Snake Eyes (1998) User Reviews

No Dice

[tjcclarke · 6/10 · 17 September 2004]

I'm a sucker for the steady-cam. Scorsese's famous entry-to-the-nightclub scene in Goodfellas that was so perfectly aped by Jon Favreau and co. in the wonderful Swingers is probably still the daddy, but the shot that glides around Mark Wahlberg to the sultry strains of 'Best of my Love' in Boogie Nights runs it pretty close. For sheer audacity though, you need look no further than the opening section of Brian De Palma's Snake Eyes.

I own a thesaurus and am fairly adept at the old 'Shift+F7' trick, but this scene left me clutching thin air for superlatives. The beauty is, it comes from nothing. The film opens up on ground that is not so much well trodden as mercilessly stamped upon: A local news reporter helpfully sets the scene for all her faithful viewers and of course, for all of us too.

But from the moment she hands over to her colleague inside an Atlantic City casino, banality is banished. What follows is a mesmerising, one-take, directorial tour de force. It is fight night and we follow bent copper Rick Santoro (Nicolas Cage) as he swaggers around making shady deals and collaring nefarious snitches for bribes and pay-offs. He checks in on heavyweight boxer Lincoln Tyler (Stan Shaw) who is preparing for the feature bout and then goes in to the arena. There he meets up with old chum Kevin Dunne (Gary Sinise) who is head of security for the evening and settles down for the action.

The fight doesn't last long. Tyler is caught by a massive haymaker in the first round and windmills backwards. At the same time a sniper high in the rafters takes aim and assassinates the US Defence Secretary who is seated just behind Santoro. Chaos ensues and the curtain closes on the first act with the camera swirling upwards at the end of its long journey. Unbelievably fifteen minutes have passed by the time De Palma shouts cut.

Impressive stuff. Indeed, De Palma seems so pleased with the shot that he decides to hang the whole movie on it, revisiting events from different perspectives using flashback and CCTV footage as Santoro tries to piece together what has happened.

Sadly, from such high, heady beginnings, Snake Eyes has a long way to fall. And fall it does. Spectacularly. Nose-dives would be a better assessment.

Cage does his best, rolling out both familiar personas: the extravagant clown and the intense, introspective everyman, but he can't fight his way through a clunker of a plot.

Conspiracy-wise, I don't suppose it would be an outrageous spoiler for me to mention that Dunne is up to his neck in it. If you want to shroud your movie in ambiguity, you are probably better off not casting Gary Sinise as the villain of the piece. Let's face it: he's no Jimmy Stewart. Sinise must be one of the shiftiest looking men on the planet – the furrowed brow, those furtive eyes - the military uniform simply tops off the caricature of a disillusioned ex-soldier with a chip on his shoulder. I wouldn't buy a used car from him, let alone put him in charge of security of an event attended by a major dignitary.

The acting is not bad, the cinematography remains slick and glossy throughout – even the direction is solid and unpretentious – but the lesson here is that nothing will work if you don't have a story. This is insipid nonsense that meanders along pointlessly and then confusingly and abruptly just ends. There is no steady build up of tension and no devious twist. Instead we have a bizarre and strangely out of place postscript which is probably an attempt to cleverly keep the camera rolling beyond the standard good triumphing over evil, lovers clinch, stretch out into widescreen and roll credits finale that closes most action flicks.

It backfires spectacularly. Rather than being innovative and bittersweet, the last scene is irritating and mildly deflating. Action heroes are meant to be flawed, we don't want to watch them screwing up their lives, we know they are gamblers and alcoholics. I would rather see them save the day, kiss the girl and I'll take the rest on faith thank you very much.

6/10

Interesting assassination thriller

[Tweekums · 7/10 · 21 January 2015]

Protagonist Rick Santoro is a cop in Atlantic City; he is not a hero; he takes bribes and shakes down crooks rather than arrest them. His friend Commander Kevin Dunne is almost his opposite; an upstanding naval officer who is in town leading the security detail of the Defence Secretary. Dunne is keen for everything to go well as his boss watches a boxing match… unfortunately it doesn't while Dunne is investigating a suspicious redhead shots ring out and the Secretary goes down. A second shot clips the woman next to him and as she flees Santoro sees that her blonde hair was a wig. Dunne shoots the assassin but he knows he messed up however Santoro assures him he can spin it so he looks good.

At first it looks like a single terrorist is behind the crime but the investigation quickly suggests otherwise; the shooter fired just after the favourite hit the canvas in what TV footages shows was a dive. We soon learn that he was approached by the redhead and another member of the crowd shouted his cue to dive… clearly there was a conspiracy. It looked as though this was going to be a mystery but forty minutes in we learn who the chief bad guy is at it isn't much longer before we learn the wounded girl was in fact a target as she was blowing the whistle on company giving falsified data to win a defence contract. The question is will Santoro save her and expose the corruption or will he live up to his reputation and take the easy option.

