Month: February 2021

Today’s quick review: Breach. Aspiring FBI agent Eric O’Neill (Ryan Phillippe) gets the chance to prove himself when he’s assigned to spy on Robert Hanssen (Chris Cooper), a veteran agent suspected of sexual misconduct. By all accounts, Robert appears to be a devout Catholic, a loving husband, and a loyal civil servant. But as the investigation progresses, Eric learns the truth: that Robert has been leaking state secrets to Russia.

Breach is a spy drama about one of the greatest intelligence breaches in U.S. history. Based on a true story, Breach follows the investigation into suspected traitor Robert Hanssen from the perspective of Eric O’Neill, the sharp rookie assigned to monitor him. The movie takes a close look at both men and the toll the investigation takes on them. Solid acting and robust character work are somewhat offset by a slow-paced plot with few thrills.

Breach doesn’t aim for suspense per se. The conversations between Robert and Eric are fraught with peril as Eric tries to maintain his cover in spite of Robert’s keen mind and tendency to pry into Eric’s personal life. But, with one or two exceptions, the stakes only go as high as the investigation itself. Breach does a good job of introducing a soft cat-and-mouse game between the two men, but it never cashes it out into concrete tension.

Breach also emphasizes its characters. The movie in part acts as a portrait of Robert Hanssen, portrayed as a complex man whose religious devotion and humble career of service are at odds with his harsh personality and his alleged crimes. For his part, Eric O’Neill must juggle the taxing investigation with the increasing strain on his marriage. Neither character is brilliant, but both of them are fleshed out in detail and acted convincingly.

Still, Breach will not be what every viewer is looking for. The hooks that it plants are subtle, its pacing is slow, and its conflict is indirect. The movie spends as much time building up its characters as it does playing out the actual investigation. Given Breach’s origins as a true story, this is a reasonable tradeoff to make, but it does mean that the movie won’t have much to offer fans of the flashy, neatly packaged plots of fictional thrillers.

Breach will appeal to viewers who are interested in the personal, realistic side of the spy genre. It does well with the material it has to work with, but it’s missing the spark needed to reach viewers expecting something more lurid. Those content with characters, ethical dilemmas, and indirect sorts of tension will find it to be a satisfying watch. Those hoping for a proper thriller will want to steer clear.

For a realistic spy drama with a wider scope and greater moral ambiguity, try The Good Shepherd. For a thriller with a similar premise and more action, try The Recruit or The Double. For a portrait of two criminals with a similar emphasis on character, try Donnie Brasco.

7.0 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 6.5 to 7.0 for skillfully drawn characters in a story that skews dry.

Today’s quick review: Closed Circuit. Six months after a terrorist bombing rocks London, the suicide of the alleged bomber’s defense attorney prompts Martin Rose (Eric Bana) to take over the case. Along with Claudia Simmons-Howe (Rebecca Hall), an old flame now serving as special counsel for the defense, Martin prepares for an uphill battle. But as the lawyers dig into the case, they discover a shocking truth that puts both of them in danger.

Closed Circuit is a crime thriller and mystery about a contentious trial where nothing is as it seems. Eric Bana and Rebecca Hall co-star as a pair of laywers tasked with defending an accused terrorist in the face of the government’s top-secret evidence and the full weight of public opinion. Closed Circuit has a reasonable premise for a thriller and a few decent twists, but its unlikable characters and misplayed plot leave it without much to offer.

Closed Circuit has a few worthwhile ideas, but its execution leaves plenty to be desired. The film’s stronger points include the cover-up that drives the plot, the emphasis on surveillance, and the elements of legal drama. But these strengths largely go to waste. The plot has a slow setup and a limp payoff. The legal angle never takes center stage. And what points the film tries to make about the surveillance state quickly get lost in the shuffle.

But what hurts Closed Circuit the most are its main characters. Martin and Claudia are in over their heads, and not in a way that leads to interesting drama. The movie plays Martin as a relentless advocate for the truth, but his weak will and lack of a plan lead to him getting walked over at every turn. Claudia is argumentative and easily manipulated, making her an active hindrance to the case. Neither character is likable or charming.

Closed Circuit has just enough in the way of plot and craftsmanship to be a middling thriller for those willing to stick it out. Its plot shows some potential, and it tries to build an atmosphere of suspense using indirect threats to its main characters. But the movie falls short when it comes to its heroes, its thrills, and the details of its plot. Most viewers will find the plot too dry and the characters too unappealing to be worth the effort.

For an action thriller that deals with similar themes but gives them more kick, try Enemy of the State. For a more powerful legal thriller, try Primal Fear. For an action thriller that delves into the aftermath of a terrorist attack, try Vantage Point.

