Movie Review: Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas

Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas (1998) 

Directed by Terry Gilliam

Written by Terry Gilliam, Tony Grisoni, Alex Cox, Todd Davies 

Starring Johnny Depp, Guillermo Del Toro, Tobey Maguire, Christina Ricci, Cameron Diaz

Release Date May 22nd, 1998 

Published June 27th, 2018

With Sicario Day of the Soldado opening this past weekend starring Benicio Del Toro, I was called to think of my favorite Benicio Del Toro performance. And while I enjoyed his work in Traffic, his Academy Award nominated performance, for me, his performance as Dr. Gonzo is an all time classic in Del Toro’s canon. Del Toro is the wild, raging, drug fueled id of Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas, a film itself that appears like a raging fire.

Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas stars Johnny Depp as Doctor of Journalism Raoul Duke, an alias of one Hunter S. Thompson. Thompson is famed for his gonzo journalism, a drug fueled style that earned him a loyal readership in Rolling Stone Magazine over three decades from the 60’s to the 80’s. Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas is taken from Thompson’s book of the same name about a drug fueled trip to Las Vegas that Thompson, as Duke, took to supposedly cover a motorcycle race for his magazine.

Of course, Duke has little interest in motorcycle racing. No, he’s in this for the road trip with his best friend and attorney, known here as Dr. Gonzo (Del Toro). Whether Dr. Gonzo was a real person or a Thompson creation cobbled together from several friends and fellow drug users is part of Thompson’s legend. The road trip debauchery is the focus of the movie and it starts right away with a red cadillac procured with Rolling Stone funds and a suitcase bursting with every kind of mind altering drug imaginable.

Eventually, Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas shifts gears from motorcycles to district attorneys as Gonzo has procured them a suite to attend the national district attorneys convention. Unfortunately, that is not all that Gonzo has procured as he is now in the company of a potentially underage girl, Lucy (Christina Ricci). Having just met, Gonzo has given the young girl her first taste of acid and the trip is going bad.

There isn’t much of a story in Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas, it’s a film of feel rather than substance. Director Terry Gilliam wants you to feel like your with Hunter S. Thompson on one of his famed drug trips and see the world through Duke’s eyes. This means fisheye lens and a queasy making visuals to illustrate the mind on various different types of hallucinogens from ether to acid to marijuana.

The film is remarkable at making you feel like you’re tripping right along with the characters, even if, like me, you’ve never used an illegal drug. I recall seeing Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas on the big screen and walking out into a world that didn’t look real after words. It took a little while before my eyes could adjust to the real world again and I recall liking the feeling. The film’s trippy visual is less effective on the small screen but no less artful.

Johnny Depp and Benicio Del Toro have a terrifically weird chemistry. I am not going to speculate as to the on-set drug use behind the scenes of Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas but it’s hard not to imagine that both actors don’t have some personal experiences driving their performances. Del Toro especially seems familiar with the wild emotions of mind-altering drugs with his wild eyes and bizarrely perfect sloppy speech pattern. It has the practiced, polished feel of someone trying not to let on that they are on drugs.

For his part, Depp radiates endless charisma. Even playing a bald man in bizarre 70’s costume, he still comes off as handsome and engaging. It’s a star performance and yet one pitched perfectly for this strange and unique role. Depp and Hunter S. Thompson became friends in real life during the making of the movie. So close were the two that after Thompson took his own life, Depp was part of a celebration that shot the author’s ashes out of a cannon.

Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas is a true cult classic. A strange, trippy, bizarre comic creation with wit and star power. Great performances combine with inventive visuals to create arguably THE best drug trip movie of all time. It’s a film that remains a go to for revival theaters across the country that roll the film out on a yearly basis, with the blessing and backing of its parent studio, Universal Pictures which has benefited greatly from the continuing popularity of the movie which barely eked out a profit on its theatrical release.