This is a solid thriller; not a classic but worth watching on television or picking up if you see it in the bargain bin. The story gets off to a good start and sets up an interesting mystery… it is just a shame that the bad guy was exposed so soon; it would have been better if we'd learnt his identity at the same time as Santoro. The action is well handled even if things get a bit cliché towards the end. Nicolas Cage is delightfully over the top as Santoro and Gary Sinise is solid as his friend Dunne. Carla Gugino looks good as the female lead although her character is sadly underused. Overall an entertaining way to pass an hour and a half.

A Three Ring Circus of a Movie- I Loved It!

[bababear · 20 August 1998]

Overblown, overdirected, overacted: that's why I always enjoy DePalma's movies. He made the statement that the camera lies 24 times a second, and SNAKE EYES plays on that theme.

De Palma's camera is constantly in motion, roaming through the arena, casino , and hotel as if it had a life of its own. At the beginning of the film we watch Nick Santoro (Nicolas Cage) as he swims through the sewer (his words) that is the Atlantic City casino world. He tells us, "This isn't a beach town. It's a sewer. It's my sewer, I am the king."

It's literally a dark and stormy night. A hurricane (a tv reporter is pressured to refer to it as a 'tropical depression' on the air) is coming ashore, and 14,000 people are gathered at a casino complex to watch a prizefight.

There's a shooting during the fight, and Cage orders the exits sealed; who would go outside into a hurricane remains a mystery, but anyhow. There are two mysterious women involved in the incident, and as time passes he realizes that there were lots of people involved, possibly even his longtime friend Navy Commander Dunne (Gary Sinese) who is as straight-arrow as Cage's character is sleazy.

By the end of the story Cage is working toward redemption- even though during the early part of the film it's made clear that he sees everything as having a price.

There's one point where he is offered a million dollars to reveal where one of the women (she knows a lot- too much- about a defense contract, and was talking to the Secretary of Defense when he was shot) is hiding. And there 's a very real chance that he might give in, or be unable to protect her when the danger gets intense.

Men in De Palma's films have a way of failing to come through for women in critical situations. An executive couldn't save his wife in OBSESSION. A young actor couldn't protect a mysterious, beautiful woman in BODY DOUBLE. The nicest guy in school couldn't keep the outcast/prom queen CARRIE from humiliation and its awful consequences. In the superb BLOW OUT a movie soundman rescues a young woman from a sinking car early in the story, but is too late to save her from a madman at the film's conclusion.

So there is no guarantee of a happy ending. Self doubt weighs heavily in De Palma's films, and often people's best efforts are to no avail.

Admittedly David Koepp and De Palma's script is something of a problem. There's a complex conspiracy underfoot, and conspiracies are low on my list of compelling things- I got burned out on them in the seventies.

Far more compelling is the great fun that Cage has with his character. Boy, does he get to chew scenery here. Constantly in motion, talking on his cell phone (even during a hurricane; some of my friends can't use theirs when a cloud passes over the sun), interacting with the low life characters around the casino.

And, oh, does DePalma have fun with the whole thing. Of course, nothing is what it seems to be. He retells the action from the viewpoint of this or that character: we sometimes literally see what happened through that character's eyes. An important setpiece in which we finally see what really happened in clear perspective uses split screen imagery- and in the theatre where we saw SNAKE EYES the use of stereo sound was an integral part of the seperation of images.

For all the bravado of his performance, I was impressed with Cage's ability and willingness to share the screen with other actors. In some of the retellings he is a supporting character or featured extra, and as an actor he's more than willing to let our attention shift to someone else. A lesser actor might have been afraid of that shift of focus. Way to go, Nicolas. That's a real sign of maturity as an actor.

So did I buy into De Palma's bag of tricks? Yup, 100%. It's nice to see a movie that isn't afraid of the old razzle-dazzle. I do appreciate subtlety and complex ideas- that's why I'm a voracious reader. I really don't think I'd enjoy De Palma directing an adaptation of a Jane Austen novel or REMEMBRANCE OF THINGS PAST. The Merchant- Ivory people do that sort of thing so nicely. But it was nice to sit back for an hour and a half and let a master showman use illusion to fool us and let our eyes fool our brains.

On a five scale, Pops gives it four slot machines.

