Apr
13
The Bank Job, reviewed by Marion Dreyfus
April 13, 2008 |
I assume many of you know about the commendably and excruciatingly watchable "Bank Job".It is involving from the jump (in the early 1980s, UK) to dénouement.
Terry (two-day beard tough guy Jason Statham), a car-repair minor player in constant hock and debt to bigger petty criminals in London, gets offered the chance of a ‘quick-take’ bank robbery that dangles the possibility of living the better life, courtesy the temptress, ripe ex-lover Martine Love, though Terry has the presence of mind to distrust her contacts and motivation, as they say in acting class. There is far more to the plot than a simple burrow into an unremarkable safe-deposit vault and hauling off the consequent goodies.
His motley band of inexperienced mates don’t reckon on the higher-ups who are remotely assisting them in the expectation that they’ll secure some extremely compromising photos that had better not come to light. The ever- oleaginous and fecund David Suchet adds another sweaty ruby to his host of memorable skeaves with attitude. SAffron Burrows is suitably stunning as the silky ex-model babe in the stylized coveralls. Director Donaldson keeps the action taut, the conversation deftly scoundrel-red, and the upstairs/downstairs worrying at a strung-out high-wire tension.
The acting is first-rate, the story unbelievable, but made all the more enjoyable when you realize it is a true story. More to it than just a highly unlikely heist, but exquisite women, moments of humor, high dudgeon, cops-‘n’-robbers, a tinge of scandal, Parliamentary misbehaving–all the ingredients for a great stew of an entertainment.
Few special effects, gritty cinematography, manly men and womanly women. Even my CCC (cautiously critical companion) remarked what a refreshingly bracing experience it was. The best movie-movie I’ve seen in a batch. People with a long memory will be able to hazily recall the actual story and high-class to-do from thee decades ago. Bumper suspense, lots of back-story, changes of venue, exotic politics, going back to naughty times that bring you right up to our former gubernatorial cash-and-carry Spitzer hi-jinks.
Comments
1 Comment so far
Archives
- May 2013
- April 2013
- March 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- August 2012
- July 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- August 2006
- Older Archives
Resources & Links
- The Letters Prize
- Pre-2007 Victor Niederhoffer Posts
- Vic’s NYC Junto
- Reading List
- Programming in 60 Seconds
- The Objectivist Center
- Foundation for Economic Education
- Tigerchess
- Dick Sears' G.T. Index
- Pre-2007 Daily Speculations
- Laurel & Vics' Worldly Investor Articles
Your work here is excellent as always and very fair in my view. The challenge in reviewing this movie is discussing it without giving away the subtleties and the intrigue. To do so would rob the viewer of its true elegance. You did this magnificently. It is tough, gritty and hard hitting. There is not a lot of tricky camera work, nor special effects, that of which you would see in The Bourne Trilogy or the most recent of the James Bond films, Casino Royale. It is more of a throwback to an earlier era where actors had to carry the movie and not high tech special effects. It's on location filming is classic British in theme. It reminded me of the British movies of the 1980's. The only problem I had with it is the all-British cast of which I am unfamiliar and which made it a bit hard to follow due to the language barrier. Jason Statham is on his way as a serious actor. This is by far his best performance in a lead acting role. He continues to build upon his previous work. His rugged persona, and chiseled good looks enhances his marketability. He completely carried the movie In the Name of the King. Prior to that he starred in The Italian Job a remake of the Michael Caine 1969 original., which is filled with such stars as Charlize Theron, Mark Walhberg and Edward Norton released in 2003. This movie is much better than either of these. Get used to Mr. Statham you will be seeing quite a bit of him in the future. His star is rising. Saffron Burrows is stunning and elegant standing a full 6' tall. She is an appropriate complement to Mr. Statham. Saffron also describes her properly. She is an expensive and precious spice. I would love to see the both of them together in a remake of the Avengers with Mr. Statham as John Steed and Ms. Burrows as Mrs. Peel. In a time when a date with the movies can cost close to 30 dollars with popcorn and drinks for two, this is money that is well spent. As Siskel and Ebert used to say " Save us a seat in the balcony, we'll see you at the movies." sl.