On a few movie screens you can still catch Michael Clayton; the George Clooney testosterone filled drama. Clooney drives the film with his usual steady and grounded characterization. It’s up for eight Academy Awards, and I wouldn’t be surprised if it wins most of them. Not because it is a very good movie, which it is, but it would be the most conservative choice. In many ways Michael Clayton is like an old film noir movie. It is character driven, dark, and offers little-to-no relief.
The story is not so completed, but that’s not really what the movie is about. Michael Clayton is a lawyer at a big New York firm who acts as a “fixer” to their high profile clients. He is never in litigation, but is involved in sorting out the messy world of their most important cases.
After a senior partner in the firm, basically, flips, and Clayton is sent in to deal with the situation. The partner who flips finds a piece evidence of a class action lawsuit that is very damaging to their client. Being that this guy is unstable and Clayton can’t control him or contain the damage, the client could sue the firm.
None this help Clayton who has a ton of personal problems of his own and all the while the client made their security unit involved. The corporate security unit is basically like corporate mob. They strong arm people and even take them out. This really happens. Under direction of their senior console played brilliantly by Tilde Swinton, they murder the partner of the firm who has flipped but is still a danger to the Corporation. When Clayton starts to poke around they try to kill him out too.
What cool about this movie is that examines the emotional elements of these decisions and the people involved. If you gave the dialogue a little zing and perfect piffys, it could easily resemble a David Mamet work.
This might a too serious for some people; like I don’t remember any smiling, ever! Not sure there are any jokes too; maybe one or two but only they are really biting.
It reminds me of an old Robert Redford or Gregory Peck film, because of its terseness. There is an economy of words, or soundtrack. Unfortunately, there is little new to story either. You have seen it before; not a lot in the past 20 years albeit. Nevertheless, I thought it was very good.
No comments:
Post a Comment