A Brian De Palma film about a shady cop finds himself in the middle of an assassination conspiracy

[ma-cortes · 7/10 · 6 November 2023]

Snake Eyes (1998) has echoes of the technical wizardry and complex plotting of other Palma films. It starts with an important boxing match in an Atlantic City casino. We are following Ricky Santoro (Nicolas Cage), a flamboyant and corrupt Atlantic City policeman who reveals in the fact that he sees every angle. Ricky has a dream: become so well connected that he can become mayor. In lieu of that, he'll settle for keeping his comfortable lifestyle. On the night of the heavyweight boxing championship, Rick becomes mixed up in a murder, whose security was in charge of his best friend and old pal, Navy Commander Kevin Dunne (Gary Sinese). The latter is keeping an eye on Secretary of Defence Kirkland, who has a ringside seat courtesy of arena owner and munitions tycoon Gilbert Powell (John Heard). Becoming the investigating officer in the case, Rick soon uncovers a conspiracy to kill the Secretary of Defence (Fabiani) and involved a mysterious woman in white (Carla Gugino). The conspiracy was shocking, but not half as shocking as the identity of its mastermind !. Believe Everything Except Your Eyes !. Watch Closely. Now you see it. Now you don't. He's got 14,000 eyewitnesses and no one saw a thing. Seeing is Deceiving !.

Interesting and fast-paced suspense/thriller, recognisably from the blood-spattered hands of expert cinéaste Brian De Palma. De Palma's coldly executed techno-thriller open with a signature sequence: a continuous Steadicam shot begins out of Atlantic City sports arena, then snakes its way along corridors, up stars and down and elevator, to reveal the packed crowd awaiting the start of a heavyweight boxing match. This haunting thriller flick is plenty of mystery, intrigue, plot twists and suspenseful. Developing throughout a complex police procedure in which Santoro/Nicolas Cage takes charge of the investigation, as he immediately seals the crowd inside the arena and using TV and surveillance camera playback, scans the screens for clues as to the killer's identity. As Santoro interviews key witnesses , the film turns into ¨Rashomon¨ with action replays, as we see flashbacks from multiple points of view. The mechanics of suspense are worked quite well by the filmmaker and tension developing quite adequately, but De Palma has made a habit of dwelling on their more strange side-shoots. Edgy intrigue and powerful kinetic energy are generated by the surprising revelations and razor-sharp editing, while the truth behind its convoluted conspiracy has a really serious emotional and political undertow. A highly attractive film displaying a great cast and catching musical score by Ryuichi Sakamoto who along with Pino Donaggio are De Palma's favorite composers, in Bernard Herrmann style and imitating former hits. There is much for De Palma buffs to savour in this thrilling and atmospheric handling of a complex story with deliberately old-fashioned treatment and filled with twists and turns.

This elegantly dreamy 'Snake Eyes' is as rich and rare as anything De Palma's made for a while. The cinéphile Brian De Palma is a genre unto himself these days, including his own trademarks and a plot twist which, as the writer/filmmaker admits, will alienate half the audience. The movie introduces us to Hitchcock style and the visuals are often impressive. Adding special characteristics techniques as ominous camera movements and split screen. The result is provocative, surprising, outrageous and fun. Stars Nicolas Cage who makes a stubborn, poised, foul-mouthed, confident hero. And Gary Sinese is pretty good as a miltitary officer who gets involved in twisted problems. They're well accompanied by a good cast giving greater or lesser interpretations, such as: John Heard, Carla Gugino, Stan Shaw, Kevin Dunn, Michael Rispoli, Joel Fabiani, Luis Guzmán, David Anthony Higgins, Mike Starr, MarK Camacho, Tamara Tunie, among others.

It contains colorful and glamorous cinematography by cameraman Stephen H. Burum, as well as intriguing and thrilling musical score by composer Ryuichi Sakamoto. Displaying a professional and graphically mysterious direction from cinéphile Brian De Palma. This is yet another Hitchcock tribute and the reason for the chief amusement turning out to be inquire what scenes taken from Master of suspense. That's why takes parts especially from Hitchcock. The flick was well directed Brian De Palma in his usual style, but it turns out to be inferior to the other similar suspense films that he directed. This ¨Snake eyes¨(1998) ¨along with ¨Sisters¨, Obsession, ¨Body Double¨, ¨Dressed to Kill¨, ¨Blow out¨ , ¨Femme Fatale¨ most of them resulting outwardly odes to Hitchcock with the accent on the killing, but on many occasions are really decent. Rating : 7/10. Notable thriller, it gets some riveting basic ideas and fascinating images .

Pulpy Fun Full of Cage

[TwistedContent · 6/10 · 9 January 2021]

Whether you are a fan of Cage, De Palma, Sinise or pulpy vintage thrillers, "Snake Eyes" has some goodies to offer. The guys are having all kinds of good fun, going about movie's biggest flaw, a plot that wants to be grounded, suspenseful, gritty, but loses plausibility and momentum the deeper we go. If You can turn a bit of a blind eye to that, welcome to Cage's world.

Brian De Palma has made Nicolas Cage into the admirably positive minded, flamboyant, deeply flawed hero Ricky Santoro, a hotshot police detective with the amount of energy only Nic can provide. The story takes place on one night during a boxing match taking place at Atlantic City Casino, which Ricky attends together with his friend and naval officer Kevin Dunne (Gary Sinise). Little did Ricky know, a massive criminal conspiracy is about to manifest itself with the murder of an important political figure right in the middle of the fight. Ricky, naturally, decides to uncover the mystery on his own and his own way.

