I will see any film that has Tilda Swinton in it. My affection for her goes back to her earliest work for Derek Jarman. She elevates any project she's associated with, and if they're not always great films, Swinton elevates them.
Michael Clayton is not a bad film. It's actually intriguing. Hours seem to pass before you have any sense of what's happening. That's not a totally bad thing, although the film does really drag in places. Largely, it works, though. The ambiguity is engaging rather than off-putting.
This is among George Clooney's better roles and better performances. The wink-and-nod characterizations that have driven much of his work is largely absent from his Michael Clayton. Clooney is supported by a great cast, and by that I mean more than Swinton. Swinton, however, stands out in a tortured, harsh performance. Tom Wilkinson provides a moral center to a film that struggles to find it. Sydney Pollack also stands out.
Michael Clayton has stayed with me in interesting ways. Perhaps the moral ambiguity of our time gives it a resonance I didn't quite realize.
Sunday, November 4, 2007
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment