Kurt Loder Movie Reviews

Jack Ryan: Shadow Recruit and Big Bad Wolves

Chris Pine in a franchise reboot, and a startling creepfest from Israel.

|

Jack Ryan: Shadow Recruit is a Bourne movie without the showpiece action scenes, the quirky characters, or the carefully layered narrative. There's plenty of Bourne-like vehicular mayhem, and a ferocious close-quarters fight scene, too; but little of it is new, and its familiarity reminds us how much more distinctively this sort of thing was done in those earlier films. Shadow Recruit isn't a bad movie – director Kenneth Branagh has constructed a professional piece of tech-thriller product – but it's clouded throughout by an air of insufficiency.

The four previous Ryan movies – which starred Alec Baldwin, Harrison Ford and Ben Affleck as the resourceful CIA intelligence analyst – were based on Tom Clancy's bestselling novels. This one isn't. Now Ryan is played by Chris Pine, an actor whose default expression of drooping uncertainty seems wrong for the role; and his character has been inserted into a tale devised by screenwriters Adam Cozad and David Koepp. The story hinges on a sinister Russian banker named Cherevin (Branagh, with a thick accent that's pure Pottsylvania). Cherevin nurses a bitter grudge against the United States, and is plotting a terrorist attack on Wall Street (no cheering, please) and the destruction of the American economy. The movie is therefore heavy with talk of international finance, which is not especially thrilling, and further lumbered with the usual ratta-tap computer wizardry.

The picture appears to be an attempted reboot of the Ryan franchise (the last film, The Sum of All Fears, came out in 2002). And so it gets underway, rather slowly, with a backstory montage. We meet Ryan studying for a Ph.D. at the London School of Economics in 2001. Jolted by 9/11, he joins the Marines and is deployed to Afghanistan, where we see a helicopter on which he's traveling blown out of the sky by a barrage of choppy editing. Shipped back to the States, he regains use of his limbs with the help of (this is a little unclear) an aspiring ophthalmologist named Cathy Muller (Keira Knightley). Then a CIA honcho named Harper (Kevin Costner) turns up to recruit Ryan for duty on Wall Street, where he'll monitor the funding of worldwide terror networks.

Ryan agrees, and before long his attention is drawn to Cherevin's fiscal machinations. Ryan and Harper take off for Moscow, where they're soon joined by Cathy, who doesn't know Ryan is a CIA agent (they've now been together for three years). There's much cat-and-mousing with Cherevin, and a good scene in a fancy restaurant where Cathy distracts the silky financier with flirtatious small talk while Ryan slips away to do improbable things with computers. There's also some business with a Russian sleeper agent, a very old-school ticking time bomb, and a vital algorithm. Dazzling Harper with his higher-ed erudition, Ryan says, "We're looking at the Panic of 1837!" Harper says, "We still need this algorithm!"

This sort of picture really requires the dash and charisma of a full-bore movie star in the lead. Pine isn't there yet, and he's outclassed by Costner's easy warmth and old-pro line readings. And while Branagh is of course an excellent performer, he's not really a "movie star" either – murmuring his dialogue ("America vill bleed") through tightly compressed lips, he seems more like a ventriloquist in search of his dummy than a world-class villain. The actors go through all the motions of genre intrigue, but the movie goes nowhere new.

Big Bad Wolves

A torture-porn comedy about a murderous child molester sounds like an appallingly bad idea. But the Israeli film Big Bad Wolves is disturbing in a complex way, and it doesn't exploit its hideous subject for sicko laughs (the humor is generally unrelated to the atrocities, and tucked in around the edges of the story).

In an unnamed city, police are desperate to catch a man who has been abducting little girls, sexually molesting them and leaving their decapitated bodies to be found by horrified passers-by. A detective named Micki (Lior Ashkenazi) has been assigned by his chief, Tsvika (Dvir Benedek), to lean on the prime suspect, a mild little Bible-studies teacher named Dror (Rotem Keinan). Micki and some colleagues take Dror to an abandoned factory to beat the truth out of him, but through bloody lips he insists on his innocence – he's the father of a little girl himself.

Micki's brutal interrogation of Dror is surreptitiously captured on a phone camera by a passing kid, and when the video appears on the Internet, Micki is bounced off the police force – although Tsvika obliquely suggests that he stay on the case. Micki does, and soon learns that the hapless Dror is also being stalked by a man named Gidi (Tzahi Grad), the prosperous father of the killer's latest victim. Gidi wants to interrogate Dror himself, in a much more vicious way, and he has rented a remote woodland cabin for the purpose. Overpowering both Dror and Micki, Gidi transports them to this hideaway, brings out a collection of torture implements in the basement, and quickly gets down to business.

