Official Secrets (2019) [R] ****

A film review by James Berardinelli for ReelViews.net on Aug. 28, 2019.

Official Secrets disrobes a scandal that received scant coverage in the U.S. media when it occurred some 15 years ago. Although hampered somewhat by a fragmented and procedural structure, the film nevertheless makes a compelling argument that the voice of the citizen in a Democracy isn’t as loud as one might like and it takes a strong constitution to play the role of the whistleblower. With a cast featuring a raft of prominent U.K. actors (Keira Knightley, Matthew Goode, Matt Smith, Ralph Fiennes, Rhys Ifans), the film examines one 2003 incident from three perspectives: the whistleblower (Katharine Gun, played by Knightley), the newspaper reporters who printed her story (Smith’s Martin Bright, Goode’s Peter Beaumont, and Ifans’ Ed Vulliamy), and the lawyer who defended her (Fiennes’ Ben Emmerson).

The movie opens in the run-up to the 2003 Iraq war with both the United States and the United Kingdom doing a fair amount of saber-rattling. Katharine Gun, working as a translator for the GCHQ (Government Communications Headquarters, a spy agency), is deeply disturbed by an intra-department memo requesting help in an illegal NSA operation to gather intelligence on various UN diplomats for the purposes of strong-arming their countries to support an anti-Iraq Security Council resolution. Following her conscience and recognizing it will mean violating the Official Secrets Act, Katharine copies the memo and passes it onto an anti-war friend.

Two weeks later, the memo surfaces at The Observer, where it comes into the possession of journalist Martin Bright. After consulting with two associates, Peter Beaumont and Ed Vulliamy, Bright does everything within his powers to verify the memo’s authenticity. His published story is initially a sensation but the U.S. government is able to discredit it. That doesn’t stop authorities from conducting an investigation. When Katharine confesses to spare her co-workers from grueling interrogations, she is swiftly arrested. The government, playing hardball, keeps her in a state of uncertainty for months about whether she is going to be charged. Additionally, they threaten her Kurdish husband, Yasar (Adam Bakri), with deportation. Recognizing the desperation of her situation, she contacts respected lawyer Ben Emmerson for representation.

From a theatrical standpoint, whistleblowers make uniquely sympathetic characters, especially in cases like this when their motives appear to be entirely altruistic and/or patriotic (unlike, for example, Edward Snowden or Julian Assange, whose narcissistic qualities counterbalance their likability). Katharine is driven solely by her conscience, risking everything in the naïve hope that she can stop a war. In the end, her efforts are fruitless but she places herself and her husband at risk. Her struggle, which is initially global in scope, ultimately becomes very personal. Having learned everything that has come out in the past 15 years, the forces aligned against Katharine seem pernicious and vindictive.

Gavin Hood, who once touched the A-list when he was pegged to helm Wolverine, has returned to the smaller films that initially got him noticed. Official Secrets is his first project since 2015’s blistering, underrated Eye in the Sky. The multifaceted aspects of the story at times makes it feel disjointed and some of the artificial thriller elements (such as a car racing through traffic to get to an airport and ominous thugs shadowing Katharine) are unnecessary. The movie also bites off a little too much – by having so many characters representing different parts of the story, there’s a sense that some of those mini-narratives aren’t fully fleshed out. It could be argued that the reporters’ segments deserve their own movie.

To date, The Insider probably represents the most compelling whistleblower story to make it to the big screen and, although the subject matter is different, Official Secrets generates in the viewer the same sense of outrage. Likewise, there are echoes of Spotlight in Official Secrets (insofar as investigative journalism is concerned), but the limitations of this movie are made evident by the comparison. Although Official Secrets may take liberties with the historical record, it’s effective as both a drama and a cautionary tale and the lessons it teaches are possibly more relevant in today’s world than they were 15 years ago. [Berardinelli’s rating: *** out of 4 stars]

Labels: biography, crime, drama, Keira Knightley, spy, thriller, war
IMDb 73/100
MetaScore (critics=63, viewers=73)
RottenTomatoes Averages (critics=69, viewers=86)
Netflix
Berardinelli’s review

 

The Bourne Supremacy (2004) [PG-13] ****

A film review by James Berardinelli for ReelViews.net

The Bourne Supremacy is a serviceable thriller - no more, no less. This may come as a disappointment to those anticipating something on the same level as the surprise hit 2002 movie, The Bourne Identity. Sadly, the cinematic second installment of Robert Ludlum's trilogy falls short of its predecessor in almost every area, except perhaps acting. There's nothing wrong with any of the performances in this movie; it's just that the actors aren't as important as they were two years ago. Action has moved to the fore, shouldering aside plot and character development in order to maintain the frantic pace that director Paul Greengrass believes is necessary to retain his audience's attention.

The Bourne Supremacy opens two years after The Bourne Identity closed, with Jason Bourne (Matt Damon) having settled down with his girlfriend, Marie (Franka Potente) in the state of Goa, India. Now, it appears someone with the worst of intentions has found them. Not only is a killer (Karl Urban) tasked with killing Bourne, but he is framed for the murder of a CIA agent in Berlin. This brings the agency back into the picture. The find Bourne team is led by Pamela Landy (Joan Allen) and Bourne's old boss, Ward Abbott (Brian Cox). Thinking that the CIA is behind the attempt on his life, Bourne decides he has no choice but to track down the people trying to kill him and eliminate them, thus fulfilling the promise he had made near the end of The Bourne Identity.