"Snake Eyes" start enigmatically, beautifully, with the camera spinning up a 20 minute continuous dance, making first introductions and yet unknown connections between the variety of characters we'll see later on. Straight away it's more than apparent that fans of Cage like myself are in for a treat. Overacting it may be, I don't feel privileged enough to tell given the amusing character of Ricky, but take away Nicolas from the equation and, trust me, it looks worse now. A character like Santoro fits his energetic and amusing nature. As he's flowing around and interacting with an entertaining cast of familiar faces and good performances (Carla Gugino, Luis Guzman, Stan Shaw, Kevin Dunne), solving all kinds of little, pulpy, episodic, amusing problems, the bigger, more boring conspiracy is also uncovering. When the big cat's out of the bag, which is like half-way through the film, that's where "Snake Eyes" become slower, less exciting and a lot more predictable, or in other words, disappointing. The first half is a decent pulp dime novella, and the second an uninspired chase thriller.

Multiple perceptions of a singular event, relationships between them, and the audience, is what "Snake Eyes" is mostly about, and I wonder what would've come out of it with a richer story and a less lackluster ending. De Palmas relentless visual style, paired with Cage's unique charms and the lively, saturated setting of a huge event in an arena, provides enjoyable jolts of pulpy melodrama. But when all the tricks are played, we are left with a movie too typical to ascend above others... Visually, the intro sequence is not the only impressive part, so those aspects endure, despite some other minor technical flaws (or bad ideas), like almost cartoon-like swooshing sounds during the boxing scenes.

"Snake Eyes" is not a great movie, but I do have a good amount of appreciation for it, particularly Palma's direction and, you know, Cage for the win! As a mystery/thriller of the 90's, it should please the seekers of such flicks. As for Cage fans, assemble, it will please. My rating: 6/10.

Nicely assembled thriller.

[Samiam3 · 7/10 · 17 July 2010]

Snake Eyes is not very original as a premise, yet the material feels engaging and fresh as it unfolds on the screen. It is also well shot, well edited, and while the story is kind of silly, it never gets too convoluted and it says linear and focused. It's not a great movie, but as it stands, it makes a pretty fun thriller.

It is fight night in Altantic City, and the Secretary of Defence is attending. Unfortunately for him (and the nation I supposed) he is gunned down in the middle of the match. Panic erupts, and the police lock down the arena, leaving fourteen thousand possible suspects and/or eye witnesses inside. It is up to detective Rick Santoro to gets some answers.

If I am gonna make any complains about the film, it would be the following two. Nicholas Cage (as usual) over-acts BIG TIME!!! I MEAN HE REALLY OVER DOES HIS PERFORMANCE!!!!!!! WHAT THE HECK??!!! ............excuse me. I also find the Climactic finale a bit over directed. Any who knows movies, knows that Brian de Palma likes to stage his adrenaline like an opera, with bold assertive scoring, and slow motion, plus an emphasis on physical acting. Sometimes it feels right, sometimes not. One thing he always gets right though, is his integration of a long sweeping shot. Snake Eyes begins with one, and it takes up most of the first scene in fact, that's pretty good.

Snake Eyes despite its flaws is crafted skillfully enough to sustain a viewer for a hundred minutes. It is not a film that needs to be seen but it is a good one to watch if you catch it on the box one night.

Flawed, quickly-forgotten De Palma thriller

[Leofwine_draca · 6/10 · 23 December 2016]

Brian De Palma directed this slow-moving thriller which was widely hated by both movie goers and critics alike on its release. In retrospect, however, it's a fun film, with a complex plot to keep the viewer thinking and guessing as the film progresses. While some moments do drag, I found myself enjoying the film totally throughout as I was caught up in the story so well. The acting is very good here, with Nicolas Cage perfectly cast as a bullish cop who initially is loud and unlikeable, but who becomes more sombre and withdrawn as time goes on, until he's just a beaten wreck at the end of the film. Gary Sinise puts in another excellently villainous performance (even if his villainous identity was revealed in the film's trailer) and I loved the scene at the end of the film where he was trapped in the headlights of the car before committing suicide, the look of anguish on his face was superb. The rest of the cast is all good, especially the female lead who is both tough and yet vulnerable. However it's really Cage who carries the film as his character is given the most depth. I have always admired Cage as an actor as he is so unlikeable, yet still a good actor anyway.