Movie Review: Brothers

Brothers (2009) 

Directed by Jim Sheridan 

Written by David Benioff 

Starring Jake Gyllenhaal, Tobey Maguire, Natalie Portman, Sam Shepard, Clifton Collins Jr.

Release Date December 4th, 2009

Published January 10th, 2010

Streaming on Starz via Amazon Prime 

It's interesting how critics can disagree so thoroughly. When the movie Brothers was released in December of 2009 most critics praised the work of Tobey Maguire and touted him as an Oscar contender. When I considered the film I felt that Tobey Maguire's performance was the film's weakest link and that Jake Gyllenhaal was the standout.

Brothers arrives on DVD this week and you can weigh in on which actor you prefer or maybe you love them both. One thing is certain, while I have my reservations about Maguire's performance, this story of one brother thought lost in war and another finding himself in the company of family has moments of great power and deeply felt emotions.

Tommy Cahill (Jake Gyllenhaal) has long been the black sheep of his family. His father was a General (Sam Shepard) and his brother Sam (Tobey Maguire) has followed in dad's footsteps. While Tommy has bounced from job to job and finally a stint in prison, Sam joined the army, settled down with Grace (Natalie Portman) and had two beautiful daughters.

Despite their differences Tommy and Sam are close and Sam is there when Tommy gets out of prison. Soon after however he is off to war in Afghanistan leaving Tommy to try and reconnect with his family which because of strains with his dad is not easy and soon he is returning to some bad behaviors.

On a mission Sam's helicopter is shot down and he and another soldier are taken hostage. Grace is soon informed that her husband is dead. You likely know where this story is headed as Grace informs Tommy of his brothers seeming demise and the two begin to turn their mutual grief into a comforting romance that will become quite uncomfortable when Sam returns home.

Brothers was directed by the humanist director Jim Sheridan whose portraits of humanity In America and My Left Foot are filled such astonishing truth and beauty that it's no surprise they were mostly ignored by audiences though lauded by critics and awards givers. Sheridan's style focuses the action in the hearts and minds of tough, damaged characters and in Brothers that focus comes through in the remarkable work of Jake Gyllenhaal.

The actor once known as Bubble Boy continues to evolve into one of our finest actors and even when playing a role where he seems to have less range to play than his co-star he shines by so effortlessly bringing his inner turmoil to the surface with quiet dignity and not merely the grand gesture. 

Gyllenhaal's performance is illuminated next to the more showy and forceful performance of Tobey Maguire whose grandstanding shouting stand in for honest emotions and understanding. With far more range to play with from the trauma of war and perceived betrayal, Maguire fails to connect and simply falls back on scenery chewing. 

Natalie Portman is caught between the brothers and her performance is a little lost in the shuffle. Portman exudes pain and warmth in scenes with Gyllenhaal while cowering in fear in scenes with Maguire, Portman's performance struggles depending who she is sharing the screen with. 

Problems asides, Jim Sheridan's direction is masterful and the story evolves one powerful, emotional scene after another until it reaches exceptional climax. Gyllenhaal is MVP doing his best to ground the story in a believable emotional realm while Maguire overplays and Portman vacillates between the two extremes. 

Flawed but still moving, Brothers is worth renting for arguably the best performance in the career of Jake Gyllenhaal. Jake is making the big move to blockbusters in Prince of Persia this summer, here's hoping he brings the same strength he showed in Brothers to his first major blockbuster.

Movie Review Seabiscuit

Seabiscuit (2003) 

Directed by Gary Ross

Written by Gary Ross

Starring Tobey Maguire, Jeff Bridges, Chris Cooper, Elizabeth Banks, Gary Stevens, William H. Macy

Release Date July 25th, 2003 

Published July 24th, 2003 

The first trailers for Seabiscuit came in late January/early February and were not well received. They looked kind of dopey and sappy, like every other horse movie ever made. It didn't help that Tobey Maguire evoked the same winsomeness that made The Cider House Rules so relentlessly dull. It also didn’t help that the film was directed by the same guy who made Pleasantville a beat you over the head message movie, Gary Ross.