At its heart, The Bourne Supremacy is a revenge action thriller. There's nothing more subtle or deeper going on here, although there is a secondary plot about a group of Russians. Character development is perfunctory. We learn a few more things about Bourne's past, and he shows signs of a conscience. However, he was more interesting in the last film, when he was foundering to discover who he was. This time around, Bourne is just a relentless killer, at least until the final 30 minutes, when he displays more compassion than we expect (or, in some ways, prefer).

After the initial 15 minutes of exposition, The Bourne Supremacy unfolds as a series of long chase and fight sequences. Some of these are more compelling than others. The final chase, in particular, is involving. Coming as late in the movie as it does, there's a sense that it will lead to a resolution rather than the usual oops, I lost him. There are plenty of instances of hand-to-hand combat, and that's where the choice of Greengrass becomes questionable. The director of The Bourne Identity, Doug Liman, was able to present the fight scenes in a clear, no-frills fashion. In The Bourne Supremacy, there are so many cuts and edits that the fights devolve into an incoherent mess. It's better not to try to follow them when they're going on - just wait until they're over to see who's left standing.

On a number of levels, The Bourne Supremacy isn't as satisfying as The Bourne Identity. The culmination of Bourne's revenge spree against the agency, while it accomplishes the task, doesn't offer a good sense of closure. And the fact that Bourne spends most of the movie on his own eliminates the nice give-and-take between Bourne and Marie that helped make The Bourne Identity better than a generic espionage flick. Not having read Ludlum's novel, I can't assess whether the problem is in the source material or in Tony Gilroy's adaptation, but The Bourne Supremacy is less intelligent than its predecessor.

In the title role, Damon again proves that he has the makeup to be a decent action hero. He's more in the mold of a Mel Gibson or a Harrison Ford than an Arnold Schwarzenegger, but there's room in the genre for all kinds of actors. Brian Cox is suitably oily as the bad CIA guy, whose role has been expanded from the first film. Joan Allen brushes up on her ice queen image to give Bourne a more formidable agency adversary than Abbott. There are also brief appearances from familiar faces Franka Potente and Julia Stiles, as well as a small-but-important part for Oksana Akinshina as the orphaned daughter of the Russian couple Bourne killed in his first project.

Although The Bourne Supremacy disappoints relative to expectations established by The Bourne Identity, it's neither unwatchable nor uninteresting. The continuity is strong (essentially everyone except the director is the same) and the lead character, while not as compelling this time around, is still worth rooting for. Plus, there's enough action to camouflage the thinness of the plot. Still, it's discouraging to encounter another sequel that can't live up to the standard established by its predecessor. [Berardinelli’s rating: 2.5 stars (62.5 out of 100)]

Labels: action, Julia Stiles, Matt Damon, mystery, spy, thriller
IMDb 77/100
MetaScore (critics=73, viewers=89) 
RottenTomatoes Averages (critics=72, viewers=83) 
Blu-ray 

 

The Bourne Ultimatum (2007) [PG-13] ****/*****

A film review by James Berardinelli for ReelViews.net.

If nothing else, The Bourne Ultimatum represents the best of 2007's inordinately high number of so-called threequels. Hopefully, that's not damning with faint praise. The Bourne Ultimatum, the third in the movie trilogy loosely based on Robert Ludlum's novels, is superior to its immediate predecessor but not quite as good as the original. The action is this movie is top-notch (despite the spastic camera) - full of suspense and kinetic energy - but the film doesn't have as much heart or emotional depth as The Bourne Identity. As with The Bourne Supremacy, this movie diverts so far from its source material that the only things retained from Ludlum's novel are the title and some of the character names. (Shades of how the James Bond movie producers approached many of Ian Fleming's books.) Ludlum's version of The Bourne Ultimatum is completely different from the one penned by Tony Gilroy and directed by Paul Greengrass.

The film moves so fast there's almost no time to breathe. Although the plot may at first seem convoluted, it's actually fairly straightforward. Jason Bourne (Matt Damon), as part of his ongoing quest to discover his true identity, once again becomes a danger to the CIA. So the department's black ops division, led by Noah Vosen (David Strathairn), targets him for elimination. Also conspiring against him is the agency's director, Ezra Kramer (Scott Glenn), but Bourne has allies as well: agents Pamela Landy (Joan Allen) and Nicky Parsons (Julia Stiles) endanger their careers and lives to help him.

The Bourne Ultimatum globe hops with the best of its genre: Moscow, Paris, London, Madrid, Tangier, and New York. Bourne is always on the move, sometimes acting as the hunter and sometimes being the quarry (and often both at the same time). One could argue it's a little exhausting, but the action is consistently excellent - if only the same thing could be same could be said of the manner in which Greengrass has chosen to film it. Looking back on The Bourne Identity, it's easy to be impressed by the clarity with which Doug Liman directed the action sequences. Greengrass, on the other hand, prefers fast cuts and an unsteady camera. Even during static shots (such as a simple conversation with close-ups), it's as if the cameraman has Parkinson's. Things aren't as bad here as in 28 Weeks Later, but there are brief instances when the inability to figure out what's going on diminishes the effectiveness of the action. Still, it's hard to deny that Greengrass' approach generates intensity.

