Tony Scott: The '00s

Spy Game (November 22/01)

Spying is a hot commodity right now, what with the success of shows like Alias and The Agency, and a renewed interest in the novels of Robert Ludlum. So it makes perfect sense that a movie like Spy Game is being released now. The only problem is, Spy Game takes the spy formula and dilutes it with wholly unnecessary plot twists and a flashback structure that's more confusing than anything else. Set in 1991, the movie opens with Tom Bishop (Brad Pitt) seemingly working undercover to rescue an unknown prisoner at a Chinese jail. He winds up captured, though, and scheduled to die in 24 hours. Meanwhile, at the CIA headquarters in Virginia, Nathan Muir (Robert Redford) is due for retirement the very next day. He finds out about Bishop's plight - Bishop just happens to be Muir's protégé - and quickly begins to surreptitiously gather as much information as he can. The majority of the film takes place in a CIA boardroom, with Muir regaling his colleagues with various tales of his and Bishop's many adventures together. It's the incessant use of flashbacks that sinks Spy Game, as a potentially intriguing concept - a rogue agent works from within the CIA's walls to free an overseas comrade - is frequently interrupted by pesky glances the central characters' past (with the majority of such moments hardly as interesting as the filmmakers clearly believe them to be). But the main story of Muir working to help Bishop is an interesting one, and allows Redford the chance to be at his cocky and jocular best. This is the sort of character he excels at and Redford proves that age hasn't prevented him from continuing to play exceedingly charismatic characters. Pitt is good as well, playing a character that seems to be as close as he's willing to get to a matinee-idol type. At the helm of Spy Game is Tony Scott, best known for other thrillers including Crimson Tide and Enemy of the State. The style of Spy Game is similar to those films - with flashy camera work and the use of different filters - but here it doesn't seem to work as well. His ADD-like approach to directing hinders the story from gaining any momentum, though that problem can mostly be attributed to the lackluster screenplay. Spy Game is marginally entertaining, admittedly, but given the caliber of talent in front of and behind the camera, marginally entertaining is very disappointing.

Man on Fire is the film The Punisher should've been. Raw and unflinching, it's a gripping story of revenge that doesn't pull any punches - anchored by an electrifying performance from Denzel Washington. Director Tony Scott - never one to shy away from cinematic pyrotechnics - is particularly hyperactive here, pummeling the viewer with rapid cuts and various other Oliver Stone-esque camera tricks. But Scott's short attention span serves the story well, giving the film a slightly off-kilter feel (and effectively mirroring Washington's character's state of mind). The film's premise is straight-forward and direct, with Washington playing John Creasy - an ex-mercenary hired to protect the daughter of a wealthy industrialist. Obviously, something goes wrong at a certain point, and Creasy finds himself forced to revive his long-since dormant military training for revenge purposes. Supporting roles are filled by reliable character actors including Christopher Walken (playing a longtime friend of Creasy's) and Mickey Rourke (as a sleazy lawyer, a character he inhabits with ease). About the only negative thing one can say about Man On Fire - aside from the overlong running time, which doesn't feel terribly oppressive - is that it takes an awfully long time to get used to Scott's over-the-top directorial choices (if at all). Certain plot points are somewhat obvious (ie Creasy's relationship with the girl goes from purely business to father figure awfully fast), but such things are expected out of a movie like this. What really matters is whether or not we believe Creasy's attachment to Pita (Dakota Fanning), the girl, and there's no denying that the film excels in that regard. Brian Helgeland's screenplay allows for an unusual amount of character development - it's around an hour before anything sinister happens - which gives us ample time to watch the two characters interact with each other. But when the bad stuff does go down, Creasy's sudden change from cuddly teddy bear to violent man-with-a-mission is completely believable. Like Payback, another Helgeland scripted story, Man on Fire proves to be surprisingly brutal when it comes to onscreen violence. And because we're just as angry as Creasy, it's hard not to root for the man - even when he's stuffing bombs up the rear ends of perpetrators. The single-mindedness of Washington's character propels the story forward, even though the plot essentially vanishes somewhere around the one-hour mark; once the movie becomes about revenge, that's literally all it's about. There's some stuff about police corruption and a journalist that provides Creasy with info, but really, the film devotes itself to Creasy's quest. Man on Fire is entering a marketplace that's crowded with similar films - ie The Punisher, Walking Tall, and Kill Bill: Volume 2 - and though it's not quite up there with the latter, it's surely far better than the former two titles. Washington convincingly sheds his nice guy image to become this gritty character (a character that's far less charismatic than Alonzo Harris, his Training Day persona), delivering a performance that's far different from anything he's done before. It's a film that will likely turn off a lot of viewers - primarily because of Scott's direction and the unforgiving nature of the story - but for those willing to stick with it, Man on Fire is one of the more intelligent and compelling thrillers to come around in a good long while.