Subsequent trailers have managed to rehab the film’s image into that of the first Oscar contender of the year and that is somewhat accurate. Despite a number of reservations, I wouldn't be surprised to see Seabiscuit come roaring down the stretch in late February at the Oscars.

Adapted from Laura Hillenbrand’s surprise best seller, Seabiscuit relates the rise of a racehorse with the resurgence of an America in the wake of The Depression. Tobey Maguire stars as Red Pollard, a jockey and part time boxer who was sold by his parents to a horse stable after his parents lost everything in the market crash. Red grew up bouncing from race track to race track working in stables and riding in races while at night getting his butt whooped in bar room brawls. In one fight in Mexico, Red is beaten so badly he loses sight in one eye.

Parallel to Red's story is that of a bicycle salesman named Charles Howard who moved out west to find his fortune selling bikes in mining towns. One day a man asks Charles if he could fix a car, and though he's never done it before, Howard is ingenious enough to figure it out and in so doing found his true calling. Seeing the rise of the automobile, Howard opens the very first Western car dealership and becomes a millionaire. Though Howard was one of the lucky people who survived the market crash, his life was not immune to tragedy. While working at his dealership one day, Howard found that his young son Sean had died after borrowing one of dad's cars to go fishing. The death of his son was also the end of his first marriage.

Looking for ways to cope with these dual tragedies, Howard heads to Mexico where he meets a strange old horse trainer named Tom Smith. An old time cowboy, Smith still sleeps under the stars and trains horses not just to run races. He simply loves horses regardless of their abilities. Howard and Smith then look for a horse to run in races and find a real nag. An undersized, intemperate sire of a Triple Crown winner, named Seabiscuit. For a jockey they find the only man who wasn't afraid to ride the angry Seabiscuit, Red Pollard, and soon the too short horse with a too large jockey is running and winning every race.

The main story arc of the film is Howard's attempt to entice the owner of Triple Crown winner War Admiral into a match race with Seabiscuit. While the film posits the match up as a David and Goliath story, I couldn't help but see it as an ego contest between two rich guys at a time when people were starving. Call me cynical if you like, but as the owner of War Admiral and Howard negotiate the terms of the big race while sitting in a New York country club, I couldn't help but imagine the number of people in line for soup just down the road from them. I couldn’t help but think how truly insignificant a horse race is. 

I realize that the race was in reality very inspiring to poor Americans coming out of The Depression but in reality, they were watching one massive ego battle between two rich guys. I guess I can't feel sorry for the number of poor people who threw in their last quarter to sit in the infield to watch the match race, they gave their money willingly. However, at a time of such poverty should there have been a charge to see this race, especially when the money raised all went into the pockets of the already very rich owners? I realize politics has no place in this film’s glossy repainting of its period but if you're going to tie your story to the rebirth of the country, it's fair to take a more realistic look at this idealized story.

All that said, Seabiscuit from a filmmaking standpoint is a very competent professional production. Ross may present a glossed over version of reality but it's a beautiful rendering of said gloss. Seabiscuit is visually very well produced and far better than Ross' previous effort, the annoyingly overwrought message picture Pleasantville.

The performances in Seabiscuit are where its award chances are, especially the supporting performance from William H. Macy as the cartoony comic relief race announcer Tick Tock Mcglaughlin. As always, Jeff Bridges is outstanding and once again shows why he is the most underappreciated actor in Hollywood. Of course, Tobey Maguire is the film’s lead and though I find his dewy-eyed innocence routine somewhat grating, I don't think it's entirely his fault. The script betrays him in the hero department, painting Red as an innocent kid even as he grows into a man living in Mexico, dallying with prostitutes and fighting in bars.