There are two standout sequences. Tension is enhanced in both because not only is Bourne trying to outthink and outflank the bad guys, but he's also responsible for protecting someone else. In the first one, he and a reporter for The Guardian, Simon Ross (Paddy Considine), are trapped by enemy operatives in London's Waterloo Station. The second involves a chase through the roads and across the rooftops of Tangier as Bourne attempts to intercept a key contact who has knowledge of his past while keeping himself and Nicky alive.

Matt Damon once again plays Bourne perfectly - it's a largely impassive, kick-ass performance that draws the viewer in. Bourne doesn't delight in killing, but he doesn't shy away from it, either. There's a kinship one can sense between him and the newest James Bond. Julia Stiles and Joan Allen get a chance to show softer sides of their hard-edged characters. In the past, both played Bourne's adversaries; here, they're his allies. David Strathairn, the excellent character actor who is favored by John Sayles, oozes white collar menace. Albert Finney's inclusion in the cast may confuse viewers with imperfect memories because he looks a lot like Brian Cox, who was in the other two movies.

When it comes to action, The Bourne Ultimatum trumps the summer's other offerings. While its stunts are no less preposterous than those in Live Free or Die Hard (in fact, both films feature flying cars), what The Bourne Ultimatum offers is grittier and more visceral. And, while there are fewer special effects here, The Bourne Ultimatum provides a lot more suspense and tension than Transformers could hope for. [Berardinelli’s rating: 3 stars out of 4, 75%]

Labels: action, Julia Stiles, Matt Damon, mystery, spy, thriller
IMDb 80/100
MetaScore (critics=85, viewers=76) 
RottenTomatoes Averages (critics=80, viewers=85) 
Blu-ray 

 

Allied (2016) [R] ****

A film review by James Berardinelli for ReelViews.net on November 22, 2016.

Allied is a World War II movie where all the action happens far from the front lines. Whether in the cafes and reception halls of Casablanca or the bombed-out streets of London, the characters face the tribulations that characterize life away from the military clashes. More a spy thriller than a traditional war film, Allied seeks to unfold like a Len Deighton novel - plenty of genuine period details entwined with a fictional story of undercover intrigue, espionage, and betrayal. On the whole, it works although perhaps not as well as it might have if the central relationship had more carefully established. There are also problems with a sense of inevitability during the second half. Despite a few halfhearted red herrings used to instill uncertainty, the resolution is too easy to sniff out.

With a nod to Casablanca, the 1942 Humphrey Bogart / Ingrid Bergman classic, one of Allied’s early scenes transpires in Casablanca, in an establishment not all that different from Rick’s Café Americain. It wouldn’t have been a shock to see Bogart or Claude Rains hanging out or to hear the strains of As Time Goes By playing over the din. In this place, Canadian intelligence officer Max Vatan (Brad Pitt) meets French resistance fighter Marianne Beauséjour (Marion Cotillard). Under the pretense of being a married couple enjoying the freedom offered in the Moroccan city, the two plot the assassination of a German ambassador. With the odds against them (Max estimates 60-40 against), the closeness and tension of the situation sparks a romance. But can a love affair conceived during an assignment survive a transition to the home front? And, with the war still raging, can the seeming security of a desk job protect Max from a tragedy that traces its roots back to Casablanca?

Over the course of a rich and varied career, director Robert Zemeckis has experimented with techniques and innovations. Titles like Back to the Future, Who Framed Roger Rabbit?, Forrest Gump, Contact, and Cast Away have confirmed his superior talent as a storyteller and put him on the A-list. Allied represents one of his more conventional films, offering little that’s unique or trailblazing and using special effects to enhance the period detail rather than to push the envelope. When Zemeckis’ entire career is considered in retrospect, Allied is unlikely to be remembered among his great productions.

Although the movie runs at a little over two hours, it could have benefitted from more screen time. The 40-minute Casablanca segment, in which Max and Marianne’s romance begins, feels at time rushed and truncated. Sometimes, it only takes a half-hour for a movie to convince its audience that two characters are in love. Unfortunately in this case, we glimpse the attraction but its culmination feels forced. More time to get to know them and witness their deeper interaction might have made a difference. Some scenes - like one in which Max covertly watches Marianne undress - are honest and believable; Allied could have benefitted from more of these. It’s not a matter of chemistry - Brad Pitt and Marianne Cotillard aren’t destined to become one of the movie world’s great screen couples although they do generate sufficient heat - but of a narrative that doesn’t want to slow down to let the characters breathe.

Allied’s second half focuses on a spy novel mainstay mystery: someone in London is sending messages to the Germans and it becomes Max’s duty to identify (and, if necessary, execute) the guilty party. The movie sets up various checks and balances about whether the methods being used to trap the traitor are reliable or part of an elaborate game and whether there are justifiable causes for the betrayal. Max, unable to watch passively as events unfold, instigates his own investigation - an action that sees him fly to France and become involved in a pitched street battle with Germans. In the end, however, the espionage elements are straightforward and the conclusion is disappointingly uncomplicated. If the filmmakers were stretching to achieve something worthy of Le Carre or Deighton, the result falls short. There’s an emotional resonance to the denouement but it could have been more potent.

