The Amateur: A spy in nerd’s clothing
For the most part, James Hawes’ The Amateur eschews action set pieces, taking a more cerebral approach in this globe-trotting adventure that sees a tech analyst best the James Bond-types again and again. Combining the fish-out-of-water trope with a standard revenge thriller, the result is a film that plays against expectations throughout, the viewer surprised along with the big screen bad guys who, like us, underestimate the titular hero.
Heller (Rami Malek) is a CIA decryption analyst whose world is upended when his wife (Rachel Brosnahan) is killed in a terrorist attack while attending a conference in London. Seeking assurances from his superior, Director Moore (Holt McCallany), that all will be done to apprehend those responsible, he soon realizes he’s being gaslit and other agendas are at play.
Far smarter than most in the agency’s employ, Heller uses his unusual skill set to gather intel about the terrorist cell, targeting four of its leaders. Intent on tracking and killing them, he’s able to supply himself with fake passports in the hopes of stealthily traveling through Europe. Obviously, there are more than a few hurdles for Heller to clear, chief among them the CIA itself, once Moore is informed his analyst has gone rogue.
Not so foolish to think he can pull this off on his own, Heller gets help from a variety of sources. Henderson (an underused Laurence Fishburne) is an aging spy who tries to convince him he’s in over his head and that killing a man isn’t as easy as he thinks. Then there’s Inquiline, the code name for an anonymous ally Heller’s never met, who has alerted him to brewing threats in the past. Tracking this person down to enlist their aid face-to-face proves a key toward achieving his goal.
What ensues is a cat-and-mouse-and-cat game as Moore dispatches agents to bring Heller in, while his boss, Director O’Brien (Julianne Nicholson), sends out her own detail to apprehend him before the others track him down. And just whose side veteran spy The Bear (Jon Bernthal) is on is anyone’s guess.
The fact that everyone underestimates Heller leads to the film’s biggest and most intelligent surprises. The screenplay by Ken Nolan and Gary Spinelli puts our hero in seemingly inescapable situations, only to offer up plausible avenues for his escape. He’s fully aware he’s not cut from the same cloth as traditional agents – his visit to a firing range powerfully drives that home.
Yet, his ability to manipulate electronic devices, then fashion a variety of homemade bombs and knowledge of security systems makes him a formidable foe. It’s a very clever premise that never wears out its welcome, Malek being the key to convincing us Heller is capable of surviving. The actor is convincing throughout, bringing a poignancy to the character’s trial, both in displaying his grief and awareness regarding the toll his actions are taking on his soul.
While The Amateur will not be confused for a Jason Bourne thriller, it proves to be a refreshing take on the standard spy movie. Car chases and vast hidden lairs may be missing, but in their place is a story that stimulates the mind, which is as rewarding as triggering those pleasure centers wired to appreciate a good explosion. In theaters.
Immersive Warfare puts us in soldiers’ boots
In an interview with critic Gene Siskel, French director Francois Truffaut once stated, “Some films claim to be antiwar, but I don’t think I’ve really seen an antiwar film. Every film about war ends up being pro-war.” His reasoning was that no matter how you portray it, there’s a dramatic element to these films that can’t help but be seductive.
There have been many attempts to disprove Truffaut’s sentiment, with varying degrees of success. Alex Garland and Ray Mendoza’s Warfare succeeds in driving home this message better than most. That the movie was based on a real incident helps, the fact Mendoza was in the skirmish portrayed, even more so.
Concerning a 2006 mission in Ramadan during the Iraq War that goes horribly awry, the filmmakers embed the viewer with a group of young soldiers. Taking place in real time, we see these men – some barely old enough to shave – making the necessary preparations for their mission, which is a relatively simple one. This sniper unit is to make sure the urban area they’re in is cleared and safe, so a larger ground unit can come through later.
We see them taking various positions throughout a house – the poor family living there held against their will – securing the two levels and basement area. They rib one another, check their weapons and fight the tedium that tempts them to let their guard down. However, as prepared as they are, they overlook a blind spot that leaves them vulnerable and, in the blink of an eye, they find themselves on defense, in a rapidly devolving situation.
