Inside Man
Denzel Washington, Clive Owen, Christopher Plummer, Willem Dafoe, Jodie Foster and Spike Lee. Wow, what a cast and director! Wow, what an average movie.
The plot: Denzel Washington is the lead, playing hostage negotiator Detective Keith Frazier on the outer, accused of misappropriating funds. Clive Owen is the robber - Dalton Russell, ostensibly robbing a bank but with a secret plan of his own. Christopher Plummer is Arthur Case, the bank's chairman with his own, dark secret to hide. Jodie Foster is the tough, hired gun Madeleine White. Plummer's character brings her in 'take care' of his interests. Spike Lee is the director.
Although I think well cast, Jodie Foster's part is both unbelievable and one-dimentional. You can actually tell how poor the part is by the fact that Spike Lee felt it necessary to have the slimy mayor of NY tell Foster, "You're a perfect cunt." How pathetic. Willem Dafoe's character could and should have been played by an extra for all the input he had into the plot - I suspect he showed up for an afternoon to film all his scenes, pick up a big cheque and go home.
Essentially, the film is a mind game between Washington, trying to find out what is really going on, and Owen/Plummer/Foster, who know what's going on/are afraid of what's going on/don't care what's going but, and don't want him to find out.
Arthur Case made his fortune by taking money from the Nazis during the Second World War. One of the safety deposit boxes in the bank branch is his and contains bags of diamonds that belonged to a Jewish friend of his whom he allowed to be carted off to an extermination camp, from whence he and his family did not return. There's also a piece of paper with a Nazi seal on it - we're never told that this is exactly, though my mind envisioned it as a thank-you letter from Hitler or a Nazi Party membership.
In summary: There's no particular twist at the end, just a moral quandary if you're of a mind to think of it. Did the thieves do the right thing, the wrong thing, or were they amoral? What would you do with the diamonds? These are my wife's questions. I just thought it was a reasonably well spent couple of hours.
The Casablanca comparison: I was trying to think about just whether Washington's Detective Frazier reminded me at all of Claude Rains' Louis. Not at all. Foster and Bergman are both beautiful blondes, but that's where that comparison ends. Even Clive Owen's thief is no match for Peter Lorre's few minutes as Ugarte. Then it occurred to me: While Christopher Plummer's Nazi collaborating bank owner doesn't have a main counterpart in Casablanca, he was the guy that Rick refused to allow into the casino section of the Cafe Americain!
The rating: 5 out of 10. All great actors but the plot is just too thin and characters lack credibility. Essentially, judging by the product placement, this is just a long iPod advertisement.
The plot: Denzel Washington is the lead, playing hostage negotiator Detective Keith Frazier on the outer, accused of misappropriating funds. Clive Owen is the robber - Dalton Russell, ostensibly robbing a bank but with a secret plan of his own. Christopher Plummer is Arthur Case, the bank's chairman with his own, dark secret to hide. Jodie Foster is the tough, hired gun Madeleine White. Plummer's character brings her in 'take care' of his interests. Spike Lee is the director.
Although I think well cast, Jodie Foster's part is both unbelievable and one-dimentional. You can actually tell how poor the part is by the fact that Spike Lee felt it necessary to have the slimy mayor of NY tell Foster, "You're a perfect cunt." How pathetic. Willem Dafoe's character could and should have been played by an extra for all the input he had into the plot - I suspect he showed up for an afternoon to film all his scenes, pick up a big cheque and go home.
Essentially, the film is a mind game between Washington, trying to find out what is really going on, and Owen/Plummer/Foster, who know what's going on/are afraid of what's going on/don't care what's going but, and don't want him to find out.
Arthur Case made his fortune by taking money from the Nazis during the Second World War. One of the safety deposit boxes in the bank branch is his and contains bags of diamonds that belonged to a Jewish friend of his whom he allowed to be carted off to an extermination camp, from whence he and his family did not return. There's also a piece of paper with a Nazi seal on it - we're never told that this is exactly, though my mind envisioned it as a thank-you letter from Hitler or a Nazi Party membership.
In summary: There's no particular twist at the end, just a moral quandary if you're of a mind to think of it. Did the thieves do the right thing, the wrong thing, or were they amoral? What would you do with the diamonds? These are my wife's questions. I just thought it was a reasonably well spent couple of hours.
The Casablanca comparison: I was trying to think about just whether Washington's Detective Frazier reminded me at all of Claude Rains' Louis. Not at all. Foster and Bergman are both beautiful blondes, but that's where that comparison ends. Even Clive Owen's thief is no match for Peter Lorre's few minutes as Ugarte. Then it occurred to me: While Christopher Plummer's Nazi collaborating bank owner doesn't have a main counterpart in Casablanca, he was the guy that Rick refused to allow into the casino section of the Cafe Americain!
The rating: 5 out of 10. All great actors but the plot is just too thin and characters lack credibility. Essentially, judging by the product placement, this is just a long iPod advertisement.
Comments