Aside from small roles for Jared Harris (as Max’s commander) and Lizzy Caplan (as Max’s lesbian sister), this is a two-character play. Fortunately, both Pitt and Cotillard are seasoned thespians capable of doing wonders with uneven dialogue and an undercooked plot. Cotillard shines brighter than Pitt in this case, in part because Marianne is more dynamic than Max. Pitt plays the heroic pilot with a stiff upper lip. It’s interesting that the actor has gravitated toward World War II films (this is his third feature, following Inglourious Basterds and Fury). He’s perfectly at home in ‘40s garb and his charisma transfers intact. Cotillard’s appeal is timeless.

Allied probably isn’t prestigious enough to attract much Oscar buzz but it’s too good to be tossed into theaters without a publicity push. Films like this - offering two hours of solid entertainment with attractive leads, exotic locations, and large dollops of romance and suspense - would have done excellent business a decade or two ago but the movie business has changed since then. Allied isn’t a great film but it’s made with sufficient care and skill that it deserves to be seen. Unfortunately, a poor showing at the box office may further diminish the likelihood of Hollywood releasing more films like this one. [Berardinelli’s rating: 3 out of 4 stars]

Labels: action, Brad Pitt, drama, romance, spy, thriller, tragedy, WWII

IMDb 71/100 

MetaCritic (critics=60, viewers=66)

RottenTomatoes (critics=60, viewers=64) 

Blu-ray 

Jason Bourne (2016) [PG-13] ****

A film review by James Berardinelli for ReelViews.net on July 28, 2016.

Fourteen years after the release of The Bourne Identity, the Bourne movies have deviated so drastically from Robert Ludlum’s source novels that, like James Bond, the film character exists separately from his written inspiration. Over the course of three ’00s movies (The Bourne Identity, The Bourne Supremacy, The Bourne Ultimatum), Matt Damon became Jason Bourne. In 2007, when he decided it was time to go, the filmmakers were left with a Sean Connery-sized dilemma and, as was the case with Connery, the eventual solution involved luring back the original actor. Damon’s return to the title role, the fifth film in the franchise, represents a coup for Universal Pictures. After Jeremy Renner failed to capture the public’s interest in The Bourne Legacy, the series’ future looked uncertain until Damon and co-writer/director Paul Greengrass agreed to terms. Despite regurgitating elements from the founding trilogy, Jason Bourne represents the best the series has yet offered.

Jason Bourne doesn’t deviate substantially from the established Bourne movie format. It’s Bourne (Matt Damon) against the CIA in a get them before they get you struggle. For this outing, the only one to return from the original Bourne trilogy (other than Jason) is Julia Stiles’ Nicky Parsons, an ex-agent who now works for a WikiLeaks-type organization. The CIA is populated by newcomers - director Robert Dewey (Tommy Lee Jones), cyber expert Heather Lee (Alicia Vikander), and a nameless shadowy assassin referred to only as The Asset (Vincent Cassel). The movie crisscrosses the globe, stopping in locations like Reykjavik, Athens, Berlin, London, and Las Vegas.

Jason Bourne is characterized by a relentless intensity that exceeds that of even The Bourne Ultimatum (the best of the first four films). Greengrass’ camerawork is part of the reason. His penchant for hand-held shots is highly effective in some of the movie’s chaotic scenes (such as a riot in Athens) but it has been tempered for the more static sequences. Damon’s interpretation of Bourne (as a killing machine whose pain is deeply buried but occasionally visible) works well within the context of the story and, like Arnold Schwarzenegger’s Terminator, he has very little dialogue. Damon does most of his acting with his eyes and jaw. The throbbing but not overpowering musical score (credited to John Powell and David Buckley) enhances the tension. When it comes to keeping audiences uncertain and white-knuckled, the movie rarely lets up. Prepare to be exhausted at the end of the two hour running time.

With Joan Allen, Chris Cooper, Brian Cox, and Albert Finney long gone, it’s time for some new blood at the CIA. Tommy Lee Jones gives a strong, Fugitive-like representation of the company man/patriot whose Nixonian approach to National Security makes him less-than-likable. Alicia Vikander plays her inexperienced but intelligent role with minimal emotion; her performance is closer to Ex Machina than her Oscar-winning turn in The Danish Girl. Vincent Cassel is on board to provide the kind of psychotic character he has become known for. Although the screenplay gives The Asset an ambiguous backstory, few viewers will find even a scintilla of goodwill for the man.

Although Jason Bourne is part of an ongoing franchise and works best for those who have seen at least the first three chapters (the movie has little or no connection to The Bourne Legacy), it’s like most other multi-sequel action series (James Bond, Mission: Impossible) in that it can stand on its own. Bourne is the protagonist but not necessarily a hero. The CIA agents vary from being outright bad guys to people somewhere in the middle. Jason Bourne continues the theme of identity that was so important in the original trilogy but here it’s interleaved with the basic instincts of survival and revenge. If the latter is a dish best served cold, then Bourne is the perfect waiter.

The film’s ending allows for future installments of the prime storyline should Damon and Greengrass decide to return (at least insofar as the Bourne movies are concerned, they’re a package deal). The open-endedness, however, doesn’t leave the viewer unsatisfied. The key plot elements are all wrapped up and the loose ends are merely hooks that can be used to reel in another sequel. Jason Bourne is more than a just worthy addition to a popular franchise - it’s the cherry on the top. It proves that when a creative team puts forth the time and effort, financially motivated motion pictures can still be gratifying. Jason Bourne is two hours of exhilarating, unrelenting cinema. [Berardinelli’s rating: 3.5 out of 4 stars]

Labels: action, Julia Stiles, Matt Damon, spy, thriller

IMDb 66/100

MetaScore (critics=58, viewers=64) 

RottenTomatoes Averages (critics=58, viewers=68) 

Blu-ray 

Eye in the Sky (2016) [R] ****

A film review by James Berardinelli for ReelViews.net on March 25, 2016.