6.2 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 6.0 for poor execution of a decent premise.

Today’s quick review: State of Play. Congressman Stephen Collins (Ben Affleck) finds himself at the center of a scandal when the staffer he was having an affair with commits suicide. As the rest of the media rakes him over the coals, his college roommate Cal McAffrey (Russell Crowe), a reporter for the Washington Globe, suspects foul play. Along with novice reporter Della Frye (Rachel McAdams), Cal launches a risky investigation to find the truth.

State of Play is a crime thriller and mystery about a pair of journalists who discover a far-reaching cover-up behind a political scandal. The movie features a complex and rewarding story rife with journalistic spirit, a fair amount of character development, and solid all-round craftsmanship. Though it has overt action in only a couple of places and its time pressure ebbs and flows, State of Play remains an engrossing watch from start to finish.

State of Play hits a sweet spot with its mystery. The viewer has enough information to anticipate the characters and predict some of the broad strokes of the plot. At the same time, the details of the investigation are worth following, and the movie injects a few twists to keep the story from getting too predictable. The investigation also has the right scope: high stakes to make it worthwhile, but tangible leads for Cal and Della to hunt down.

State of Play also does well with its characters. Della and Cal have a good dynamic; their light antagonism morphs into a fruitful partnership as the movie goes on. Cal himself is a well-rounded character, with admirable persistence and nice tension between his personal motives and his professional ones. Stephen doesn’t work quite as well, due mainly to his passive role in the plot and him never getting the chance to build up much rapport with Cal.

Give State of Play a shot when you’re in the mood for an investigative thriller with a solid plot and the cast to back it up. State of Play isn’t as deep or as dramatic as the very best films in its genre, but it delivers cleanly on its premise and avoids any serious mistakes along the way. Those looking for a thriller with a focus on story should try it out. Those looking for something action-oriented may want to give it a pass.

For a darker investigation, try Zodiac. For an action-oriented thriller with similar elements, try Enemy of the State, Jack Reacher, or The Adjustment Bureau. For a bleaker investigation with more of an action tinge, try Edge of Darkness.

7.1 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 7.0 for a robust plot and interesting characters.

Today’s quick review: Unlocked. When the CIA catches wind of a planned biological attack in London, interrogator Alice Racine (Noomi Rapace) is called in to extract crucial information from a courier. But Alice soon learns that she’s being set up by an enemy within the CIA, forcing her to flee to stay alive. With the help of her mentor (Michael Douglas) and an unlikely ally (Orlando Bloom), Alice must locate the virus before it is too late.

Unlocked is an action thriller about a CIA interrogator thrust into the middle of a deadly terror plot. Alice Racine must use her wits and the few resources at her disposal to stop a biological attack on London and track down a traitor within the Agency. Unlocked is a typical entry into its genre. Sharp plot twists and a fairly strong cast make it a worthwhile pick, but it lacks the polish and spectacle to stand out from its competition.

Unlocked takes the usual action thriller formula and adds a few flourishes that serve it well. The plot is prone to sharp twists that are often quite clever. The supporting cast is broader than usual for Unlocked’s flavor of thriller and includes Michael Douglas, Orlando Bloom, John Malkovich, and Toni Collette. The action isn’t a standout, but it’s a serviceable mix of fighting and gunplay, used more to accentuate the plot than as its own end.

Still, Unlocked is missing the polish needed to take it further. Noomi Rapace makes for a fine protagonist as Alice Racine but not an especially memorable one. The plot tends to move in fits and starts, reeling wildly in response to each plot twist. The supporting cast could have been condensed by two or three characters without much loss. The action suits the film well enough, but there’s room leftover for bigger stunts and more adrenaline.

Unlocked is a solid pick for those looking for a tidy action thriller with some good plot twists. It doesn’t deviate from the formula enough to make for an exceptional watch, but it does have enough going on to entertain fans of the genre. Those hoping for all-out action may want to keep looking. For an action thriller with more polish, try Safe House, Shooter, or Enemy of the State. For one of a similar caliber, try Survivor or Erased.

6.2 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 6.5 to 7.0 for a solid plot and a good amount of action, missing the quality needed to take its premise further.

Today’s quick review: The Good Shepherd. In 1961, CIA division head Edward Wilson (Matt Damon) attempts to pick up the pieces of the Agency’s failed invasion of Cuba at the Bay of Pigs. As Edward follows the trail of clues to find out who leaked the operation to the Soviets, he reflects on key events of his life: his time at Yale, his marriage to Margaret (Angelina Jolie), his intelligence work during the War, and the founding of the CIA.

