| Overall Grade: |
A- |
|
| Story: |
B+ |
|
|
| Acting: |
A+ |
|
|
| Direction: |
A- |
|
|
| Visuals: |
A- |
|
|
Move Over Grisham, Here Comes Clayton
by Eric (movies profile)
May 8, 2008
20
of
23 people found this review helpful
Coming out of the theater, my fellow film critic Cesar Villalta commented “It’s great to finally see a film for adults!” I thought about it for a second and realized that he had a point. Most of the films that we had seen this year were targeted towards the tweener crowd between 16 to 22. Very rarely have we seen films that actually required an adult sensibility and patience. Michael Clayton requires intelligence and sensibilities, a film that takes time to tell its story, but makes up for it by being about something.
In a Milwaukee deposition room, a great lawyer goes crazy and starts taking off his clothes. That lawyer is Arthur Eads (Tom Wilkerson), a high-class New York lawyer defending a fertilizer producer that is linked to cancer. His film calls in a fixer, Michael Clayton (George Clooney), to fix the mess made by his friend. But Arthur quickly eludes Clayton and goes rogue. Clayton thinks that Eads is up to something, considering that he’s also the film’s expert in insanity cases.
Also in this mix is the fertilizer company’s own lawyer (Tilda Swinton), an up and coming fixer who sees it as her responsibility to repair the damage that Eads has done, not to mention the damage he will do when it’s revealed that he might be changing sides. When Clayton finds that his apathy has a bitter cost, he is left to make a choice between doing the right thing and most advantageous thing.
From what you’ve just read, you would think that this film is a legal thriller amongst the best of John Grisham and Scott Turrow, but the film is better than that. The legal thriller is the disguise for it’s real intention; a character study of people caught in a moral dilemma. Eads finds out that his life’s work was for nothing and he makes a choice between doing the right thing and the wrong thing. His decision kicks off a chain of other choices made by other characters, none more important than for the characters of Clayton and (?). When we get to the end of the film, we are satisfied, though in a way we know how this is going to end.
My only real problem with the film is the finale, which I saw coming from a thousand miles away. While I do say yes, the confrontation between Clooney and Swinton might be considered classic later on, the events surrounding that scene are extremely predictable. But then again, this isn’t a real legal thriller after all. If it were, the stakes would be higher and the tension would be unbearable.
Another amazing thing about the film is the way it performs what I consider to be the perfect foreshadow. This isn’t meant as a gimmick. It allows us to see the same events, a pivotal event as it would turn out later, to be seen from a different perspective under different conditions. This kind of technique is very surprising to see in even the veteran filmmakers, not to mention first-time directors such as Tony Gilroy.
Another thing of curiousity; why is the film called Michael Clayton? It would be easy to say because that is the character we're following, but we're also following two other characters too. I think it's to put more focus on this particular character and the choices he makes in comparison to the two other stories we're following as well.
But what really demands attention is the superb acting skills on range here. From the first minute when we hear Mr. Wilkinson’s opening voiceover (which sets up the film perfectly) to the very last scene, the acting is always on task, elevating great material to an even better level. Clooney leads this cast with such exuberance, which is amazing considering that he’s very solemn. This is a man who is on his way to being a has-been who never liked what he did, but has failed in the restaurant business and looking at heavy gambling debts. Tilda Swinton also hammers her scenes with silent furiousity. Pay attention to those scenes she has at the mirror, timing her presentation, her rebuttals, and making sure that she says and does everything right, which will eventually lead to her own downfall. Even Sydney Pollack, who has a thankless role as The Exposition (the character that lets you know what the score is at that part of the film), makes his part actually seem like a living human being that doesn’t live in the office closet (but not for a lack of trying). But the real showstopper is Wilkinson who gives an Oscar-worthy performance. From the opening monologue we get a sense of this character as he rants and raves, but never going over the top (which is important since this a part of the character he plays).
Tony Gilroy has been writing screenplays since 93’s The Cutting Edge about figure skaters. He’s better known for his work on the Bourne films. For his directorial debut (which he also penned the film), he slows the action down, using long takes to set tones. There’s a lot of quiet time that the film uses to maximum efficiency. He’s playing his story close to the vest, going for the jugular with razor-sharp dialog and steadfast direction. Along with cinematographer Robert Elswitt, he creates a cold palate that is still colorful but stark at the same time. All I have to ask is when will he don the camera again?
All in all, Michael Clayton is a great film, a solid entertainment, and a pure thrill to those who are willing to not be talked down to. It treats its audience like adults; with respect and consideration. Not many films will do that, especially films that are supposed to be for adults. |
My Public Profile 