Eye in the Sky provides a comprehensive cross-section of the logistics, procedures, and tolls associated with something that’s now taken for granted in modern warfare: a drone attack. For the average citizen, this seems to be a relatively straightforward situation - locate a target; fly an armed, unmanned aircraft to the scene; launch the weapon; and fly post-attack reconnaissance to determine if it was successful. As Gavin Hood’s film shows, there’s a lot more to it than that oversimplified outline. Terms like legal cover, rules of engagement, and collateral damage play a big part.

Eye in the Sky reminded me of United 93 - not necessarily in terms of the subject matter but because of the apolitical, clear-headed manner in which it approaches an act. Eye in the Sky isn’t based on any one particular incident but instead draws from many. There have been enough drone strikes that details have emerged about how these things are handled, what risks are deemed acceptable, and how the pilots cope with the immense stress under which they’re placed. The 2014 film Good Kill (with Ethan Hawke) might make a good companion piece to Eye in the Sky.

The situation is straightforward. Terrorists have gathered in a small house in a village in Kenya. Three governments have been involved in tracking these men and women (two of whom are British nationals and one of whom is U.S. citizen) to this location - Great Britain, the United States, and Kenya. The military operation is under the command of Colonel Katherine Powell (Helen Mirren), who takes her marching orders from Lt. General Frank Benson (Alan Rickman). The drone pilots, Steve Watts (Aaron Paul) and Carrie Gershon (Phoebe Fox), are based in America. Surveillance confirms that the terrorists are present but reveals something chilling: explosives being prepped for an imminent suicide bombing. Powell determines that the drone must strike quickly and decisively. But the presence of a little girl in the blast radius complicates matters for those watching from London.

The firing of a single Hellfire missile requires multiple approvals. The military leaders - in this case, Col. Powell and Gen. Benson - must confirm that the objective, killing several high-value targets and preventing a terrorist action - will be met. Lawyers must agree that the strike is legal. And political representatives must weigh the pros and cons of how the news will play in the media. There’s not much disagreement that the terrorists have to be stopped (although one voice argues that the objective should be capturing rather than killing - at least until a terrorist puts on a suicide vest). However, when it becomes apparent that one innocent girl has a high probability of dying, the stakes are raised. If she dies along with the terrorists, who wins the propaganda war? And what if footage of the attack, despite being a top secret mission, finds its way to YouTube? Before it’s all over, the U.K. Prime Minister and U.S. Secretary of State are consulted.

Then there are Watts and Gershon, two pilots who have never participated in any attack. They’re accustomed to flying eye in the sky drones - those that observe and record. Emotionally, neither is prepared to pull the trigger, especially when their close-up monitoring shows the girl going about her daily routine, unaware that death may soon rain down upon her. The psychological toll of participating in an action like this (which in real life has left some pilots with PTSD) is conveyed honestly and powerfully.  Sometimes antiseptic killing isn’t at all clean and, although the hardware and imagery may mimic video game controls and visuals, the pilots are all-too-aware that they are about to end an innocent life.

Eye in the Sky doesn’t sympathize with the terrorists. It’s clear what will happen if they aren’t stopped. The arguments against killing them have nothing to do with their guilt. At first, it’s a legal question - whether the drone has the right to kill American and British citizens, depriving them of due process. Once that’s resolved, it becomes about collateral damage. The coldly dispassionate contention (to which Powell and Benson subscribe) is that the greater good outweighs the immediate and unfortunate consequences. It’s not easy to accept, however, watching images of the little girl selling the loaves of bread that provide her family with much needed income. Difficult choices and consequences - these things lie at the core of Eye in the Sky’s drama. Nothing is simple or clean-cut. It’s 12 Angry Men in a different arena. There’s no right or wrong - only points and counterpoints.

The real-time format enhances the suspense. Although this is primarily a dramatic piece, there are times when the pacing makes it feel like a thriller. Tension arises from two aspects: whether the terrorists can be stopped and whether the girl will move out of the danger zone.

Quality acting enforces the sense of verisimilitude.  In his swansong, Alan Rickman reminds us that, although he may be remembered best for Die Hard and the Harry Potter movies, he was capable of a variety of roles one normally associates with character actors. Helen Mirren is credible as the tough-as-nails Powell, a military officer whose obsession with killing these terrorists has consumed her for six years but who recognizes the potential for tragedy in finally achieving success. Aaron Paul continues to expand beyond his Breaking Bad persona; despite limited screen time, he provides viewers a window into his character’s inner conflict.

