Black Bag.

Review #2359: Black Bag.

Cast: 

Cate Blanchett (Kathryn St. Jean), Michael Fassbender (George Woodhouse), Marisa Abela (Clarissa Dubose), Tom Burke (Freddie Smalls), Naomie Harris (Dr. Zoe Vaughan), Regé-Jean Page (Col. James Stokes), Pierce Brosnan (Arthur Steiglitz), Gustaf Skarsgård (Meacham), Kae Alexander (Anna Ko), and Ambika Mod (Angela Childs) Directed by Steven Soderbergh (#984 - Logan Lucky, #1526 - Traffic, #1889 - Ocean's Eleven)

Review: 

Sure, let's go with a movie like this to throw some variety into the theater experience* for 2025. It probably isn't surprising to note that the movie was written by David Koepp, who had previously co-written Mission: Impossible (1996). It was during the middle of the process of writing that film with doing research that led to the inspiration for what eventually became this film, specifically because he found the personal life of a CIA guy more interesting than the spy stuff when it comes to having difficulty to sustain a relationship. Koepp wrote the script during the writer's strike over the course of a few months; previously, Koepp and Soderbergh worked together on Kimi (2022) and Presence (2024).

You might have an interest in the movie when it comes to "sleek" espionage thrillers...if you are big on the personal life aspects and being tantalized by talking in rooms. It's the kind of movie that admirers will call "the kind of movie Hollywood used to make for adults" and others will call "not nearly as clever as it thinks it is". It is drawn out on dialogue about the uncertainties that, well, come with personal lives with varying levels of blood (personal life or otherwise); Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf? might come to mind moreso than Mr. & Mrs. Smith (2005). It plays the game of observation and communication to 94 minutes that basically is a reaffirmation of one guy's love for his wife, if you think about it. Sure, one can't speak all they want to their wife about what they do (the term black bag was basically one Koepp made up, but go with it), but they can sure have fun with dinner games and conversation. You might as well call it a sharp smoothness when it comes to the dynamic between Blanchett and Fassbender, who have that sleek conviction in what they like to do (work or each other, either can be listed before the other). It basically starts and ends on separate dinner sequences that see our two leads watch the reactions of the others around them (one instance sees someone get their hand stabbed and then patched up, as one does) for an intimate movie. It is mostly enjoyable to see the game play out in viewing the interactions Fassbinder has with the others around him to set up his part of the trap as a man of the process that is pretty convincing and reflects well upon Blanchett, who has a cutting grace that might as well have the cutting power of a knife on butter. The others are fairly enjoyable in watching their timing when seeing things quickly play out (long story short: who plays who is actually who plays who plays who), which is mostly effective in seeing the vulnerabilities that play out with supposed "cool cucumbers" (as one might say) in Abela or Burke, which is a bit amusing. It casually lets its story elements play out in careful timing, right down to the sequence involving trying to seek out a liar with a lie-detector test. Its milage may vary on just how much one can take in dry suspense, but at least the experience doesn't try to pull the wool over your head and just ends where it feels best to do so. As a whole, it is a generally sleek movie to watch play out in the game of espionage and drawing out tension in the smoothest way possible that will work for those who buy in to what the film yearns to deliver in carefully constructed filmmaking. It is the kind of tight and snappy movie that you might want to see on a comfortable day.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

*I don't usually say it, but man, there were no other people watching this movie at 2pm on a Thursday with me. Hell, I saw Anora at 11am to exactly one guy and Novocaine at 4:45 had seven other people.

Ocean's Eleven.

Review #1889: Ocean's Eleven.

Cast: 

George Clooney (Danny Ocean), Matt Damon (Linus Caldwell), Andy Garcia (Terry Benedict), Brad Pitt (Rusty Ryan), Julia Roberts (Tess Ocean), Bernie Mac (Frank Catton), Elliott Gould (Reuben Tishkoff), Casey Affleck (Virgil Malloy), Scott Caan (Turk Malloy), Eddie Jemison (Livingston Dell), Don Cheadle (Basher Tarr), Shaobo Qin (The Amazing Yen), and Carl Reiner (Saul Bloom) Directed by Steven Soderbergh (#984 - Logan Lucky and #1526 - Traffic)

Review: 

"I wanted to see if I could combine two types of films, one that had this elegant, elaborate, technical side but also this casual off-hand quality to the performances – a film that wasn't aggressive."

The thing to remember about Ocean's 11 (1960) is that it sucked. It was a mediocre, bland movie that begged for a more involving script when it came to making a star vehicle heist movie that did only one thing right: making the idea of stealing money from Vegas with an intricate plan sounded cool. So yes, I would understand why someone would think they could do a remake of a 40-year old movie with a new array of talented name actors. Ted Griffin serves as the screenwriter for this film, which takes the loosest of inspiration from the original film and its screenplay by Harry Brown, Charles Lederer, George Clayton Johnson & Jack Golden Russell. Soderbergh, who went from indie classics such as Sex, Lies, and Videotape (1989) to mainstream success with Erin Brockovich and Traffic (both 2001), was recruited to direct, and he directed both of the subsequent sequels (released in 2004 and 2007), which were all commercial successes.