Chris Cooper delivers yet another solid performance and though it may not be as memorable as his Oscar winning turn in Adaptation, it underscores his amazing range. Finally, some praise for real-life jockey Gary Stevens who plays Red's best friend and rival, George Woolf. Stevens delivers a very relaxed and real performance and his riding ability of course is well showcased in the film’s very well orchestrated racing scenes.

There are a number of good things about Seabiscuit, especially its acting. However, the falseness of the re-imagined reality of the period continues to nag at me and thus the impact of the film’s centerpiece, the match race between Seabiscuit and War Admiral, felt hollow to me. I just can't cheer what amounts to an ego contest between two rich guys no matter how athletic and beautiful the horses may be.

Movie Review Spiderman 3

Spiderman 3 (2007) 

Directed by Sam Raimi 

Written by Ivan Raimi, Alvin Sargent 

Starring Tobey Maguire, James Franco, Kirsten Dunst, Thomas Haden Church, Topher Grace, Bryce Dallas Howard, J.K Simmons 

Release Date May 4th, 2007 

Published May 3rd, 2007 

It was bound to happen. The law of diminishing returns had to kick in at some point. For some film franchises; it happens right away (Matrix Reloaded, anyone?). For some; a good run continues (We’ll see what happens with Shrek and Harry Potter soon). Other film franchises have never gotten off the ground creatively (How did we get a second Fantastic Four and a third Rush Hour?).

But, for one of the great franchises of all time, a great run doesn’t exactly end as much as it ebbs. In Spiderman 3 a great franchise doesn’t jump the shark, to appropriate a TV term, rather it levels off with a first mediocre entry. Failures in logic, underwritten villains and overripe melodrama, can’t sink a great franchise but it does bring an unsatisfying end.

When last we left Peter Parker (Tobey Maguire) he had revealed himself as Spiderman to the woman he loves Mary Jane Watson (Kirsten Dunst) and she had run away from her wedding to be with him. Now, Peter is ready to take the relationship to the next level and ask Mary Jane to be his wife.If only things could be that simple.

Unfortunately for Spiderman a trifecta of villains has other plans for the webslinger's future. First there is Peter’s ex-best friend Harry Osbourne (James Franco) who believes Spiderman killed his father and wishes for revenge. Then there is Flint Marko (Thomas Haden Church) a petty thief who stumbles into some kind of science experiment and becomes the Sandman.

Finally, the third villain, for a time, is Peter himself. With New York finally coming to see Spidey as a real hero, things are going to Peter’s head. He is soaking up the love and admiration of the public and is beginning to neglect his relationship with Mary Jane. When a meteor filled with a lively black goo slams into the earth it attaches itself to Peter Parker and its power is transformative.

The problems with Spiderman 3 are going to be obvious and overbearing for some and easily forgivable for others; but they should be obvious to everyone. Director Sam Raimi, in a rush to cram a whole lot of plot into not a lot of space, cuts a few to many logical corners. Coincidence and contrivance takes the place of rational plotting.

Characters make decisions based on what is needed for the scene even if it contradicts previous behavior. More than once a character arrives somewhere because the plot needs them and not for any other logical reason. One character holds on to a piece of information that could have been helpful as far back as Spiderman 2. This previously insignificant character happens to hold this info until just the moment that it is needed in this plot.

Despite the logical leaps and the abuse of coincidence and contrivance, there is still much to enjoy in Spiderman 3. The computer graphics continue to be cutting edge. The action and CGI work together in dazzling effect. The scene in which Flint Marko becomes the Sandman is a visual mind blower as we watch Thomas Haden Church pulled apart atom by atom until there is nothing but sand.

Then; there are the fight scenes which grow bigger with each successive battle. Peter versus Harry, fighting in mid air. Spidey taking on Sandman inside and outside a moving brinks truck and the battle at the end between Spider and the tandem of Sandman and that villainous black goo, which attached itself to a new host, are all terrific scenes and more than enough reason for me to recommend Spiderman 3.