Eye in the Sky is compelling, offering the best elements of a drama and a thriller. The film is philosophically challenging because, although it doesn’t guide an audience into picking a side, it illustrates facets of a complex issue without bias. Productions of this sort rarely appear outside of Oscar season and, when they do, viewers who care about intelligent, well-made movies would be remiss not to seek them out. [Berardinelli’s rating: 3.5 out of 4 stars]

Labels: drama, spy, thriller, tragedy, war

Internet Movie Database 73 

MetaScore (critics=73, viewers=71)

RottenTomatoes Averages (critics=76, viewers=79) 

Blu-ray 

Bridge of Spies (2015) [PG-13] ****/*****

A film review by James Berardinelli for ReelViews.net on Oct. 15, 2015

With names like Steven Spielberg, Tom Hanks, and Ethan & Joel Coen, it's hard not to be excited about a project like Bridge of Spies. Yet, although the workmanlike production is solidly engaging, it falls short of the loftiest expectations. It's worth seeing but not one of the best films of 2015. In terms of the director's oeuvre, this will likely be remembered as one of his minor productions. (Think Always, The Terminal, and War Horse.)

Part of the problem may be the sprawling screenplay which starts out as a courtroom procedural before taking a sharp right turn into John Le Carre territory. The spy element is where the film's strength lies, but it's not on par with some of the great Cold War thrillers that have come to the screen both before and after the Berlin Wall fell. Admittedly, the screenwriters are constrained by the based on a true story aspect but, in concert with Spielberg, they somehow fail to capture the powerful sense of claustrophobia that characterizes almost every film set in Cold War Berlin. The period detail is impeccable but the atmosphere is surprisingly tepid.

The story opens in Brooklyn, N.Y. during the late 1950s with the arrest by American authorities of suspected Soviet agent Rudolf Abel (Mark Rylance). Concerned that the man receives top-notch representation, the government approaches attorney James Donovan (Tom Hanks) to defend Abel. Although initially reluctant, Donovan warms to the idea after meeting his would-be client. Although unable to secure a not guilty verdict, Donovan's arguments spare Abel the death penalty. However, his vociferous defense of such an anti-American criminal earns Donovan the ire of his fellow citizens.

In a parallel storyline, Bridge of Spies introduces CIA pilot Lieutenant Gary Powers (Austin Stowell), who flies a U-2 spy plane on a mission high over Soviet territory. He is given strict instructions that, if the aircraft is compromised and in danger of falling into enemy hands, he is to activate the aircraft’s auto-destruct mechanism. He is also given orders about the conditions under which he is to end his own life. He fails in both regards and is captured by the Soviets. The CIA, concerned about the top secret information Powers might divulge, asks Donovan to broker a prisoner exchange: Powers for Abel. This requires the lawyer, who is sick with a cold, to travel to Berlin and meet with KGB and East German officials in circumstances that could best be described as precarious.

Although the screenplay is co-credited to the Coen Brothers, it's a strangely straightforward story with little of the quirkiness one often associates from the Oscar-winning duo. Their off-kilter sense of humor comes across in some of Hanks' lines (consider his response to a CIA agent when he's in a phone booth) but the finished project would seem to lean heavily toward the pen of co-writer Matt Charman. Spielberg's recreation of 1960s Berlin is exemplary but there are times when his approach is surprisingly heavy-handed. In particular, instead of going for something subtle, he opts to use a sledge-hammer approach in contrasting what appears outside train windows when traveling in Berlin and New York. The misstep is small but strident.

The spy aspects of Bridge of Spies are handled effectively, although Donovan's situation isn't as dire as what we have become accustomed to in other Cold War thrillers set in Berlin. There's tension but it's not suffocating. Even when Donovan is incarcerated, we don't believe his situation to be perilous. That's because, no matter how loudly the U.S. government denies that he's their agent, he's playing a game with rules and the other side is as bound by them as he is. In the end, Bridge of Spies is more about the mechanics of how the deal gets done than it is about watchers skulking in the shadows and people disappearing into the night.

Tom Hanks has grown into this sort of role.  It's that of a grizzled warhorse who is fueled by equal parts cynicism and idealism. He's a good man who recognizes that might not matter much. Amy Smart (as Donovan's wife) and Sebastian Koch (as the East German lawyer who becomes involved in the negotiations) provide solid support. But the real standout is Mark Rylance whose turn as the meek, composed Abel compels the viewer’s attention. His quiet performance steals scenes away from Hanks and everyone else.

A more tightly focused screenplay might have resulted in a leaner, more riveting motion picture. Perhaps by attempting to tell the entire story from Donovan's first to last involvement results in an arc that is difficult to manage. Bridge of Spies is an engaging mid-Autumn recollection of an era that is increasingly viewed through the tinted glasses of nostalgia. However, despite the pedigree of those involved, it would be surprising to see this emerge as one of the season’s great successes. [Berardinelli’s rating: 3 out of 4 stars]

Labels: biography, drama, history, Sixties, spy, thriller, Tom Hanks

IMDb 76/100 

MetaScore (critics=81, viewers=76) 

RottenTomatoes Averages (critics=77, viewers=80) 

Blu-ray 

Jack Ryan: Shadow Recruit (2014) [PG-13] ****

A film review by James Berardinelli, on January 16, 2014.

