Is it me, or does the older Wesley Snipes get the more he looks like Scatman Crothers?

This looks like it could go either way - another "cops and criminals are no different" flick or it could have some actual value.

Don Cheadle, Wesley Snipes, Vincent D'Onofrio, Will Patton, I think I saw Michael K. Williams flash by in a couple shots (he was my favorite part of The Wire) there's Ethan Hawke doing his Training Day deal, and Richard Gere, if nothing else this is one heck of a cast. Hopefully, the script and director Antoine Fuqua will bring something out of Snipes. I always thought he has been underused by Hollywood.

This hits theaters in March.

Finally, a movie about rich, self-absorbed, white people working through problems - let their voices be heard!

Special kudos go out to Viola Davis (Disturbia) who standing in for Whoopie Goldberg as the rich, white woman's singular black friend. She's wise and just urban enough to give that Oprah vibe without being so urban she's threatening to the suburban audience. You go girl!

What's James Franco doing here? Isn't he heading second tier flicks now (Flyboys, Annapolis), why take a turn with the wounded son role? Isn't there some teen from a television drama who could take this on to punch up their film resume?

Is there really any reason to see this film after watching the trailer? As I've said before, be wary of any film that gives you the whole narrative in the trailer.

Director Lasse Hallström seems to have a problem developing his stories into something more than a chain of events. This film, like Hallström's other efforts (Casanova, What's Eating Gilbert Grape) is interesting enough but it fails to have any real depth or meaning. Where Hallström succeeds is in the charm of his film. This is probably mostly due to the topic, the film is about a failing writer who attempts to execute a broad scam on the publishing industry. Clifford Irving (Richard Gere), along with his conflicted cohort Dick Suskind (Alfred Molina) cons McGraw-Hill executives into believing they have the official autobiography of Howard Hughes. The story takes place in 1971 when Hughes' legendary status was at its height. There is always a naughty charm to con films and Hallström does a solid job of getting the audience to enjoy the con.

This film runs into the same problem Spielberg ran into with his conman movie, Catch Me if You Can, answering the question "who cares?". The film fails to deliver much beyond its basic narrative. There's no grand statement, no memorable scenes and no real purpose beyond simply delivering a story. The audience will get an inherent vicarious thrill from watching a con going down, but, in reality, the filmmaker is asking us to support a lie. When the liar doesn't have a good reason for us to a) support him or b) like them, then there's trouble. Watching something get away with a crime can be fun in the same way playing a prank can be fun. But like playing a prank, the fun is often abruptly cut to size by the consequences. The final act, where the conman gets his punishment, reminds the audience that this was about an evil being perpetrated. While its good that doing evil is shown ending in punishment, this lets all of the air out of the story.

I enjoyed a good portion of this movie despite the fact that Hallström does become unfocused. Gere's performance, while not brilliant, is lively. In addition, Molina does well in his supporting role and he mixes well with Gere's dominant presence. Overall, however I can't recommend the movie because it doesn't give me a good enough reason to do so. If you enjoy stories about cons you'll find something interesting here. If you're into well-written characters and narratives, you'll come up short.


Related Reviews:
Alfred Molina movies
Luther (2004)
Spider-Man 2 (2004)



Other Critic's Reviews:
Screen It!
Cinema Blend