The easiest thing to say is that the remake is better than the original. In fact, it runs laps around the original, doing so despite perhaps being just a good feature rather than the possible great caper it could have been. It is not particularly outstanding in any one area, but it manages to do just enough in being good in most of the core aspects to make it a solid piece of entertainment. It is a movie that wants you have a good time and that's about it, doing so with casual energy and expertise that would make anyone favorable to a machine-type of film (i.e. a movie that is mechanical but solid for a rental) where the heist is a heist you might see coming but enjoy anyway, complete with assembling its key eleven pretty quickly in the 116-minute run-time. Clooney glides through the adventure with casual charm, maneuvering through the machinations of what comes with heists and people, which mainly consists of a few amusing moments when it comes to the setup and his key part of the climax. Pitt maneuvers as the second man with casual coolness that also lends for a few little neat moments, such as pretending to be a doctor to move his way forward. Damon has the self-effacing qualities one might see from other films with him, which more or less means that he makes the best of playing a quiet pickpocket. Granted, some of the supporting cast sticks out better than others. Cheadle tries his best to play the charade of having a Cockney accent in a manner that would make Dick van Dyke proud. Oh right, I hadn't actually seen Julia Roberts in a movie before. Eh, she's okay, but watching the chemistry between her and Clooney is merely passable in bittersweet zippiness, which either means I should watch more films with Roberts or just go on my merry way. Besides, Garcia is the real presence among the others, odious and calculating in all the right ways as the targeted heavy. Mac and Reiner make quality relief in the "comedians turned con men" roles, as is the case with Gould and his loose charisma. Disappointing that Jemison and Qin kind of fall by the wayside, since Jemison's panicky characterization is at least semi-interesting as opposed to Caan and Affleck trying to play siblings for what you'd expect in very loose amusement. Each half could be seen coming in terms of general "know where it's going" quality, but they work out in not dragging the obvious points down, and the eventual endpoint is a nice way to go out. As a whole, the movie is a glossy and familiar work, but it is a well-executed familiar work that does everything you would expect from it with plenty to like that fulfills its reasonable expectations just fine. Whether one has seen the original or the subsequent sequels to the remake, you can't really go wrong here.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Traffic (2000).

Review #1526: Traffic.

Cast: 
Michael Douglas (Robert Wakefield), Benicio del Toro (Javier Rodriguez), Don Cheadle (Montel Gordon), Catherine Zeta-Jones (Helena Ayala), Dennis Quaid (Arnie Metzger), Erika Christensen (Caroline Wakefield), Luis Guzmán (Ray Castro), Jacob Vargas (Manolo Sanchez), Tomas Milian (General Arturo Salazar), Topher Grace (Seth Abrahams), Miguel Ferrer (Eduardo Ruiz), Amy Irving (Barbara Wakefield), Steven Bauer (Carlos Ayala), D. W. Moffett (Jeff Sheridan), James Brolin (General Ralph Landry), and Albert Finney (White House Chief of Staff) Directed by Steven Soderbergh (#984 - Logan Lucky)

Review: 
"Well, I think a part of you has to be scared, it keeps you alert; otherwise you become complacent. So absolutely, I'm purposefully going after things and doing things that I'm not sure if it's going to come off or not."

There's a difference between one doing films for a living and one making cinema, particularly when it comes to a process-driven director like Steven Soderbergh. He had an interest in film as a teenager that led to him doing his own shorts with a Super 8 and 16 mm camera. He moved to Hollywood by the 1980s and moved his way gradually through roles such as game show composing to concert video directing. His first directing responsibility was the 1985 concert film 9012Live, which featured the band Yes. An idea for a film combined with a cross-country trip led to the development of his first feature in Sex, Lies, and Videotape (1989), a film regarded as an independent classic. Soderbergh (who once described himself as a synthesist) has done a mix of independent and mainstream films over the years, with noted works including Out of Sight (1998), Erin Brockovich (2000), and Ocean's Eleven (2001) that represent a versatile director of heist and psychological movies.

The basis for this film was Soderbergh wanted to make a film about the drug trade without having it be about addicts. With the rights to a property that seemed like what he wanted, producer Laura Bickford presented him with the rights to Traffik, a six-part 1989 miniseries written by Simon Moore that dealt with the illegal trade that wove a story between suppliers, growers, and customers from Pakistan to Germany to England, respectively). Looking for scripts led to one by Steve Gaghan that was about high school students and their problem with drugs and gangs that had Edward Zwick involved as producer, but the writer got him to try and do a film together with both Soderbergh and Zwick. After spending time consulting on the outline and doing films on the side, a script was finished that would have over a hundred speaking parts and split storylines to be shot in two months. The film was released by USA Films after 20th Century Fox went through wanting Harrison Ford for the lead, getting him to sign on, and dropping out even after script changes (which Douglas liked enough to take on the role after declining it initially). Soderbergh (who also shot the film himself) wanted a distinct vision for each of the three stories in order, such as having that involved different filters and contrast, such as no filter for a blue tinted Wakefield story or overexposed film with diffusion filter for Ayala's story or tobacco filter in Rodriguez's story.