Probably the best way to approach a Jack Ryan movie is to look at it like a James Bond film. The lead actor keeps changing, the supporting actors are rarely the same, and the time period varies. Bond is Bond, whether he's played by Sean Connery, George Lazenby, Roger Moore, Timothy Dalton, Pierce Brosnan, or Daniel Craig. In the same way, Jack Ryan is Jack Ryan, whether he's played by Alec Baldwin, Harrison Ford, Ben Affleck, or Chris Pine. And, just as the Bond filmmakers moved beyond Ian Fleming's written material, so the Ryan movie-makers have now taken the character away from Tom Clancy's novels. The core essentials that made the previous Jack Ryan movies accessible and enjoyable remain intact in Jack Ryan: Shadow Recruit, even if many of the individual pieces have changed. What remains undecided at this point is whether or not this fifth Ryan production will represent a Casino Royale-style reboot for the franchise. Is this it for Clancy's hero or does he have more cinematic adventures ahead of him?

Jack Ryan: Shadow Recruit provides the best motion picture adventure for the title character since his introduction in The Hunt for Red October. This also doubles as an origin story, taking viewers back to his beginnings. In this telling, that's 9/11/01, when Ryan (Chris Pine) watches the Twin Towers burn on TV while attending college in England and thereafter decides to devote himself to the protection of his country from all enemies foreign and domestic. After being injured in Afghanistan, he is recruited by Commander Thomas Harper (Kevin Costner) to join the CIA as an analyst. The Jack Ryan readers know from Clancy's books is still in the formative stages here and he's more of an action hero than has previously been seen.

Ryan's role changes from analytical to operational when, in his capacity as an undercover agent on Wall Street, he discovers the seeds of a Russian conspiracy to crash the U.S. economy. The scheme, unlike the ones at the center of many espionage thrillers, sounds at least remotely plausible. Ordered by Harper, Ryan heads off to Moscow to investigate. The mastermind of the plot, Viktor Cherevin (Kenneth Branagh), sees the American as dangerous and seeks to have him eliminated. Meanwhile, dodging bullets and thwarting attempts on his life takes its toll on Ryan's relationship with his fiancée, Cathy (Keira Knightley), who thinks his evasiveness might be evidence of an affair.

Director Kenneth Branagh, who showed in his Shakespeare adaptations that he understands how to maintain a smooth, controlled pace, uses that quality to good advantage in Jack Ryan: Shadow Recruit. There are at least three action sequences (a hotel ambush, a heist, and a car chase) that, in less expert hands, could have been dull and generic. As choreographed by Branagh, they crackle with tension and suspense. At its best, the movie feels relentless, almost exhausting. The necessary connective tissue between the adrenaline-fueled scenes is also deftly handled; the movie rarely threatens to bog down due to excessive exposition. At the same time, there's a little time for character development.

There are some structural issues in the movie's final half-hour after the scene shifts from Russia to the United States. Although the filmmakers find a way to make the climax thrilling, it's preceded by a segment featuring a group gathered in a war room making deductions about the identity and location of a terrorist. This isn't inherently cinematic material and, although Branagh keeps the energy level high, there's a sense that the movie has wandered off-track, if only for a little while. Getting Ryan back into the heart of the action requires a cheat, although it's necessary to avoid an unsatisfying ending.

Chris Pine, perhaps best known for playing Star Trek's Captain James T. Kirk Version 2.0, has the presence and physicality to make Ryan a more Bond-esque action hero than he has been in the past. Pine is an excellent choice for this re-envisioning of the role and he takes the character in a different direction. Playing Ryan's soon-to-be wife, Keira Knightley is strong and appealing. Kevin Costner is solid in the mentor role - a part that seems well-suited to him at this stage of his career. And Branagh provides a villain who is less of a 007-style megalomaniac and more of a misguided patriot.

Jack Ryan: Shadow Recruit was originally scheduled for a December release but was bumped by Paramount to open up a slot for The Wolf of Wall Street. Its delay gives movie-goers something to get excited about in January. This is summer blockbuster quality entertainment delivered in the dead of winter - a most welcome development. [Berardinelli’s rating: 3 out of 4]

Labels: action, Keira Knightley, mystery, spy, thriller

Internet Movie Database 

Metacritic 57/100 

RottenTomatoes Averages (critics=57, viewers=68) 

Blu-ray

Notorious (1946) [NR] *****

A film review by Roger Ebert on August 17, 1997.

Alfred Hitchcock's Notorious is the most elegant expression of the master's visual style, just as Vertigo is the fullest expression of his obsessions. It contains some of the most effective camera shots in his--or anyone’s--work, and they all lead to the great final passages in which two men find out how very wrong they both were.

This is the film, with Casablanca, that assures Ingrid Bergman’s immortality. She plays a woman whose notorious reputation encourages U.S. agents to recruit her to spy on Nazis in postwar Rio. And that reputation nearly gets her killed, when the man she loves mistrusts her. His misunderstanding is at the center of a plot in which all of the pieces come together with perfect precision, so that two people walk down a staircase to their freedom, and a third person climbs steps to his doom.

Hitchcock made the film in 1946, when the war was over but the Cold War was just beginning. A few months later, he would have made the villains Communists, but as he and Ben Hecht worked on the script, Nazis were still uppermost in their minds. (An opening subtitle says: Miami, Florida, 3:20 p.m., April 20, 1946--admirably specific, but as unnecessary as the similarly detailed information at the beginning of Psycho.)

The story stars Bergman as a patriotic American named Alicia Huberman, whose father is a convicted Nazi spy. Alicia is known for drinking and apparent promiscuity, and is recruited by an agent named Devlin (Cary Grant) to fly to Rio and insinuate herself into the household of a spy ring led by Sebastian (Claude Rains). Sebastian once loved her, and perhaps he still does; Devlin is essentially asking her to share the spy's bed to discover his secrets. And this she is willing to do, because by the time he asks her, she is in love--with Devlin.