Told in real time, Garland and Mendoza don’t go into depth where the background of any of the characters are concerned. We get to know them through their actions and responses to the hell they suddenly find themselves in. While this may seem a counterintuitive approach toward getting us to empathize with them, the opposite occurs thanks to the immersive nature of the film and the solid cast, Will Poulter, Cosmo Jarvis, D’Pharaoh Woon-A-Tai, Michael Gandolfini, Adain Bradley and Charles Melton being standouts.
Using handheld cameras, the directors put the viewer in the middle of the horror that unfolds. Nothing is held back regarding the extent of the injuries some of these young men suffer, nor the responses they have to the violence that surrounds them. There are acts of bravery and displays of bravado, but more importantly, moments of doubt and fear.
This is as far from a jingoistic war film as imaginable. No sides are taken, no justifications are given. Most striking is the portrayal of how young these men are. While we’re aware we ask them to put themselves in harm’s way, being aware of this and seeing it play out are vastly different things. And while this is not a documentary, Mendoza’s involvement speaks to the validity of what he’s sharing.
In the end, it’s obvious the intent of the movie is to raise awareness. Unless we’ve been in their shoes, none of us know the pain and damage any veteran has experienced. Mendoza and Garland’s purpose is to validate the sacrifice these soldiers have made, to inform the rest of us of the true nature of what they endure and open a dialogue regarding these veterans’ needs. As such, the release of this film couldn’t be timelier, what with VA services being drastically and maliciously cut. Warfare should be required viewing for anyone who’s said, “Thank you for your service,” to a soldier, an obligatory phrase that’s often uttered without knowing the true cost these men and women have incurred. In theaters.
Drop’s thrills give way to idiocy
Ill-conceived and in-your-face, Christopher Landon’s Drop takes a simple premise and runs it into the ground, taking what could have been a clever exercise in suspense, only to deliver a ridiculous thriller that jumps the rails in spectacular fashion. Overwhelmed by unnecessary camera moves and lighting cues, the director can’t get out of his own way. Lacking faith in the material and the audience, Landon makes us aware of his presence throughout, a distraction that only exacerbates the script’s flaws.
In a sense, the script by Jillian Jacobs and Chris Roach owes a debt to Agatha Christie drawing room mysteries. Our heroine, Violet (Meghann Fahy), finds herself in a single location, tormented by an assailant she doesn’t know, the bulk of the movie spent trying to identify him. The set up is a first date with Henry (Brandon Sklenar, self-consciously cool to distraction), a photographer who’s arranged a dinner to remember, in a high-rise, high-class restaurant, some 40 stories above the streets of Chicago. He’s aiming to impress.
Unfortunately, this is all doomed for failure as Violet begins getting airdrops on her phone, which she initially ignores. However, as they become more frequent and threatening, she realizes they’re no joke. Told to access the cameras of her home security system, she sees a would-be assailant lurking outside and is informed her sister and son will be killed unless she does as she’s told.
A handy explanation from Henry informs us that whoever is messaging Violet is in the restaurant, no further than 50 feet away at any given time. After this, the guessing game begins as to who the techno-terrorist is, of which there are plenty of candidates. As to what the mystery person wants Violet to do, it involves murdering a patron in the restaurant, thus prompting a moral quandary. Kill a stranger or let her son and sister be killed?
The various ways in which Violet buys time range from inspired to ridiculous, but to Landon’s credit, he does keep the action moving. Yet there are plenty of distractions as well that keep the viewer from investing fully in the film. Increasingly large copies of the messages dropped on Violet’s phone are placed in various parts of the frame, each obtrusive and off-putting, while moments in which glaring lighting is used to highlight certain characters are unnecessary and come off as amateurish.
For movies like this to succeed, they need to be told at a breakneck pace in order to prevent the viewer from seeing or caring about the holes in its plot. Unfortunately, the pace lags in the third act, the story becoming so ridiculous it proves insulting. To Jacobs and Roach’s credit, the big reveal regarding who is tormenting Violet and why is clever. As such, the film seems to be on firm footing to deliver a rousing, inspired climax. But things go spectacularly wrong during the last 15 minutes, the improbability of all that occurs insulting, the outcome infuriating rather than thrilling. Because of this, Drop left a bad taste in my mouth, one cleansed by rewatching Netflix’s Carry On, which covers much of the same ground with greater intelligence and skill. In theaters.
This article appears in Young offenders in Illinois still serving life sentences.
