Blackbyrd (![[info]](http://p-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small} blackbyrd2) wrote,@ 2008-04-02 10:15:00 |
|
I watched Inside Man last night, with Jodie Foster, Denzel Washington and Clive Owens.
Assuming you've seen the movie means the review is redundant, so I'll try to avoid spoilers, but they may show up.
On the surface, the movie was a nice whodunit along the lines of The Usual Suspects, but it falls short in a number of areas from equalling that fine piece of cinema.
Jodie Foster's character is a paper cutout, and Jodie never really invests it with any life. I think she recognized that the character as written wasn't realistic, because I know she's a much better actress than this performance would imply. I know that if I were in her character's place, I wouldn't have been so much a supplicant when entering the bank, but would have had a backup plan already in place if they failed to respond to negotiations and bribes. Money and power were obviously not an issue for her character to wield, and the only thing keeping the kidnappers alive is the fact that the cops follow certain rules which someone in her position would not be subject to.
The handling of certain realizations was questionable as well. That the kidnappers, although asking for a plane, didn't actually want one, was brushed upon by Foster's character, yet she, supposedly this competent, capable person, even though she realizes the fact, doesn't follow it through to the logical conclusion which Denzel Washington's character realizes mere minutes later.
It's like the director wanted to make the point to a not-so-bright audience, but couldn't manage to get there without beating us over the head with it. It left me the impression that he thinks we're stupid, which may or may not be true, but since the end of the movie is so subtle in laying out the villain's final fate, one wonders why he felt so differently halfway through the movie.
Finally, the cursory search disappointed me. You'll figure it out later.
However, if you overlook that, Foster's performance and even her character's questionable presence, the rest of the cast did an excellent job. Denzel Washington's cop was believably human while being nearly supernaturally brilliant at times (which I blame on the screenwriter and director) and Clive Owens was more believable in this than anything I can recall seeing him in. Which, unfortunately, isn't saying much. At any rate, he was toned down, less melodramatic and more interesting, although that may all have been because of the mask. :)
The questioning, the revelation of the importance of the outfits and masks, some really odd behavior during the course of the movie by hostages and kidnappers alike, all become clear only at the end, which was, finally, fairly satisfying and fun. You'll probably want to see it a second time, much like The Usual Suspects, and I suspect it may hold up reasonably well under that second viewing.
Hopefully I didn't actually spoil the movie for you. With all its flaws, it's still a better movie than most I've seen lately.
Assuming you've seen the movie means the review is redundant, so I'll try to avoid spoilers, but they may show up.
On the surface, the movie was a nice whodunit along the lines of The Usual Suspects, but it falls short in a number of areas from equalling that fine piece of cinema.
Jodie Foster's character is a paper cutout, and Jodie never really invests it with any life. I think she recognized that the character as written wasn't realistic, because I know she's a much better actress than this performance would imply. I know that if I were in her character's place, I wouldn't have been so much a supplicant when entering the bank, but would have had a backup plan already in place if they failed to respond to negotiations and bribes. Money and power were obviously not an issue for her character to wield, and the only thing keeping the kidnappers alive is the fact that the cops follow certain rules which someone in her position would not be subject to.
The handling of certain realizations was questionable as well. That the kidnappers, although asking for a plane, didn't actually want one, was brushed upon by Foster's character, yet she, supposedly this competent, capable person, even though she realizes the fact, doesn't follow it through to the logical conclusion which Denzel Washington's character realizes mere minutes later.
It's like the director wanted to make the point to a not-so-bright audience, but couldn't manage to get there without beating us over the head with it. It left me the impression that he thinks we're stupid, which may or may not be true, but since the end of the movie is so subtle in laying out the villain's final fate, one wonders why he felt so differently halfway through the movie.
Finally, the cursory search disappointed me. You'll figure it out later.
However, if you overlook that, Foster's performance and even her character's questionable presence, the rest of the cast did an excellent job. Denzel Washington's cop was believably human while being nearly supernaturally brilliant at times (which I blame on the screenwriter and director) and Clive Owens was more believable in this than anything I can recall seeing him in. Which, unfortunately, isn't saying much. At any rate, he was toned down, less melodramatic and more interesting, although that may all have been because of the mask. :)
The questioning, the revelation of the importance of the outfits and masks, some really odd behavior during the course of the movie by hostages and kidnappers alike, all become clear only at the end, which was, finally, fairly satisfying and fun. You'll probably want to see it a second time, much like The Usual Suspects, and I suspect it may hold up reasonably well under that second viewing.
Hopefully I didn't actually spoil the movie for you. With all its flaws, it's still a better movie than most I've seen lately.