Later this summer Shrek will try to avoid its own jump the shark moment. Meanwhile Pirates of the Caribbean will try and bounce back from a lackluster follow up. Every franchise is different but each will have a low point. If Spiderman 3 is the low point for the Spiderman franchise then we can look forward to more great things from our friendly neighborhood Spiderman the next time he swings into theaters.

Movie Review Spider-Man 2

Spider-Man 2 (2004) 

Directed by Sam Raimi

Written by Alvin Sargent 

Starring Tobey Maguire, Kirsten Dunst, Alfred Molina, James Franco, Rosemary Harris 

Release Date June 30th, 2004 

Published June 29th, 2004 

The first Spider-Man was a spectacular adventure that surprised a lot of critics with its depth and terrific characters. Spider-man 2 is likely to surprise even more. Free of expository scripting, this sequel leaps into the fray and delivers something most sequels cannot, a follow up that is more than worthy of its original.

2 years have passed since Peter Parker (Tobey Maguire) was bitten by that radioactive spider and Spider-man has continued saving innocent New Yorkers from all sorts of peril. Still, he is not quite the hero you would expect. Spider-man is still consistently vilified by the maniacal newspaperman J. Jonah Jameson (JK Simmons). Worse yet, his Spidey powers are coming and going, often leaving him falling from the sky and in pain.

As for Peter Parker, well, he's getting it worse than his alter ego. It does not pay to be a superhero so Peter is forced to take odd jobs to pay for his tiny one-bed-no-bath apartment. Unfortunately, his web slinging duties tend to make him late for work and thus he gets fired a lot, including from his latest job delivering pizzas. Peter's Aunt May (Rosemary Harris) is close to losing her home and blames herself for the death of her husband Ben. Peter has not told her what really happened.

Peter is also failing his college courses, too often late to class where his professor (Dylan Baker) is ready to fail him unless his paper on the legendary scientist Otto Octavius is good enough to save him. Doctor Octavius (Alfred Molina) just happens to be working for Peter's friend Harry Osbourne (James Franco) at Oscorp where he is developing a dangerous new energy source with the help of four massive metal tentacles that fuse to his spine. You can tell this is going to go bad and it does. Octavius' experiment blows up, killing his wife and leaving the tentacles permanently fused to his back. Worse yet, somehow the tentacles are now in charge and they want to try the experiment again.

Of course that is not Peter Parker's biggest problem. No, his biggest problem is still his unrequited love of Mary Jane Watson (Kirsten Dunst). In the two years since Peter told Mary Jane they could never be together, she has become a successful actress and model. Her face is plastered all over the city, a constant reminder to Peter of what he has given up to be Spider-man. Mary Jane has finally tired of waiting for Peter and has told him she is going to marry Astronaut John Jameson (Daniel Gillies).

That is a minor gloss of this wonderfully dense and well-conceived plot. Director Sam Raimi and writer Alvin Sargent, with an assist by writer Michael Chabon amongst others, have concocted a rare action-adventure film with a life outside of its computer graphics.

Filled with humor, sadness and life, this is a script worthy of attention of awards shows. The middle portion of the film is especially good. Peter Parker gives up being Spider-man and while his grades are up and he may finally be able to be with Mary Jane, crime goes up 75% and even Jonah Jameson wishes Spidey would come back. With Doc Ock on the loose, you know Spidey will be back but this terrific script and cast make this obligatory decision a seamless part of the story and the maturing of Peter Parker.

The script nods endlessly to its comic book source. The scene where Peter tosses his Spidey suit in an alley garbage can is a direct lift from the comic book. Extraneous characters like John Jameson and the doctor who treats Peter after he thinks he's lost his powers, Dr. Curt Connors, are both historic characters from the comic book. Both go on to have serious accidents that lead them to becoming villains in the comic, FYI.