There are lots of taut sequences in this film and also some excellent scenes, like the beginning tracking shot which goes on forever, or the suspenseful moment when both Cage and Sinise are hunting for the key witness to the crime down long hotel corridors. The action is surprisingly sparse and therefore the film does get bogged down a bit by heavy, long-winded explanations, although there are some brutal fight scenes, not just in the arena either. I also liked the use of flashbacks and points of view which show what happened before the assassination, these give a greater depth to the story and there's no doubt that De Palma has a real cinematic flair. Originally, I hear that the film was supposed to have a tidal wave (created by Industrial Light and Magic) flood the building but that this was cut out. I can only think how much better the film would have benefited with this climax. As it stands, it is a bit of an anti-climax at the end, but this didn't spoil the film for me as I was having a great time puzzling over things anyway. Good but flawed.

Good potential, terrible writing

[drjnfever · 3/10 · 10 July 2004]

This movie caught my attention on cable as I was flipping channels. The mystery and the setup were great. The placement of suspicious events was great. At one point, I even commented to myself, "this is a good f---in' movie!" Boy was I wrong.

As the story unfolded, you wish it didn't. It's a good movie before you find out what's going on. Then the plot holes, cheesy dialogue, outrageously contrived situations, and just plain comical story progression spread like wildfire. It's almost as if someone came up with a great story idea and then left it in the hands of a high school scriptwriting hobbyist.

The investigation of the murder of the US Defense Secretary in front of 14,000 witnesses is left up to one city cop and one military security officer who are best friends? People are running around a casino and being able to stay hidden? I better stop there because if I start listing plot holes and stupid scenarios, we'll never get out of here. I'm trying really hard not to comment on the end. It's like whoever was writing the script got tired of writing and just threw something together so he could rest his fingers and get paid.

However, if you can not focus on the bad writing (kinda like not focusing on a speeding train heading towards you), the style of the film is quite interesting. I liked how the story (terrible as it was) unfolded through the different angles and points of view of different people. The timing and placement of action were executed well.

It's too bad that a movie has to rely on something as minor as a script in order to be good.

-----SPOILER-----

I like Gary Sinise. He's a good actor. But unfortunately, he's usually typecast as a bad guy, so I kinda suspected he was involved all along.

Snake Eyes

[marmar-69780 · 7/10 · 30 September 2020]

Snake Eyes isnt my favourite Cage film from 90s but it is still a fun film to see and it has good acting duo in it.Cage was again very solid here and even if his character here is more normal compared to rest of his resime,he still give a very good act and character story progress,Sinise was also good here and he showed that he is very talented actor that should be in a far more movies then he actually is,expecely this days.Story wasnt nothing new and it didnt felt really fresh but it surved its purpose and it give me a solid time in front of screen

A feast of visuals, but a famine of suspense.

[Talz · 5/10 · 8 August 1998]

Director Brian DePalma has always been excellent at letting the visual image speak for itself (like Hitchcock, with whom he is often compared). In "Snake Eyes", the juxtaposed and multi-angled images are captivating for a while, until you realize how unsuspenseful the story quickly becomes. Once all the key players and plot elements are revealed, the film seems to have nowhere to go and resorts to those hokey flashback devices where we see the events play out differently via each character's recollection. Cage and Sinise do the best they can with the material, but they lack real motivation, mirroring the film's lack of direction. This particularly hurts Sinise's characterization which starts out solid, then is set adrift mid-way through the film, and winds up completely contrived by the end. Overall a disappointment, but maybe not a bad rental if you are a Nicholas Cage fan.

De Palma masterpiece that doesn't get enough appreciation

[UniqueParticle · 10/10 · 5 June 2021]

One of the most captivating movies I've seen which is strange that I've seen before a few times and forgot a lot of it. Impressive how it was shot some parts feel so authentic that weren't practiced first, seems so genuine! I can't believe there's more people that bashed Snake Eyes then not. Nicolas Cages wild energy is exceptional he's unlike most people, I love that! Amazing how Carla Gugino is sexy and how she's part of the master plan.

"Well, at least I got to be on TV"

[Quinoa1984 · 7/10 · 29 May 2006]

(2020 review) It's a good thing I waited about, oh (checks watch) 22 years to rewatch Snake Eyes - since I saw it as an adolescent opening weekend - as I have a (somewhat) different perspective on the film. It helps that at the time I only knew Brian De Palma from the only other work Id seen from him, Mission: Impossible, and at the time this felt like a pretty natural progression from that blockbuster: both are about shadowy government conspiracies that can fly over the head of someone who is too young to know much better about logic or how things work in the grownup world, and can just appreciate the suspense and A-list actors doing what they do with these roles.

Now, I've seen Blow Out, and indeed practically all of the rest of the director's catalog, not to mention a whole shitload more of Cage, and it's certainly a film by that director as well... Just not quite on that level. Then again, how could it be? That story of a sound man for low budget movies stumbling on a conspiracy via the power of cinematic grammar and the bond that forms and (spoiler) is broken by the end between Travolta and Nancy Allen was astonishing for its marriage of technical craft and emotional resonance, and as an 80s movie that spoke to the disillusionment of the previous two decades. Snake Eyes is taking a cue from that as far as "OmG our government has some really dastardly people out for power grabs with... Defense contracts and missile systems" and so forth, which, fine, but it doesn't seem like the story has that much complexity past it being an Intricate Conspiracy Plot for the sake of De Palma getting to do his thing as a master stylist.

