The Art of the Steal Review

It's nice to see Canadian cinema making some real strides into the mainstream.  Many of the films that come out of Canada have this artsy vibe to them as if to say that we're either above making a Hollywood style movie or we're just not ready yet.  The Art of the Steal breaks away from that and proves that Canada can make a decent quality movie and make it distinctly Canadian and not one big stereotype of lumberjacks and maple syrup.

I'll start with the story.  It's a fairly basic heist movie that has a lot of the same elements of the Ocean's franchise.  There's a big score, a twist or two, and clever dialogue that keeps it light.  Unfortunately, the writing is a bit inconsistent as there are a few spots where it slows down quite a bit.  But, for the most part, the dialogue is engaging enough for a 90 minute movie.

The movie is also helped out by a very good cast.  Kurt Russell, Jay Baruchel and Matt Dillon are not the biggest stars in Hollywood but they are all competent at what they do.  It shows in this film.  They play off of each other very well and all seemed comfortable in their roles.  Even Baruchel who seemed comfortable playing someone who seemed to always be uncomfortable (which is his forte).  Baruchel steals every scene he's in and keeps the audience laughing throughout.  The same can be said for Jason Jones.  He provides terrific comic relief as the witless Interpol agent.

But what I liked the most was the feel of this movie.  It had a lot of bleak shots which is not surprising seeing as how it takes place in Canada and Detroit in the winter.  Rather than stylize the lives of the criminals and have them be these suave and cool people like Clooney and Pitt in the Ocean's movies, they made them out to be regular people.  While the story is a bit far fetched, it still felt real.

See it.

The Great Train Robbery Review

The hallmark of a good heist movie is to keep it light.  After all, the protagonists in most of them are actually very bad people with bad intentions.  And the audience should be cheering for the heroes.  With a setting like Victorian England and two fine dramatic actors like Sean Connery and Donald Sutherland it would have been easy to turn this into a very heavy and intense heist movie.  I haven't read the book so I cannot speak to its tone.  But I was glad to see that Michael Crichton kept the tone light all the way through.  The flippant attitudes of Pierce and Agar make it a much more enjoyable film.  In this way, it really resembles Ocean's 11 without the large entourage of characters.

The Great Train Robbery follows the basic elements of a good heist movie.  There's the setup where the main character sees an opportunity for personal gain.  This is followed by recruiting some help and then moving into the preparation stage.  It is the preparation stage that is the most important in these films because it is more about how they cross their 't's and dot their lower case 'j's than it is about execution.  This story does an excellent job in laying out how they go about getting all four keys and dealing with the inevitable road bumps along the way.  It is during one of those road bumps that the movie takes a slightly darker turn that doesn't seem to fit with the rest of the tone.  How they deal with Clean Willy is a deviation from the rest and it still kind of bothers me.  But, throughout the buildup to the heist there is a fine mix of tension and comic relief to make it very entertaining.

Finally, the heist itself is a bit anti-climactic in that there is really no crisis to be dealt with other than Connery hanging out on the edge of a train.  It's almost as if their planning was too thorough.  Other than Connery dealing with wave after wave of bridges on the top of the train, there's no real suspense.  But they don't dwell on it and the film actually wraps up quite quickly.

Overall, it's a well-paced, lighthearted heist with some decent performances.  See it.

Sneakers Commentary

This really was one of the last heist movies from the late 80s/early 90s to fit the old mold.  Now, those types of movies rely more on edgy dialogue, characters that emit "cool" and comic relief.  When Steph and I were looking through Netflix and saw this, she said it looked kind of like Ocean's Eleven.  And, to a certain extent, it is.  It involves a group of criminal specialists trying to steal something.  But Sneakers really relies a lot on the strength of actors like Sidney Poitier, Dan Akroyd and Robert Redford to be bigger than their roles.  Ocean's Eleven relied on actor strength too but the focus was largely on the character.

That's not to say that Sneakers doesn't work.  It does.  It's got a decent plot even if it does get a bit confusing along the way.  The entire heist is carried out in a tight, strong and humorous manner which is really a must for movies like this.  The writing seems a bit weak in spots but, for the most part, the actors are able to make it work.  After all, Redford, Akroyd, Poitier and River Phoenix are all superior at their craft.