There is also a bit at the end involving James Franco's Harry Osbourne that relates to one of the comics all time best storylines. Fans of the comic who recognize these characters are drooling over which will be the big baddie of Spider-man 3.

What a loss it would have been if rumors prior to the film’s shooting had come true and Tobey Maguire had been dropped as Spider-man. No offense to Jake Gyllenhaal who was rumored to take over for Maguire, but Spider-man is clearly Maguire's role. Maguire has not always been one of my favorite actors. I've always found his earnest nerdiness and dewy eyed look cloying. Somehow, Maguire turns those negatives into positives for both Spider-man and Peter Parker. His nerdy exterior is the perfect cover for the superhero inside, his nervousness and quavering voice as Peter Parker is the essential yin to Spidey's confident superhero yang.

The chemistry between Maguire and Kirsten Dunst is tremendous and the love story is almost as exciting as the CGI fight scenes. Almost. These are some impressive effects, but I digress. There are real fireworks when Peter and Mary Jane are together. The unrequited love story has grown from the puppy dog crush of the first film to a deeper, more mature longing and we feel it every time they are together.

Now back to those effects. Science has not moved far enough yet to make Spider-man or his nemesis Doc Ock look completely seamless, but this is as close as anyone has come other than George Lucas. Doc Ock is a terrific-looking character. At first he seems kind of goofy looking, Alfred Molina is not the first actor you think of when you think of a comic book movie. However, once the character gets into fighting Spider-man it really gets good. The climactic battle on an elevated subway train is one of the most exciting action scenes ever. Ever!

If there is a criticism of Spider-man 2, it’s that there might not be enough of Spider-man himself. As good as Maguire is at being Peter Parker, that is where the film’s depth comes from. I can see where some audience members will be counting the seconds until Peter is back behind the mask. That for me is a minor criticism because whether it's Spider-man or Peter Parker, this movie is a terrific ride filled with emotion, humor and unbeatable action. As Roger Ebert said, this may be the best superhero movie ever made.

Movie Review Spider-Man

Spider-Man (2002)

Directed by Sam Raimi 

Written by David Koepp

Starring Tobey Maguire, James Franco, Kirsten Dunst, Willem Dafoe, Bruce Campbell, J.K Simmons

Release Date May May 3rd, 2002 

Published May 2nd, 2002 

I must admit that when I heard Tobey Maguire had won the role of my favorite superhero, Spiderman, I was quite disappointed. How could the Cider House Rules geek be a superhero?!? Well, I'm glad that I now must eat those words because Tobey Maguire is a terrific Spiderman and now, I can't imagine anyone else doing this role.

As the film begins, we are introduced to science geek Peter Parker, a shy introverted kid who’s only friend is Harry Osborn (James Franco) and nurses a crush on the girl-next-door Mary Jane Watson (Kirsten Dunst). I'm sure most people are familiar with the origin of Spiderman; he was bitten by a radioactive Spider and began to take on the spider’s traits. The ability to spin webs, strength 10 times normal and of course the amazing ability to crawl up walls.

Suddenly the shy kid is a muscled-up superhero and immediately looks for a way to cash in on his newfound abilities. He finds it in a wrestling ring with a huge guy named Bonesaw (The legendary Randy “The Macho Man” Savage). Peter, now calling himself Spiderman, defeats Bonesaw to win $3,000 dollars, however the promoter refuses to pay the full amount. The promoter’s office is then robbed, and Peter skips an opportunity to catch the thief. The decision to let the thief get away is a fateful one as it is the same thief who shoots and kills Peter's beloved Uncle Ben (Cliff Robertson).

Parallel with Peter Parker's story is that of Norman Osborn (Willem Dafoe), father of Peter's friend Harry and the president of Oscorp. With his company on the verge of losing a major military contract Osborn decides to test his controversial new weapon on himself. Needless to say, the experiment is a mistake and causes Osborn's personality to split between Norman and his new alter ego, the Green Goblin.

