in mimicking the book. Chili Palmer is long gone; Chris O’Dowd plays a low-level erudite tough guy with the way less evocative name Miles Daly, and he starts off living in cruddy old Nevada, not Palmer’s primary-colors Miami. The book and the movie both begin with Palmer flashing some whimsy-menace as he recovers a stolen coat; the show starts with a random dude getting his tongue ripped out.
Epix
I’m not sure you need this: more bleak prestige grit, all crude violence with very little style or joie de vivre (though joie de vivre would be fun to hear O’Dowd say in his thick Irish accent). This new Get Shorty is thus far way too reminiscent of The Good Wife’s merciless prestige-grit show-within-a-show Darkness at Noon; either that or it’s going for True Detective and getting about as close as Gigli got to Get Shorty.
I wonder what Elmore Leonard would’ve made of True Detective: If he’d have admired the evocative gloom, the erudite-tough-guy aura debt it clearly owed him, or if he would’ve dismissed it as florid hooptedoodle. This new Get Shorty works fine if you need another bleak crime thriller, but it’s not sharp or assured or wry enough to live up to its name. You are apt to skip ahead looking for people; so far it’s all adverbs and no verbs, unworthy of Chili Palmer’s coat, let alone Karen and Jack’s trunk.[/size][/size]

https://www.theringer.com/movies/2017/8/15/16145880/steven-soderbergh-movies-ranked

Great article! They really put some thought into their analysis of the films. I generally agree with them, although I liked "Solaris" better than they did and didn't think "The Good German" was that bad. Of course, I don't see the films as technically as they do. Totally agree on "Ocean's 11" and "Out of Sight".
Thanks, benex.

(PS - I'm still waiting for someone to tell me how George got back into the room with Bruiser in "Ocean's 11" - and now I'm also asking: What was the point of building the duplicate vault? Any explanation of either gratefully accepted. )