Engrossing, solid performances and a crackerjack ending. Still, this is all well-honed territory. In Owen Glieberman's EW rave, he credited the movie for being a crackling expose of what corporations and lawyers really do and how they work together. Really? This movie told you something you didn't already know and hadn't seen depicted in a myriad of other thrillers, dude?

good but not a great film. Wilkenson deserves a nod and possible win

B+

The horses resembled a picture in Arthur Eden's book. Michael Clayon was therefore reflecting on Edens, not his love of horses.

Anyways it's very taut, brilliantly acted and yes, quite slick. Yoshue's not wrong in that this isn't the first time we've seen this sort of drama about corporations and lawyers, but I think you're selling the film a bit short by saying that we've seen this world from exactly this angle. And even if we've come close, it's rare that they're this good.

I have to steal a term from filmspotting to describe this, it's an "airport thriller".

This may not be an emotional or touching movie, but that was the last thing it was trying to be, and for the kind of film it is, I don't think Tony Gilroy could have handled it any better. Tons of great performances, but Tom Wilkinson absolutely OWNS this movie...he better pick up at least an Oscar nomination for his work here. I loved the way they did the credits, too.

A-

Slow at points and a little confusing. However, the performances are solid, it's mostly interesting and the ending is fantastic. The last 20 minutes of the film (including Clooney in the cab) are very well done.

A-

George Clooney's performance is anything but subtle. He has a sad, deer-eyed look in every single scene, even in random, insignifcant moments where he's not doing anything. Part of what makes a performance great is constraint; knowing when to control yourself and vary your range instead of constantly "acting" for the camera even when the scene doesn't justify it. It doesn't help that almost all the camera angles are close-up shots of his face so that we are distracted by the same few emotional looks on his face every single second of the movie. Tom Wilkinson was not very impressive here either; his masterful performance for In the Bedroom blows this away as he just doesn't feel like a real person here with some exaggerated delivery of his lines. Tilda Swinton does the best, most natural acting in the film, and the whole rest of the ensemble do an excellent job as well, though probably because the viewer takes their emoting in small doses rather than a constant hammering like the two primary characters.

As for the story, it doesn't even matter. Director Tony Gilroy cares only about capturing showy performances from all of his actors on camera, probably because the storyline itself is so generic. C-.

Still need to catch this. I hope it's still playing at Times Square when I get back to NYC.

It's getting an academy-run expansion next weekend.

Not too great. It was a good film but not Oscar Nom worthy,,

I wasn't really involved in the story or the characters at all, but the sheer strength of the acting, writing, and directing is enough to overcome that, I think. There's no less than four remarkable performances, each of which gives otherwise boring characters ample amounts of life and depth. The dialogue is sharp and witty and yet refreshingly natural and realistic. Though the base story isn't anything special, the subtle and sly way with which it's presented makes it a lot more interesting than it is. And the camera work, while not overly showy, still manages to amp up the tension while remaining aesthetically pleasing. It's really nothing more than an expertly made thriller, but there's nothing wrong with that.

I liked this way more than I was expecting to. It's going to make a 13th hour entry into my Top 10 of 2007. Clooney was good, but nothing fantastic on his part. Wilkinson was great, and, in my opinion, Swinton was even better. Very, very tight direction and a clever little script. One of my only tiny complaints is that you could see where the wrap-around structure was headed a little too early.
As for the Oscar nods....I'm content with all but Clooney (yeah, I even liked the little techno score), and would be happy about a Swinton win (haven't seen I'm Not There, though) and an Original Screenplay upset over Juno.

The best word I can think of describe this film is 'slight'. The whole film feels like they took the first act of countless other legal potboilers and dragged it out over 2 hours, only to abruptly end the film the moment it starts to get exciting.

That said, I wasn't really ever bored, the performances were uniformly strong and the message was good, even if, as Yoshue said, it's one we've seen countless times in a million different Grisham adaptations.

B

k. I def don't get why this movie got so much praise, yet alone oscar noms. The acting is top notch. No complaint there. But entertaining? no. Adrenaline was the last thing this movie left me with.

C-

a borefest

Borrowed from AwardsDaily, my thoughts:

"Tight" is probably the best word to describe this. I don't think it was ever extraordinary, but it did what it needed to very well, enough that I can accept its Oscar noms.