The movie isn't a mindless Hostel-style shocker, but the writer-directors, Aharon Keshales and Navot Papushado, don't flinch from showing us the bone-smashing violence inflicted by Gidi on the bound and helpless Dror (who continues to deny any part in the murders). Some of the most disconcerting images, however, are non-graphic. There's a shot framed behind the legs of a dead girl who has been tied to a chair, with her underpants pulled down below her knees; and an electric scene in which a real estate broker, compelled to demonstrate the soundproof quality of Gidi's basement, lets out a mounting series of screams while Gidi listens upstairs. (Here and throughout the movie, Haim Frank Ilfman's dark score is frightening in its own right.)

The humor that crops up throughout the film seems odd at first: Gidi is distracted from tormenting Dror first by a phone call from his doting mother, and then by the arrival of his father (who plays an unexpected part in the proceedings). But as eventually becomes clear, the movie is really about the spiritual corrosions of vengeance and paranoia – about Israel itself. (Gidi's cabin was cheap to rent because it's surrounded by Arab settlements; a young Arab man passing by stirs Gidi and Micki to instant suspicion, and he shakes his head in gentle dismay.)

Quentin Tarantino pronounced Big Bad Wolves "the best film of the year" a few months back, which may or may not be an endorsement, depending on your experience with cult-movie hyperbole. But it's an audacious film (it ends with a supremely eerie image), and a major step up for its creators, whose first feature was a straight low-budget gore flick called Rabies. If not the best film of the year, it's definitely one of them.  

NEXT: Obama Reportedly To Call For End of Govt. Control of Phone Data

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Hollywood flushed the Jack Ryan franchise down the Khazi when they altered the villains in the last one from Jihadists to whatever it was (Neo-Nazis? Two-Face and The Joker? Something dumb.). Jihadists made sense, and the new clowns didn’t. I can’t say I’m surprised that the new film isn’t based on anything Clancy wrote. If they wen’t back to adapting Clancy, and they had a hit on their hands, sooner or later they would have to adapt THE BEAR AND THE DRAGON (with its major plot point of forced abortion in China) or RAINBOW SIX (and its fascist environmentalists).

    Now, I’m not saying that Clancy writes deathless prose that should never be meddled with. But if you are going to adapt his work, which is almost entirely plot-driven, you rurally have to leave the plot largely intact. Not doing so would be like remaking TRIUMPH OF THE WILL without the fascism or BEN HUR without the embarrassing references to Christianity. Sure, it’s theoretically POSSIBLE, but why bother?

    1. I thought that, in the book of the most recent movie, the bad guys were Saddam-type secular Arabs, and the Osama-type fundie Arabs ended up lopping their heads off in the epilogue.

      Yeah, they changed it, and maybe that ruined the story, but mostly because they didn’t want to have an Osama stand-in cast as a terrorist-killing hero.

      1. Hogwash. Hollywood would be DELIGHTED to present an enlightened Arab/Islamic good-guy. They just don’t want to also feature an Arabic villain.

      2. as Herbert implied I didnt even know that some people can make $8003 in one month on the internet. navigate to this web-site ?? http://WWW.JOBS37.COM

    2. Start working at home with GOOGLE!YAHOO. ABCNEWS AND MORE GLOBAL SITES… It’s by-far the best job I’ve had. Last Wednesday I got a brand new BMW since getting a check for $6474 this – 4 weeks past. I began this 8-months ago and immediately was bringing home at least $77 per hour. I work through this link, …. http://www.Max47.com

  2. Hadn’t heard of Big Bad Wolves but will check it out now.

    Have any of you movie fans found good reviews of Paul Thomas Anderson’s films (Magnolia, There Will Be Blood, The Master)?

    Love all of his movies but haven’t found any good reviews, even by Loder or Ebert.

    1. PT Anderson has had lots of good reviews.
      Nothing under 77% according to Rotten Tomatoes
      http://www.rottentomatoes.com/….._anderson/

      1. I was looking for more in depth analysis. Sorry, I wasn’t clear on that.

  3. my roomate’s half-sister makes $89 hourly on the laptop . She has been fired for eight months but last month her pay was $20094 just working on the laptop for a few hours. blog link……..
    http://www.Jobs84.com

  4. I am far from a prude, I love most of Tarentino’s work, but this is just a bridge too far.

    One of the best movies of the year? Seriously? Would have made it to #1 if they HAD shown the child rape/killing scenes?

    No wonder Hollywood is dying a slow, painful death.

    1. “No wonder Hollywood is dying a slow, painful death.”

      I wouldn’t count on it. Hollywood, rather like Broadway, has been dying a slow, painful death for as long as I’ve been alive.

    2. I’m one of those insane people who thinks Tarantino hasn’t made a decent picture since “Jackie Brown.” At some point — probably the point he started taking Eli “Hostel” Roth — seriously, he started mistaking airborne gore for plot and character.

  5. My very first thought when I heard a new Jack Ryan film was out. “They probably miscast the lead role.”

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.