The Good Shepherd is a historical spy drama about the founding of the CIA and one of its greatest crises. The Good Shepherd follows Edward Wilson from the late 30s to the early 60s as he’s inducted into the intelligence business and becomes involved in some of its most pivotal moments. A strong dramatic cast, a nuanced lead, and a set of well-chosen puzzle pieces make The Good Shepherd an effective and cohesive drama.

The Good Shepherd has a knack for picking its scenes. The story steps through Wilson’s life years at a time, but each stop manages to be engaging on its own and meaningful to the big picture. The Good Shepherd also unfolds into a mystery without seeming to as the hunt for the leaker begins to tie into Wilson’s past. The plot is still broad and nonlinear, but there are enough connections between the plot threads to make it feel cohesive.

For his part, Matt Damon makes for a nicely ambiguous lead as Edward Wilson. Wilson is driven by a mix of altruism and human frailty. The ideals he aspires to and the compromises he makes, personally and professionally, are a large part of what drives the drama. The Good Shepherd also sports a distinguished supporting cast that includes Angelina Jolie, Robert de Niro, Alec Baldwin, John Turturro, and William Hurt in roles of varying size.

The film does have a few drawbacks that will grate on the wrong viewer. For all that it tries to be comprehensible, The Good Shepherd is still a spy movie with plenty of moving parts, and its long run time and large cast give the audience lots to keep track of. The scenes may be compelling on their own, but they take a long time to tie together. The film also relies on its protagonist and loses much of its appeal if he doesn’t click.

Watch The Good Shepherd when you’re in the mood for a robust drama that captures the highs and lows of the mid-20th century intelligence landscape. The movie’s well-judged story and solid craftsmanship make it a worthwhile pick for those looking for something grounded and serious. Those looking for pulse-pounding action, a direct story, or clear-cut heroism may want to give it a pass.

For another tense, grounded peek into spycraft, try Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy. For a CIA thriller with more action and a modern setting, try Spy Game.

6.7 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 7.0 for an elaborate and well-crafted story.

Today’s quick review: Syriana. With the pending merger of two oil companies, lawyer Bennett Holiday (Jeffrey Wright) is assigned to broker a deal with the Department of Justice to allow the merger to go through. Meanwhile, analyst Bryan Woodward (Matt Damon) becomes a trusted advisor for the progressive prince (Alexander Siddig) of a Middle Eastern nation, and CIA agent Bob Barnes (George Clooney) faces the fallout of a botched assignment.

Syriana is a political drama about the oil industry and American interests in the Middle East. The sprawling story follows the lives of a lawyer, an analyst, an intelligence agent, and a Pakistani immigrant during an important shift in the oil industry. Corruption, cover-ups, assassination, and political maneuvering are the movie’s bread and butter. However, its dense and unrewarding story will make it a dry watch for the wrong viewer.

The greatest tool at Syriana’s disposal is political shock value. The plot encompasses a broad cross-section of the parties involved in the oil trade and shows the complex web of connections that determine how changes in the industry play out. The movie’s frank portrayal of a scandal in the offing shines a harsh light on American foreign policy. Watching the consequences spread is one of the film’s chief draws and where it gets much of its drama.

The drawback is that Syriana spends so much time flitting between storylines that it doesn’t develop any of them fully. The film tries to flesh out its broad cast through character-building moments, but no single character has a large enough role in the plot to make an impact. Syriana also has a cryptic presentation style that makes the story difficult to follow, requiring the viewer to pay close attention to piece together what is going on.

The end result will appeal to fans of realistic drama and political commentary. Its talented cast coupled with its intricate plot and serious take on its subject matter will be enough to hook the right portion of the audience. But for anyone looking for a straightforward story, conventional heroes and villains, or less of a heavy-handed political message will want to give Syriana a pass.

For a look at the drug trade done in a similar style, try Traffic. For a political thriller with more focused scope, try Body of Lies or Argo. For another take on Middle Eastern politics with a focus on terrorism, try The Kingdom or Traitor. For a jaunty, documentary-style tale of corporate malfeasance, try The Big Short.

6.9 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 6.5 for ambitious scope that robs its individual storylines of impact.

“I drink your milkshake! I drink it up!” —Daniel Plainview

Today’s quick review: There Will Be Blood. At the dawn of the 20th century, oilman Daniel Plainview (Daniel Day-Lewis) searches the United States for land to buy up and drill for oil. With his young son HW (Dillon Freasier) in tow, he embarks on his latest venture: drilling a well in the small town of Signal Hills, California. But Daniel’s ambition soon brings him into conflict with Eli Sunday (Paul Dano), a passionate local preacher.