This sounds like I'm complaining, but I'm largely not, insofar as overall enjoyment goes. I liked this more than when I was a more thickheaded young teen, and seeing this filmmaker get to do what he wants on a fairly large canvas, not to mention understanding how much he's not just soaked in Hitchcock Bleach but so many of the concepts and visual cues and motifs of film noir (boxing match gone awry, women in double crossing roles or just not what they seem, double crossing in general, corruption abounding including with our protagonist Atlantic City detective, storytelling from various points of view with multiple narrators), I got a kick out of seeing how he finds a way to filter all these ideas through his own visual language and framework.

So as far as the simple thrill of a superb director pulling off things like that opening (almost) unbroken tracking shot, that one shot panning over the hotel rooms (which holy jellyfish Spielberg totally stole for a similar moment in Minority Report), to the split screen and the POV shots we get when being told the stories of what went down, from fighter to red-headed red-herring (ho ho), it's fun stuff. Where it falters a bit is the emotional resonance part, where it needs to get us to believe that there's this backstory and friendship between Cage and Sinise (Cage and Gugino is different as it's a lot more brief so there doesn't need to be as much there except for what's required suspense-wise).

I didn't buy that they were somehow at some level that the eventual betrayal was so shattering. Maybe, as solid as he is, Sinise is slightly miscast (though probably better than... Will Smith who was considered, too young I think) - I knew something was up with him from the start, even as a dumb young moviegoer in 98, because he seems shady from the jump. Maybe with a slightly nicer-looking guy, like Bill Paxton or someone like that, it could have been a stronger turn when it's revealed how rotten he is. Or, again, I just didn't see how his plan to assassinate a defense secretary needed to even uh... Be, so a main part of the plot doesn't hold water either.

And yet, I still recommend Snake Eyes because it's a thriller that takes chances with how to convey us details and story through how everything is presented (the video surveillance is another key filmmaker touch and one that fits right at home here), and because Cage is having a great time playing an openly sleazy but not BAD guy who realizes how deep he's into some shit, at a time when he was in Full Movie Star mode as a leading man. Last but not least, Carla Gugino, if you'll permit me a moment... Ahhh, what a sexy and very good actor here.

Unlikable main character and all-too-obvious bad guy

[duce122 · 5/10 · 24 March 2003]

Snake Eyes (1998) D: Brian De Palma. Nicolas Cage, Gary Sinise, John Heard, Carla Gugino, Stan Shaw, Kevin Dunn, Michael Rispoli, Luis Guzman. Acceptable action film places Cage as a loud-mouthed, hot shot police officer who, along with 14,000 screaming fans, witnesses the murder of the U.S. secretary of defense while attending a boxing match. Of course, there is a conspiracy which he uncovers in 98 minutes. First film I have ever seen where I knew who the bad guy was just by viewing the opening credits. This `twist' is revealed halfway through the film, so by the end, it's hard to imagine why the audience would even care. In addition, Cage plays one of the most unlikable main characters in recent memory. On the plus side, the Hitchcock-esque unbroken opening shot is a great touch. Unfortunately the rest of the film is drab. RATING: 5 out of 10. Rated R for violence and profanity.

The Eye That Lies

[tedg · 14 November 2000]

This is a wonderful experience. Never mind that the acting is poor and the story weak --that was never the point. This film was made because DePalma knows how to make his camera dance and wanted to make a film based on that notion.

A central question in most art concerns the role of the viewer. This dominated easel painting, then was the center of evolution of the novel and now sits at the core of thought about film. Is the viewer an omniscient God, or can the viewer be fooled like a person? Is the viewer a passive observer, or does she `walk' with the participants as an invisible character? So many clever questions.

DePalma thinks the camera is a whole new thing, The camera is a type of character, part narrator, part actor, part god. It can lie, be fooled, search curiously, document, play jokes. So this is a film about the camera's eyes. `Snake' both because the camera can snake around following Cage, going places that Cage cannot, but also `snake' because the camera sees with forked tongue.

So we have one seemingly continuous shot of the key scene, which is played first from Cage's perspective, then the fighter's, the Navy guy, the Girl, then the cop again, and finally the `flying eye.' Along the way, every eye trick DePalma can think of is woven in:

--The girl's glasses are crushed so she sees less than the audience

--The whole mess is about what a satellite sees

--The casino has 1000 cameras which our own eyes coopt

--The thing is framed by the TV eye

--God-like, we scan over several hotel rooms while Cage and Sinese are stuck in the hallway maze

--Splitscreen simultaneity

--The whole thing is in real time, as if you were living in the action

This is masterfully intellectual. See it. Forget the story.