All of these sexual arrangements are of course handled with the sort of subtle dialogue and innuendo that Hollywood used to get around the production code. There is never a moment when improper behavior is actually stated or shown, but the film leaves no doubt. By the time all of the pieces are in place, we actually feel more sympathy for Sebastian than for Devlin. He may be a spy but he loves Alicia sincerely, while Devlin may be an American agent but has used Alicia's love to force her into the arms of another man.

Hitchcock was known for his attention to visual details. He drew storyboards of every scene before shooting it, and slyly plays against Grant’s star power in the scene introducing Devlin to the movie. At a party the night her father has been convicted, Alicia drinks to forget. The camera positions itself behind the seated Devlin, so we see only the back of his head. He anchors the shot as the camera moves left and right, following the morally ambiguous Alicia as she flirts, drinks and tries to forget.

There are more famous shots the next morning. Alicia awakens with a hangover, and there is a gigantic foreground close-up of a glass of Alka-Seltzer (it will be paired much later in the movie with a huge foreground coffee cup that we know contains arsenic). From her point of view, she sees Devlin in the doorway, backlit and upside down. As she sits up, he rotates 180 degrees. He suggests a spy deal. She refuses, talking of her plans to take a cruise. He plays a secret recording that proves she is, after all, patriotic--despite her loose image. As the recording begins, she is in shadow. As it continues, she is in bars of light. As it ends, she is in full light. Hitchcock has choreographed the visuals so that they precisely reflect what is happening.

The film is rich with other elegant shots, the most famous beginning with the camera on a landing high above the entrance hall of Sebastian’s mansion in Rio. It ends, after one unbroken movement, with a close-up of a key in Alicia's nervously twisting hand. The key will open the wine cellar, where Devlin (posing as a guest) will join Alicia in trying to find Sebastian’s secret. One of the bottles contains not wine but a radioactive substance used in bombs. Of course, it could contain anything--maps, codes, and diamonds--because it is a MacGuffin (Hitchcock's name for that plot element that everyone is concerned about, although it hardly matters what it is).

The Hecht screenplay is ingenious in playing the two men against one another. Sebastian, played by Rains, is smaller, more elegant, more vulnerable, and dominated by his forbidding mother (Leopoldine Konstantin). Devlin, played by Grant, is tall, physically imposing, crude at times, suspicious where Sebastian is trusting. Both men love her but the wrong man trusts her, and the plot leads to a moment of inspired ingenuity in which Devlin is able to escort Alicia out of the Nazi mansion in full view of all of the spies, and the circumstances are such that nobody can stop him. (There is a point earlier in the film where Devlin walks up the same staircase, and if you count his steps you will find that on the way down he and Alicia descend more steps than there actually are--Hitchcock's way of prolonging the suspense.)

Throughout Hitchcock's career, he devised stories in which elegant women, usually blond, were manipulated into situations of great danger. Hitchcock was the master manipulator, with the male actors as his surrogates. Vertigo treats this theme so openly it almost gives the game away. But look how it works in Notorious, where Devlin (like the Jimmy Stewart character in Vertigo) grooms and trains an innocent woman to be exactly who he desires her to be, and then makes her do his bidding.

The great erotic moment in Vertigo is the one where the man kisses the woman of his fantasy, while the room whirls around him. There is a parallel scene in Notorious, and it was famous at the time as the longest kiss in the history of the movies. It was not, however, a single kiss, as Tim Dirks points out in his essay on the film (http://www.filmsite.org/noto.html). The production code forbade a kiss lasting longer than three seconds, and so Bergman and Grant alternate kissing with dialogue and eye-play, while never leaving one another's arms. The sequence begins on a balcony overlooking Rio, encompasses a telephone call and a discussion of the dinner menu, and ends with a parting at the apartment door, taking three minutes in all. The three-second rule led to a better scene; an actual 180-second kiss might look like an exercise in slobbering.

The choice of Ingrid Bergman for the role was ideal; she subtly combined the noble and the carnal. Consider Casablanca (all of the viewers of Notorious would have), in which she lives with a resistance hero but in her heart loves a scruffy bar owner, and yet emerges as an idealistic heroine. In Notorious, we never seriously doubt that she is the heroine, but we can understand why the Grant character does. She appears to be a dipsomaniac, and besides, she sleeps with Sebastian. But she does it because she loves Devlin. Devlin has difficulty in loving a woman who would do that; one is reminded of Groucho Marx, who refused to join any club that would have him as a member.

So many movies have ended in obligatory chases and shoot-outs that the ability to write a well-crafted third act has almost died out. Among its many achievements, Notorious ends well. Like clockwork, the inevitable events of the last 10 minutes take place, and they all lead to the final perfect shot, in which another Nazi says to Sebastian, Alex, will you come in, please? I wish to talk to you. And Alex goes in, knowing he will never come out alive. [Ebert’s rating: **** out of 4 stars]

Labels: action, drama, film-noir, Ingrid Bergman, romance, spy, thriller

Internet Movie Database 8.0/10 

RottenTomatoes Averages (critics=89, viewers=82) 

Blu-ray 

Blu-ray Hitchcock Classic Collection