A couple of months ago I saw Steven Spielberg's Munich - I found the first half of that movie to be a brilliant stylised thriller in the vein of the genre in '70s, yet when it came time to merge those thematic devices with that of Spielberg's politics I think he failed. Miserable. However, right now we have a movie by a director notorious for his opinions and trademark style, taking on a traditional genre picture. However, unlike Spielberg, Spike Lee didn't let me down when it came to merging the ideals of a modern-day heist thriller and those of a political nature.
Inside Man takes place almost entirely in a bank that has become under seige from a group of 4 robbers who may or may not actually be considered robbers, considering we're not even sure they want to rob anything. Clive Owen is the masked leader of the group, Denzel Washington is the negotiator trying to free the 30-odd hostages, Jodie Foster is the upper-crust lawyer in a deal with the bank's manager played by Christopher Plummer. Chiwetel Ejiofor is Washington's detective sidekick and Willem Dafoe is the policeman who doesn't wanna take orders from a man like Washington. What proceeds is 2 hours of heist wrangling. Where does the politics fit into it? If you see the movie you will see it's quite obvious.
It's also obvious why Spike Lee chose this screenplay to "go mainstream". The screenplay by Russell Gerwitz makes many references to race and the place it plays in post 9/11 New York. The robbers release a hostage, a middle eastern man, the police assume he is one of the robbers despite his pleading. When he eventually asks for his turban back, which was taken away, because it is an important part of his religion, they seem almost surprised. Many other instances are scattered throughout the film including ones criticising black 50-cent-inspired culture and so on.
But apart from all of that, the film works exceptionally well as a thriller too. Many people will not be able to get into the film (Kris at InContention for starters gives an odd and baffling review of the film at his blog) and while I can understand people not liking it, I think it's all a matter of whether you're willing to forgive the movie and go for the ride. Yes, they don't explain how Owen's character happened upon his knowledge of the bank - but the screenplay is filled with so many witty and laugh-out-loud one-liners that I could forgive that.
The acting is above average for the genre, too. Jodie Foster in particular gives a performance that was surprising in many ways. It didn't feel like a typical Foster role. She's a bitch - plain and simple, and she's relishing it. I'm not sure if the sly grin on her face throughout most of the movie was part of her character (actually, I'm sure it was) or whether it was Jodie smiling to herself in delightful glee. Owen, Washington and Ejiofor also provide sterling work that they shouldn't be ashamed of.
Technically the film is great as well. Music is always important in Lee films and here is no disappointment. The one or two song selections are great ones, as is the musical score - an almost operatic (at times) acompaniment that gives the film grandeur and power. Cinematography and sound are key as well.
I liked this film because I enjoyed the aspects of the heist thriller that it employed, but Spike Lee merged it with his own sensibilities and trademarks as a filmmaker. The two went surprisingly well together, and considering Lee's 25th Hour was the first film to deal with September 11 in any form, this is another great film that deals with it in an around-the-corner sort of way. And considering the other films to be released this year, it will be interesting to see how this film stacks up against them when it comes down to it. Yes, Oliver Stone's World Trade Center may be powerful stuff, but I doubt it will have anything to say on the matter of race relations in our world. We'll see, but for now we have Spike's own piece of work that is rightfully getting the respect it deserves and isn't being relegated to "Spike Lee Sells Out" status. B+
1 comment:
I think you missed the part where he said "im not arab or muslim, im a SIKH. Sikhs are not from the middle east nor are they muslim. It's a completely different faith that make up around 23 million across the globe.
Its too bad that even though the scene was shown to portray a mistaken identity, fools such as yourself still didnt get it.
Post a Comment