The main three are excellent, from the subtlety of Swinton and Clooney to the delectable hamminess of Wilkinson. Swinton in particular is excellent at making a character that could've otherwise been a hammy, maniacal villain into a real, flawed yet ultimately greedy and desperate human being. I haven't seen Blanchett yet (I might this weekend), but she would be my #2 choice behind Ronan for Supporting Actress, and a more than deserving winner. Wilkinson's performance is hardly subtle, but it's the good kind of hammy, the kind that leaves you grinning and captivated instead of wincing. And of course Clooney is able to bring his natural star charisma and mix it with some good subtlety as he gets into this fascinating, flawed character.

While the script doesn't reach the complicated brilliance of say, Lars and the Real Girl or Ratatouille, it does work better than most films of its kind, being tight and entertaining, keeping a steady pace that's never too slow or too fast, and doesn't get convoluted in its plotting like some corporate thrillers have a tendency to do. The direction is strong, if not quite worthy of an Oscar nomination, though it's another worthy entry in a year filled with promising directorial debuts.

While the film wouldn't really deserve major wins come Sunday (Outside of Swinton and maybe Screenplay, since it's the only film that can really beat Juno), it's a fine also-ran that shows how a standard sutdio thriller can be done with grace and confidence in its characters and audience.

***.5

Pretty solid thriller that left me wanting more. I was never really excited about what happened on screen. IMO, they should have nominated Into the Wild over this. Clooney was good, though he didn't blow me away. B-

B-


My first reaction after having seen this was: "This was nominated for Best Picture?!"

My second reaction was: "Seriously...this was nominated for BEST PICTURE?!"


It's not like it's my least-liked BP nominee ever. As a matter of fact it was a decent film. But with some films that I even liked quite a bit less I could at least somehow comprehend the train of thought which led to those films being nominated for BP at the Oscar. This one simply escapes me.

It's a story we have seen so many times before and I wouldn't even say that none of them were as well done as this. Okay, what do we've got? An evil corporation, an ambigous man who changes sides after his friend who changed sides before is killed...wow, how world-shattering.

Oh wait, it's not.

The movie's primary strength is its acting ensemble. To my major surprise, though, Clooney delivered my least favorite performance of the bunch, one I wouldn't have even nominated for an Oscar. Actually, this year's nominated Best Actor line-up seems really weak to me afteral. Of course Daniel Day-Lewis was brilliant, but the other three performances I have seen didn't deserve their noms, in my opinion: Clooney, Depp and Mortensen. Verdict is still out on Toimmy Lee Jones, though. Clooney played his role very low-key, going for subtle, ambigous and somewhat sad. Sometimes it worked, but often it just left me very cold.

Same can't be said for the rest of the cast. Tom Wilkinson's turn is pretty much the opposite of subtle. He's manic, stealing his scenes and chewing the scenery, but for his character that works just perfectly. Sidney Pollack (who, as makeshift has said does play the same character in all of his films) delivers a nice stoic turn once again. It's Tilda Swinton who's the biggest standout here. Before seeing this film I was really baffled that the Academy would award her an Oscar for a seemingly casual performance. Now I tend to even agree with the Academy on it. I think she's tied for my favorite Best Supporting Actress performance of 2007 with Romola Garai in Atonement. Swinton's character was by far the most real out of the Michael Clayton cast. She just felt so very real, just like I'd imagine a person like her behaving in real life. She's a complete nervous wrack, a woman in a position as high as only few women achieve them and that makes her constantly anxious, fearful, trying to do everything to show herself competent and being able to control the situation. Swinton captured this character perfectly.

The rest of the movie, while competently made, rather bored than enticed me. It was pretty predictable from the very start to the very finish. Some scenes were great, like Clooney's final confrontation with Swinton (in stark contrast to their first meeting) as well as the shockingly cold assassination scene in the middle of the movie, but overall, it just left me cold and unimpressed.

I liked it a lot. Entertaining and really well made. It's my least favorite out of the films nominated for BP but I don't really mind the nomination. I'm not sure if I'm happy with Swinton winning the Oscar, but the cast is strong.

B+

Tilda Swinton is definitely the best here. Engaging thriller but not as good as Breach.

Clever writing, deep and engrossing performances, wonderful cinematography and a more than solid directorial debut. Tilda Swinton shines like never before. It could've been a little more bold but I enjoyed it's coldness and distant approach.

8/10 (B+)

Lots of talking and weren't enough explosions.

***1/2