After the rampant excess of Domino - Tony Scott's all-but-unwatchable 2005 actioner - the filmmaker has thankfully done away with most of his over-the-top stylistic tendencies and instead infused Deja Vu with a comparatively toned-down vibe that's reminiscent of past efforts such as Enemy of the State and Crimson Tide. And while the movie is consistently entertaining and surprisingly intelligent, there's no denying that it would've been better served with a much shorter running time (at 128 minutes, the film is at least a half hour longer than it needs to be). Deja Vu opens with a deadly explosion aboard a New Orleans ferry that leaves hundreds dead, with the ensuing investigation catching the interest of brilliant ATF agent Doug Carlin (Denzel Washington). After immediately spotting clues overlooked by his peers, Doug catches the attention of a mysterious fed named Pryzwarra (Val Kilmer) and soon finds himself caught up in a time-bending probe of the tragedy. Working from Bill Marsilii and Terry Rossio's screenplay (the latter of whom has evidently started the slow process of redeeming himself for the interminable Pirates of the Caribbean series), Scott and cinematographer Paul Cameron have infused Deja Vu with precisely the sort of slick sensibility that viewers have come to expect from a Jerry Bruckheimer production. To their credit, both Scott and Bruckheimer have resisted the temptation to pepper the admittedly talky screenplay with a series of needless action sequences - ensuring that such moments can't help but come off as engrossing and genuinely exciting when they do arrive. The eclectic supporting cast - consisting of such familiar faces as Adam Goldberg, Matt Craven, and Bruce Greenwood - plays a substantial part in the film's success, though there's little doubt that most of these characters are straight out of the Jerry Bruckheimer playbook (Goldberg's wisecracking tech whiz is a perfect example of this). Washington delivers as expectedly charismatic a performance as one might've expected, while Jim Caviezel makes for an appropriately sinister villain. The film's time-traveling elements - which appear to be, on first glance, entirely nonsensical - seem to hold up fairly well to scrutiny, with the end result an entirely entertaining piece of escapist fare.

The third (and least effective) collaboration between Denzel Washington and Tony Scott, The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3 follows a gang of ruthless terrorists (led by John Travolta’s Ryder) as they hijack a New York City subway train and hold the various passengers for ransom - with beleaguered dispatcher Walter Garber (Washington) inevitably establishing himself as the only man on the outside with whom Ryder will communicate. Though scripter Brian Helgeland retains many of the beats and plot twists from John Godey's engrossing novel, The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3 is ultimately unable to match its 1974 cinematic predecessor in terms of thrills and excitement - as the pronounced emphasis on Ryder and Garber's ongoing radio conversations results in a lack of momentum that persists for much of the movie's overlong running time. This is despite expectedly superb work from Washington; the actor, cast as the film's surprisingly non-heroic protagonist, does a nice job of transforming his schlub of a character into a figure the viewer can't help but root for, while the eclectic supporting cast - which includes John Turturro, James Gandolfini, and Luis Guzman - adds a fair amount of color to the proceedings (Travolta, on the other hand, offers up an increasingly over-the-top performance that becomes awfully tough to take). Scott's relatively toned-down directorial choices - his head-scratching obsession with choppy slow motion notwithstanding - ensure that The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3 generally holds the viewer's interest from start to finish, yet - given the caliber of the filmmaker's previous partnerships with Washington - it's difficult not to feel just a tinge of disappointment at the final product's less-than-enthralling nature.