There Will Be Blood is a historical drama about an oilman’s attempts to expand his business while raising his son. There Will Be Blood is a sober look at the cutthroat origins of the oil industry and the peculiar combination of traits that make up Daniel Plainview. Impressive acting and a persistent sense of tension contribute to the film’s distinctive vision, but slow pacing and lack of a unifying plot make the film hard to invest in.

Daniel Day-Lewis delivers a strange but fascinating performance as Daniel Plainview. Beneath his veneer of folksy charm and humility is a darkness that becomes more apparent as the movie goes on. In addition to being a ruthless businessman, Plainview harbors a bad temper and a hatred for his fellow man that lead to shocking outbursts. At the same time, love for his son and human frailties shape him into a complex character.

The trouble is that There Will Be Blood focuses on his character to the exclusion of all else. There is no concrete story with a beginning, middle, and end, just a progression of events that fray Daniel more and more and cast light on the kind of man he truly is. The problem is exacerbated by how long the film takes to get its pieces in place, how aggressively the soundtrack tries to build suspense, and how infrequent the moments of payoff are.

The result is an ambitious character portrait without a conventional story arc or much in the way of emotional catharsis. Those who like dark, ambiguous drama for its own sake will find There Will Be Blood to be a powerful and unique watch. But many viewers will find it to be overly bleak with few qualities to redeem it.

For the tale of a prospector driven mad by greed, try The Treasure of the Sierra Madre. For a more surreal descent into madness, try Barton Fink. For a more even-keeled biography of an unconventional man, try The Aviator. For a similarly bleak and ambiguous movie with action and a more active plot, try No Country For Old Men.

8.2 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 7.0 for a high degree of craftsmanship hurt by slow pacing and a lack of structure; your score will vary.

Today’s quick review: Gangs of New York. In 1862, Amsterdam Vallon (Leonardo DiCaprio) returns to his childhood home of Five Points, New York, and works his way back into the gangs who run the neighborhood. In the process, he becomes a trusted friend of Bill Cutting (Daniel Day-Lewis), the nativist gang leader who killed his father sixteen years ago. As Amsterdam contemplates revenge, he risks throwing away the new life he has built.

Gangs of New York is a historical crime drama about the son of an Irish immigrant and his attempt to avenge his father. Set at the onset of the Civil War, Gangs of New York is a window into a crucial point in the development of New York City. The movie is ambitious in scope and boasts both a star-studded cast and a famed director in Martin Scorsese. However, its characters and direction aren’t as compelling as in similar films.

Gangs of New York is notable for its historical setting. The New York of 1862 is a tumultuous place that the film goes to great lengths to bring to life. Racial conflicts, political corruption, gang violence, and the looming specter of the Civil War all contribute to a colorful environment with grey morality. The film’s large cast, broad scope, and attention to detail make it an effective slice of a particular time and place.

Where Gangs of New York finds shakier footing is with its characters. Amsterdam is neither pure enough to be sympathetic nor clever enough to be impressive, making him hard to root for over anyone else in the story. For his part, Daniel Day-Lewis cuts an odd figure as Bill Cutting, a knife-happy bigot who keeps a violent stranglehold over Five Points. The role is compelling but uneven, with quirks that undermine him as a villain.

The same pattern holds for the supporting cast. Cameron Diaz plays Jenny, a pickpocket with a love-hate relationship with Amsterdam. Jim Broadbent plays the political influencer William Tweed. John C. Reilly, Brendan Gleeson, and Liam Neeson appear as some of the key inhabitants of Five Points. The acting is impressive and the roles are distinctive, but they have precious few redeeming characteristics for the audience to latch onto.

Finally, Gangs of New York has an active directorial style that belies its historical setting. The dramatic scenes are treated soberly enough, but the frequent outbursts of violence are accompanied by aggressive camerawork that draws attention to itself. The movie also takes pains to drive home its historical significance by inserting contemporary newspaper clippings and filling gaps with Amsterdam’s narration about the birth of New York.

How much you get out of Gangs of New York will depend on what you expect from it. Those hoping for skilled acting, historical flavor, and ambiguous morality will find that Gangs of New York delivers exactly what they’re looking for with uncommon skill. But those hoping for a strong emotional core to tie the pieces together may be disappointed. Gangs of New York is an ambitious film, but for the wrong viewer, its story will fail to resonate.

For a historical crime drama with a more focused scope and a sharper plot, try Miller’s Crossing. For a more fanciful tale of revenge, try The Count of Monte Cristo. For an iconic crime drama from Martin Scorsese, try Casino or Goodfellas.

