The Poison Rose

Good movie!

Recomendo

Good movie!

Good movie!

Good movie!

Good movie!

Very modern 'Marlow-ish' in colour. Travolta is at his best playing the more serious role. Brendan Fraser certainly looked different but played his role well as a camp 'mad doctor'. Not a bad film for the Generation X.

What a long ride, even though the movie is only 93 minutes in length. The Poison Rose tells the chronicle of private investigator Carson Phillips, or he tells it himself, as he digs into a story of deceif and deception on his hometown in Galvestone, Texas. Actually, he digs into a bunch of stories. As he keeps sniffing around, he keeps uncovering more s*** to investigate. Is everything connected? That's what keeps us going. Carson hasn't been in Galvestone for 20 years and, being a small town, as it is stated sometimes, nothing is kept in secrecy. As he pokes around, everyone get to know something. I like the slow pace of the movie. I actually like movies like this one. Travolta's persona is amazing and his slow pace, sarcastic, character sets this movie's style and rhythm. There's even some comedic relief for good measure. Fraser's character is likeable and, as he is now, he's perfect for the role (which kinda makes me sad). Nothing to be said about Freeman, Patrick and everyone else, they are fine. With its twists and turns, I like this movie as it is. It's slow, I'll give it that, but for nowaday standards, I think it holds himself as a fine crime thriller. It has no mastermind plot or anything, it's just an entertaining investigation that unfolds.

OK, for real. Yes, we were watching this movie when my wife had a mild stroke (she's fine now), but I don't think the movie had anything to do with that. That being said, this is a seriously bad movie. Let's start with the title, Poison Rose. Typically, when you title a work, that title has something to do with, you know, the story. In this movie, there are two roses - Rose, Doc's daughter, played by the criminally underused Kat Graham, and Rose the nightclub where we meet Doc and the sheriff and the hippie guy and Rose and Happy and such. Yet, neither of these roses have much of anything to do with the story. The director clearly doesn't have a good idea of what he's doing. Neither does the editor. I mean, there's a bit early in the movie when pretty much everything stops for the better part of minute while the camera concentrates on Travolta lighting a cigarette. Just basic, obvious stuff any decent editor would know to have cut around. I could go on and on. It's really, really bad.

I once used to try to dig john travolta, but unfortunately , for each flick i see him in he is keeping on digging himself his own grave, and have soon dug himself to china, to try financing his future products ,full stop. no, i did see this film because i like morgan freeman, 82 yrs of age, even a bit older than me, and well he does not impress either. its a film about a small time private detective that sets out on a mission to find a little ol lady in a dull texas gulf coast town, and as three is a lucky number it is his beloved town where he was born and raised 20 years ago..so everybody is so happy to see him and shadows or shadows away from him, as he is like good old colombo, making people dizzy and frustratedby the talk and walk as an intrusive threat. he finds a lot of errors in the community and sets out to clear up everything before returning to sunny l.a.. its a boring flick, i smiled at 2 occasions, and its neither dramatic or thrilling, and the shootouts are so bonanza like that tuscon city took his tux-on and took hi ho silver to bed. the story,plot and point of this story,are just as meaningless as this review, so dont bother read it and dont bother watch the film, its not good.