A joy for the De Palma fans, for most others it's just another confusing thriller.

[Boba_Fett1138 · 7/10 · 23 September 2007]

Just like with "Femme Fatale" was the case, the opening sequences of this movie is more legendary than the actual movie itself. The opening sequences of this movie lasts for about 13 minutes. It seems like its one big long take but there are some hidden cuts in it. Most people that are really into movies will notice some of the cuts. De Palma uses some good editing tricks and crafty cinematography. It also makes the opening the highlight of the movie. Of course you can wonder if its really wise and good for a movie to have its best moment in the beginning. Everything that comes after it just doesn't match up to it and it might very well be the reason why this movie disappointed many people.

I really like it how the same events are told throughout the movie from different viewpoints. It sheds now light on the truth and helps to unveil the story and plot. That's some great film-making! It also makes the movie a very original one in its sort.

Yes, the movie gets at points hard to follow, mainly because it isn't always credible what's happening on the screen. Nevertheless, I remember the first time I saw the movie that the twists in it surprised me and the story was a great mysterious one.

Nicolas Cage and Gary Sinise are really strong actors in this movie. It takes some skill to handle all those long scene's without messing up and staying consistent. Especially Gary Sinise is great but I think that Nicolas Cage is also under-appreciated in his role. You are supposed to sort of dislike him, I mean he really isn't a clean cop, and that's what I like about the character and Cage's his performance.

I also enjoyed the musical score by Ryuichi Sakamoto. It's totally overblown and out of proportion but it suits the movie and its style really well. Same of course goes for the cinematography.

It's basically a very stylish and originally made movie, like you would expect from Brian De Palma. It's obviously not his most expensive movie because most of the movie is set at one location and it also isn't the longest movie around. It makes this an enjoyable 'small' De Palma movie that's also perfectly watchable for the general public. The movie is made in the sort of style they also used to make '40's movies in. I especially like the use of shadows in this movie. De Palma is, as far is I know of, the only director who can successfully implement '40's movie-making style into modern film-making. It's a good looking movie with a style that captures you and sort of makes you forgive the inconsistencies and flaws in the story. However if you also look beyond this style you'll notice that the story and its thriller elements are all quite standards and nothing really really. Just the way it all is dressed is new! So yes, it's a case of style over substance, like often is the case with De Palma movies. But as a fan I really aren't complaining about this!

Most recommendable to the De Palma fans but other people should also be able to appreciate the style and craftsmanship of this movie.

7/10

http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/

oh my. what happened?

[xmute · 6/10 · 25 February 1999]

witness 30 minutes of film brilliance and then sit back as this film falls completely apart. it's such a shame too, as depalma has pieced together a gob-smacking bit of eye-candy with no heart. a sad waste of cage's (and depalma's) wealth of talent.

Visually striking, content lacking

[Rumples · 6/10 · 12 April 1999]

No question this was a clever idea and beautifully filmed. The opening sequence was an impressive piece of seamless film and, with a quality leading cast appeared to hold such great promise. But then it all fell in a heap. Why? Because nothing was developed in a clever or convincing fashion. Cage couldn't be related too as he bounced between good cop/bad cop and was constantly hyperactive. Sinise was somewhat ominous in his role but wasn't allowed to develop anything close to a sympathetic stance. And since nothing was made of the good guy turning bad or the bad guy struggling for redemption, there was essentially no character development. Added to this, there was no suspense. It was just too easy to work out. And there was never any doubt about the safety of the girl, even if you cared about her - which you didn't. In the end, it looked like they just wanted to wrap this film up and just as well. Very disappointing movie. Not because it was bad, but because it had the potential to be very good and wasn't. My vote 6/10 and that was mainly for the cinematography.

De Palma is a genius with the camera!!!

[swaddels · 7/10 · 27 December 2002]

I saw this film for the first time the other day, and I was blown away! Not only is the story mysterious and compelling, but the techniques De Palma uses are amazing!

The first 12 and a half minutes is one big shot! That's incredible! And the split-screen sequence is very welcome, simply because the split-screen isn't used enough any more. As my brother, who watched the film with me, said, "The split-screen hasn't been used effectively since Wood-Stock!" I Agree with him. What a great film.

That being said, it isn't De Palma's best. That would probably be The Untouchables.

Starts out showing potential, turns out to suck.

[mattdm · 2/10 · 20 February 1999]

The beginning is really cool, and there looks to be a great, convoluted conspiracy plot developing. But there isn't -- your first guess might not be right, but your second one will be, and there's no surprises from there. The ending is particularly lame, with a series of coincidences standing in for an actual plot.