The drawback to the movie is the length.  The build up to the actual heist takes too long to develop and that's where a lot of the confusion starts to develop.  By the time they get to the actual meat of the plot, the viewers will likely be a bit too confused as to why anyone is doing what they're doing.  Had they cut down on a lot of that, it could have been a tighter movie.  I think this is the third time I've seen it and I think the same thing every time.

Given that it's available on demand and is on TV an awful lot, I say see it.  There's enough of a good heist movie there to make it worth your while.  Just know that it didn't age as well as it could have given the direction that heist movies have gone in recent years.

The Italian Job (1969) Commentary

I'm a big fan of the 2003 remake of the same name.  I like heist movies, Mark Wahlberg, Charlize Theron and Ed Norton.  I also love Mini Coopers.  So it's pretty obvious that I would like that movie.  But I had never seen the Michael Caine original from 1969.  I decided to get a copy of it and give it a go.  While there are many similarities between the two, they are two very different movies.  And they have to be because they are made 34 years apart.  The original is not what I expected.  It's still a decent movie but it took me a bit to get into it because of how it was made.

First, I was expecting a grittier heist movie that was more like The French Connection in tone.  Rather than that, The Italian Job is very much more comedic and light hearted.  It is really really more of a comic romp that has the suave, womanizing Charlie Croker (Michael Caine) trying to pull of this great heist whilst surrounded by complete buffoons.  While the remake has some very good comic bits in it, it focuses more on the action and heist whereas the original seems to be focused more on the comedy.  I should have keyed into this when I saw that Benny Hill was in the opening credits.  And he plays is own pervy self throughout (a part he plays very well).

Second, this movie is very indicative of the era it was made in.  It is your typical sixties movie where characters aren't developed like they are now and things seem very choppy.  There is little exposition and many blanks left between plot points that the viewers are left to figure out on their own.  The acting is also very over the top just like in most movies made in that time.  The only one that seemed believable was Caine which is good because he's almost constantly on screen.  Finally, it's got that typical, "why the hell would they do that" feel to it.  If you've ever seen movies like Hello Down There or The Party, you'll know that these movies tend to follow a coherent plot for a while and then deviate off into some bizarre happening close to the end almost as if the film makers really didn't know how to wrap it up.  The Italian Job does the same thing with no resolution at all for the film.

But, when all is said and done, I didn't feel like I had wasted my time.  It is entertaining enough through its humour and a great car chase with old Mini Coopers that it is worth while for a rainy Sunday afternoon diversion.  See it but don't make it a priority.

Tower Heist Review

Tower Heist is a movie that has a hard time deciding what it wants to be.  Throughout the whole film, there is never really any consistent theme developed.  It starts out as a movie that seems light hearted but has the potential to get quite serious and dark quickly.  Then, Ben Stiller bails Eddie Murphy out of jail and it goes into a very dialogue based comedy involving those two and the core thieves.  My brother Karl pointed out that it almost became a buddy comedy which was a very apt description.  Then, it finally becomes the comedic heist movie that it was advertised as.  This inconsistency is really the only drawback of the film and it is far from enough to diminish the viewer's enjoyment.

The rest of the film is really quite solid.  The dialogue writing is very good and it is delivered through some very strong timing from all of the actors.  The ones that really stand out though are Eddie Murphy, Matthew Broderick and Michael Pena.  Murphy normally has a tendency to be either really on or really off with his hyper-speed line delivery.  In Tower Heist, he is on and he has a very good chemistry with Ben Stiller.  Broderick was a perfect choice for the geeky, soft spoken and timid character who comes out with the occasional line that makes you laugh out loud.  But (and I was very surprised by this), Pena steals just about every scene he's in.  He's one of those actors that you recognize but never really stands out.  This is by far the best work I've seen him do and, to me, it was very memorable.

The story writing and development was really decent for the most part.  For a lot of the movie, it seemed actually quite plausible that this could happen.  Then, it derails through some theatrics and plot twists that make it lose a bit of credibility.  It's pretty important to the plot and wasn't advertised in any of the marketing so I won't give away specifically what it is but I can say it has to do with where and when they find out where the money is hidden (anybody who knows anything about heist movies can't complain about giving that much away).  Again, it isn't enough to take away from the entertainment value of the movie.  But it does go back to the inconsistency of the film.

However, inconsistency notwithstanding, see it.  While it isn't the best heist movie or even comedy out there, it definitely delivers superior value for your money and time.  It is worth it for the comedic timing and interaction of the characters.