It is interesting to view the film through its numerous perspectives that says what it wants about the approach to various cultures and the way that vices inhibit their little worlds in big and small ways of cruciality that shows shades of gray in every place with no real clear answer, with a war that isn't what it looks like on television. It has a cohesive edge in most areas that will inspire curiosity alongside certain emotions that make it stick with a viewer now as it did back in 2000. It doesn't compromise itself with trying to make a definitive statement or judgement on any of the three linked stories but instead lets the viewer make their own impressions on how vices (whatever kind of substance they are) can affect us or others around us without having easy solutions whatever border you live in. Obviously there isn't just one key star in the film, but the one that seems the most prominent to focus as first is Douglas, then followed by del Toro, Cheadle, and Zeta-Jones, although this isn't to diminish the effect others have in support. Douglas proves fairly captivating, one who runs with a hard-lined naivety that makes for a high-strung and capable performance that we can at least see some of which in others or ourselves in what we believe seems right. The speech at the end for example makes a point in what it doesn't say just as much as what actually is said about a fight against substances and ourselves, which Douglas handles neatly. When it comes to del Toro (a Puerto Rico native that shifted his focus from studying business to drama at the age of 20), he sticks out just as well in his distinct storyline (told to us primarily in Spanish with subtitles, which is what Soderbergh desired) in jaded honesty that we follow with great interest because of his well-timed instincts for what seems to be necessary to eke out a living within authority and corruption. This works out best in a little scene involving tourists looking for their car and del Toro telling them about calling a man to help them find the car (after stating the police won't find their car) - it is a fascinating moment that would've probably just been a one-shot blip with a less intuitive actor (incidentally he would later star in another drug war related film with Sicario, which also rules). Cheadle does just as well in reliable nature with a sort of cat-and-mouse game involving procedure and coercion, which he does with careful tension. This reflects just as well on Zeta-Jones in her evolution of principles and moments shared with a sneaky (and fairly effective) Quaid.

There are other aspects that do well, such as Christensen in driving the angle of shocking addiction without seeming like an after-school special act, but it ultimately is the balance of its three storylines in look and tension that makes it a mostly well-done film for its era. It will hold the attention for most of its intentions in 147 minutes that rewards patience through a mostly intact plot and fair camerawork and editing. It accomplishes most of what it wants to speak to us by knocking us over in its statements said and unsaid that excels in uncompromising uncomfortability that speaks truth to hypocrisy now more than ever.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

Logan Lucky.

Review #984: Logan Lucky.

Cast: 
Channing Tatum (Jimmy Logan), Adam Driver (Clyde Logan), Daniel Craig (Joe Bang), Seth MacFarlane (Max Chilblain), Riley Keough (Mellie Logan), Katie Holmes (Bobbie Jo Logan Chapman), Farrah Mackenzie (Sadie Logan), Katherine Waterston (RN Sylvia Harrison), Dwight Yoakam (Warden Burns), Sebastian Stan (Dayton White), Brian Gleeson (Sam Bang), Jack Quaid (Fish Bang), and Hilary Swank (Special Agent Sarah Grayson) Directed by Steven Soderbergh.

Review: 
Admittedly, this is a film that I did not see too much promotion for until roughly a week before its release, but I was still interested due to the fact that it seemed to have an interesting cast assembled; while it may not be the biggest success with audiences, I found this to be a neat little caper, having just enough turns and laughs to serve for good entertainment. The main cast (Tatum, Driver, Keough, Gleeson, Quaid, and Craig) have good chemistry with each other, inspiring some laughs because how offbeat (but fitting) these characters are in how they do a caper inventive as this; one of my favorite scenes is Craig explaining the principles of what makes the "bang" to the others. The film is inventive enough to let these characters operate without trying to give them some sort of "sympathy moment"; even the parts with Tatum and his onscreen daughter (Mackenzie) seem charming and relatively useful. The way the film is structured is also commendable, having a good amount of finely set characters and a pace that never drags its cast nor its story in the turns that the heist has. The other members of the cast are fine, with Yoakam, Gleeson and Quaid being pretty amusing in their roles. The film's climax is perfectly satisfactory, even if the parts with the two FBI agents is a bit sluggish (though at least Swank is fine); the (brief) parts involving MacFarlane and Stan aren't too great, though the latter's scene prior to the race is pretty amusing. The film's ending does seem to hint at a sequel (future note: sorry), and whether there is a follow-up or not to this story and its characters, this is undeniably a good experience that has enough charm and brilliance to work at least for now.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.