who notices?

I watched Collaterallast night, with Tom Cruise and Jamie Foxx. I found it interesting but a little thin. I appreciated the existential undercurrent more than anything; even that was a little underdeveloped. As thrillers go it was a great premise, and Tom Cruise was good if a little clipped. Jamie Foxx was lauded for his part as Max when it came out; I thought he was very solid but wish he could have been a little less transparent. As his character is put under more and more pressure he cracks, then gets it together, then cracks and gets it together again. I wish he could have cracked a little harder; really lost it at least once. Even the scene that was supposed suffice for that particular plot result fell a little flat and unexciting. The best part of the dynamic between Max and Cruise’s killer Vincent was during the final scene as Vincent tries to find Max and Annie (Jada Pinkett Smith) -- the subtle suggestion that they are thinking along very much the same lines as one tries to escape and one continues to pursue is portrayed effortlessly. Director Michael Mann’s signature is to pit two men against each who differ only slightly: one good but flawed, one really really smart but really really bad. He likes to blur the line, but it’s always pretty clear who is the good guy and who is the bad guy. The contest is also always on a slightly higher level than your typical action movie, the main characters are usually intertwined in lots of ways that are obvious as well as subtle.

This movie approached existentialism (and the flaws of existential thought) from the standpoint of a couple of familiar routes: life as meaningless unless chosen and acted upon, as well as the idea that existence is subjective and that certain people could justifiably be murdered for the greater good. Vincent leans on this philosophy a little, more to keep Max engaged the mission Vincent is trying to carry out than as a real philosophy. Vincent obviously is a symbol of entropy and chaos, for which no justification is necessary. At first Vincent seems to be reacting to Max’s squeamishness with firm orders and justification in order to keep Max moving; later in the movie he actually becomes engaged with Max’s protests and tries to justify his actions in some other context other than “just do what I say or I’ll shoot you.” It leads to some interesting comments, if not real discussion between Vincent and Max. “Guy gets on the subway and dies. Think anybody’ll notice?” Unfortunately it also leads to the predictable “Oh yeah, you’re gonna shoot me? Well, shoot me, then!” bullshit.

The movie had a couple of gaping plot holes that almost ruined it for me. Vincent himself is visually completely unbelievable. His grey suit and hair are unforgettable; as in, witnesses are not likely to forget that guy. Wearing sunglasses in places where normal people wouldn’t is also an attention-grabber. I’m not a professional hitman, but I would assume that the idea is to NOT be noticed. Eventually the Feebs and local PD figure out what’s going to happen next and go after Vincent and Max (who they think is Vincent) with air support, and yet when Vincent and Max manage to escape after a huge shootout, the helicopter has disappeared. The whole point of calling air support is to track criminals on the ground when the ground forces can’t; yet Vincent and Max get away, in a cab that has been identified, to go on to the final conflict and chase without any interference from law enforcement. Another flaw is the premise that ANY cab driver ANYWHERE does not have their own cell phone, no matter how idiosyncratic, idealistic, short-sighted, or unfulfilled. Just does not happen. I also get sick of people who are being portrayed in life-or-death situations TALKING to each other during the one moment they have to kill the other and get away. I always think back to a scene in Best Seller with James Woods; two pros fighting each other in the dark in complete silence (in suits and ties no less), not wasting time or energy, just trying to survive by killing the other as quickly as possible.

I think the filmmakers also missed a huge opportunity to develop Mark Ruffalo’s character a bit more; he is the catalyst for the law enforcement characters to treat the situation with a little higher level of suspicion but is left as a minor character, too weak to effect real change. He makes the kinds of logical leaps that normal folks like us like to see our cops make, connecting the dots in a way that inspires the audience to root for him even though nobody else in the movie can see it or believe it. He is the vehicle for the classic law enforcement “hunch” to be played out in the movie; I like that kind of non-linear thinking and would have liked to see it played up and make a bit more of a difference in the outcome.

Overall, I like a thriller that has a little brains and a little guts. This one has both; I think where it falls flat is avoiding predictability and really delivering on the “thrill” part. A for effort; C for results. Totally worth a rental.