Roll the Dice

[aciessi · 7/10 · 16 May 2017]

Not all De Palma films are beloved. Snake Eyes is considered one of his weakest. The story is generic and the ending is a complete letdown. But the cinematography is so on point, it's really hard to dislike this film. It's a lot of fun, in fact. Nicholas Cage doesn't get better. Gary Sinise is superb. The opening shot is a steady cam, long take, reminiscent of the Copa scene in Goodfellas and the opening to Boogie Nights. It gets you right into Ricky's world, and immediately, you are hooked. De Palma knows how to get you invested in his characters. Overall, it's very surprising to me how much of a bad rep Snake Eyes has.

THESE "EYES" ARE BLIND!

[Collins · 2/10 · 1 March 1999]

Brian DePalma can make some really great films like "Mission: Impossible" but he can also make some really awful disappointments like "Raising Cain" and this weak, little movie called "Snakes Eyes."

The first half of the film is awesomely written and directed, but, as soon as the cat is out of the bag (and that comes sooner than you think), the movie fizzles into a shockingly disappointing failure of a film. First off, the "real" bad guy is so easy to spot it's laughable. Second off, does that girl in the film ever really DO anything aside from standing around and looking like a deer caught in a set of headlights for 90-plus minutes?!! I never even got a name, but, then again, maybe she didn't have one. Really, who cares?! (In fact, DePalma might have actually thought the concept of a nameless "heroine" was a plus.)

What it boils down to is this director's overpowering urge to BE Alfred Hitchcock. Problem is, Hitchcock invented the style he used. DePalma's different in that all he does is use the Master's fifty year old methods (split-screens, real-time photography, passing through walls, etc.) that, by this point, have been imitated so many times that they don't really even register an impact on the audience anymore!

Oh, well. There's always that "Mission: Impossible 2" coming up, right?

I Like This.....Which Surprises Me

[ccthemovieman-1 · 8/10 · 20 November 2006]

Most people didn't like this movie, from what I have heard and read over the years. Some of my friends who saw it didn't like it either. For some reason, I did, and that was despite a few things I normally don't put up with (too much usages of the Lord's name in vain and the usual anti-military agenda.)

However, I found this a very fast-moving, involving story with Nicholas Cage playing an extremely interesting person: "Rick Santoro," a guy who acts like a complete crazy man at the beginning but slowly gets it together as the film goes on. Gary Sinise plays his normal corrupt role (this was before his CSI: New York days) and Carla Gugino was very easy on my eyes.

Brian DePalma directed this, so you know it's going to be stylishly shot, too. This looks really, really good on the recently-released Blu-Ray.

All the characters are interesting, actually. One complaint I agree with: the ending was a bit weak and detracts from the story. It's a rough film but edgy and interesting. Don't be discouraged reading a lot of negative reviews about this. It's good entertainment.

A well-orchestrated symphony of a thriller

[gridoon2024 · 6/10 · 15 May 2016]

"Snake Eyes" is one of Brian De Palma's most underrated (even forgotten) movies. Sort-of an update of "Blow Out" (the political assassination conspiracy, technology recording and revealing what the naked eye has missed, the overhead shots, the witness that must be silenced, etc.), but with stylistic elements from other De Palma films as well (long continuous shots, split screen, flashbacks of the same events from multiple perspectives, etc). In terms of how De Palma uses the camera to (mis)guide the viewer and tell the story, it's extraordinary; David Koepp's script is also like a well-orchestrated symphony, or a well-put-together puzzle, if you prefer. But there are two problems with "Snake Eyes", and they are pretty big: the first is that it's extremely obvious that Sinise's character is part of the conspiracy (his blunder with the redhead is so big that there could be no other explanation for it), and the second is that Nicolas Cage's character is an obnoxious sleazebag (and Cage's performance overdone). The film has to show him bruised, battered and beaten to make us root for him even a little near the very end. Gary Sinise, John Heard and Stan Shaw give much more effective performances, and both Carla Gugino and Jayne Heitmeyer are very hot. **1/2 out of 4.

Initially promising but ultimately disappointing thriller

[1001 · 5/10 · 14 October 1998]

Snake Eyes opens with a brilliant 12-minute tracking shot, ostensively one long unedited scene. In this sequence we learn everything we need to know about our hero, played by Nicolas Cage. He is a highly energetic and corrupt Atlantic City cop - "it's a sewer, but it's my sewer." It's fight night, and there are a number of dignitaries in the crowd. Included in this select group is the Minister of Defense, guarded by a good friend of Nic's, played by Gary Sinese.

It isn't long before the Minister of Defense is dead, and Nic's cover-up machine kicks in. But who is really guilty here? Who's the blonde, and who's the redhead? Will our hero ultimately stay in character, or will his conscience win over?

Brian De Palma should do well by this material. He's a veteran of thrillers with a number of good ones under his belt (see Blow Out, Body Double, Carrie). But this movie loses steam about halfway through. A cliched and perfectly predictable plot sets in, the Nicolas Cage character loses his energy, and the finale in the rain makes no sense. To add insult to injury, the movie tacks on a half-hearted happy ending. Rent the aformentioned movies instead.