7.5 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 7.0 for a rich setting and a talented cast, hurt somewhat by the particulars of its characters and story.

Today’s quick review: War. Three years after the death of his partner at the hands of Rogue (Jet Li), an assassin for hire, FBI agent John Crawford (Jason Statham) has ruined his life trying to track him down. He finally gets his chance when Rogue resurfaces in San Francisco at the center of a turf war between the Yakuza and the Triads. But in digging deeper, John is puzzled to learn that the assassin is playing both sides against each other.

War is an action movie about one man’s quest for revenge against an elusive assassin. Jason Statham squares off against Jet Li against the backdrop of a gang war that Li’s character intends to turn to his advantage. War is a straightforward action movie with a decent mixture of action, plot, and attitude. However, slight misplays in the way its story unfolds mean that War is unable to deliver on its premise’s full potential.

War is split between the perspectives of its two main characters: Crawford as he hunts down Rogue, and Rogue as he manipulates both sides of a gang war. Rogue ends up stealing the show, both because he has a greater opportunity for action and because his scheme is what drives the plot. The film has a healthy dose of car chases, shootouts, and martial arts for its action scenes. The plot is minimal but does have one or two nice twists.

Where War misplays its hand is in the conflict between Crawford and Rogue. Jason Statham and Jet Li are cast well for their roles, but they don’t have many opportunities to interact. Their action scenes together are not as climactic as the premise would suggest, and Rogue in general tends to overshadow Crawford, who spnds much fo the film playing catch-up. Their story arc also wraps up rather abruptly, missing the chance for further drama.

Watch War when you’re in the mood for popcorn action that mostly delivers on its premise. War isn’t quite ambitious enough to use its stars to their full potential, but what it has to offer should please fans of the genre. Skip it if you’re looking for a deeper plot or less conventional action.

For a similar flavor of action movie, try The Fast and the Furious or Face/Off. For action in a similar vein starring Jet Li, try Cradle 2 the Grave or The One. For a Jason Statham action movie with an even more elaborate plot, try Chaos or Safe.

6.3 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 6.5 to 7.0 for two strong leads, lots of thrills, and a decent plot to tie them all together, albeit with a few missed opportunities along the way.

Today’s quick review: The Nice Guys. The death of a Los Angeles porn actress makes unlikely partners of Jackson Healy (Russell Crowe), hired muscle looking to do some good with his life, and Holland March (Ryan Gosling), a private detective trying to raise his teen daughter Holly (Angourie Rice). Healy and March decide to join forces to protect Amelia (Margaret Qualley), a missing girl wrapped up in the case, from the killers who want her dead.

The Nice Guys is a crime comedy set in Los Angeles in 1977. The movie takes a complicated noir setup and drops in two hapless detectives to try to make sense of the situation. The Nice Guys’ sharply written dialogue and excellently matched leads make it a smart and often hilarious comedy, while a robust plot gives it some legs as a mystery. The only real downside is that the dark tinge to its humor won’t be to every viewer’s taste.

The Nice Guys’ biggest draw is its comedy. The film is packed with short exchanges that quickly go off the rails, nearly all of which are creative and expertly timed. Russell Crowe and Ryan Gosling have outstanding chemistry, while Angourie Rice is an unexpected hit as the self-appointed third member of their partnership. The gags are also deeply intertwined with the characters themselves, letting the humor double as character development.

The film’s comedy is backed by a fairly strong noir-style mystery. The case Healy and March find themselves wrapped up in involves murder, mistaken identity, a missing girl, several different factions interested in finding her, and layered revelations about what is actually going on. The moving pieces can be hard to track, but the film does a good job of managing what each character knows and playing on the audience’s expectations.

The main issue that limits The Nice Guys’ appeal is that it skews dark for a buddy comedy. The heroes make genuine mistakes, characters die in violent ways, and in general there are no guarantees that everything will turn out okay. The film still comes down on the side of comedy, but the rules it plays by are closer to a noir than anything else. Sensitive viewers will also want to watch out for a high amount of nudity and swearing.

Watch The Nice Guys when you’re in the mood for a clever comedy with a great pair of leads and a tough but rewarding plot. The movie’s particular blend of dark comedy, gritty mystery, and touching moments won’t resonate with every viewer. But those who like their humor a little skewed will find The Nice Guys to be a hidden gem that’s well worth a watch.

For a crime comedy with a similar tone from the same director, try Kiss Kiss Bang Bang. For a more action-oriented buddy comedy with similar appeal, try The Hitman’s Bodyguard. For a darker tale of criminal misadventure, try Pulp Fiction.

7.4 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 7.5 for hilarious comedy, a strong plot, and an excellent pair of leads.