It's a classic comic book story and transfers to the screen extremely well thanks to the brilliant director Sam Raimi. Raimi could have just used his big budget for nothing but special effects, but instead he uses it to create a whole universe for Spiderman and his supporting cast to inhabit. Whether it's Aunt May and Uncle Ben's row house, Peter's High School, or even a professional wrestling ring, the comic book sheen that Raimi and his team brings to Spider-Man looks terrific. 

Maguire is excellent; he makes Spiderman and Peter Parker come to life. Maguire never plays him like your typical, all-powerful, unkillable superhero. He plays him as a human who can bleed and get angry and has to fight his emotions as well as his pursuers. Kirsten Dunst has it easy, she merely has to smile, and the audience falls for her the same way Peter Parker does. Dunst is a wonderful actress who builds great chemistry with Maguire. Willem Dafoe is effective as Osborn/Goblin, he certainly can play a believable psycho and in Spiderman he does so with only a little bit of scenery chewing.

It is rare that a summer blockbuster actually meets expectations; it is far rarer when one surpasses them. Spiderman does exactly that and is one of the best movies I've seen this year and one of the best blockbusters of all time.

Movie Review The Good German

The Good German (2006) 

Directed by Steven Soderbergh

Written by Paul Attanasio 

Starring George Clooney, Cate Blanchett, Tobey Maguire 

Release Date December 15th, 2006 

Published September 10th, 2007

Before Tarentino and Rodriguez put the clicks, pops, scratches and cigarette burns back into film in Grindhouse, Steven Soderbergh had already used technology to revive the look of another Hollywood era. In The Good German, Soderbergh crafted a wartime noir love triangle but it was his attention to period detail, and the way he recreates the way movies looked in the 40's and 50's that makes The Good German notable and modestly watchable.

In The Good German George Clooney stars as an investigative reporter for the New Republic and an ex-soldier who returns to Germany for the first time since the end of the war and the beginning of the reconstruction of two different Germany's. Upon his return Clooney's Jake Geismer seeks and finds trouble in the form of his ex mistress Lena Brandt (Cate Blanchett) who had been his stringer before the reconstruction forced her into prostitution to pay the bills.

When Jake and Lena reunite it's not a warm moment. Lena is now involved with another American, a motor pool con man named Patrick Tully (Tobey Maguire). Tully is no stranger to Jake, when he arrived in the country for this assignment, Tully was made his driver. How did the current boyfriend of Jake's former flame end up his driver upon his return to Germany? Jake is not a believer in coincidences and his reporter's instincts lead him to a dangerous conspiracy.

Steven Soderbergh's painstaking detail in making The Good German resemble the films of the 40's and 50's is admirable and intriguing. Unfortunately, all of that fascination with technique and style left the story of The Good German in neglect. The story plays out in three acts from three different perspectives and plays like rough character sketches that were only integrated at the final moment.

The script by Paul Attansio, the talented writer and creator of TV's Homicide and Oz, plays second fiddle to the technology on display to recreate the era. It's quite clear that Soderbergh is more interested in his black and white toys than he is in this script. As evidence, the script highlights anachronisms that undermine the period detail Soderbergh is going for. The Good German is R - rated for nudity and naughty language; two things that would never have made it into a film made in the period Soderbergh is attempting to recreate.

A more bold and clever play, in a script the director cared about, would have been to make The Good German meet the standards of the Hays code, the ratings system of the day that was essentially institutional censorship. Not to say that the Hays Code was good, it wasn't, but how clever might this movie have been had they explored the boundaries of the period and employed the kind of subtext and layers that directors like Michael Curtiz made such wonderful use of during the Hays Code period. But then that would have taken far more work than what went into this rough draft of a script.

If the biggest draw of The Good German is the period evoking technology , the biggest issues may be the actors on camera. Though few actors can evoke golden age leading men as well as George Clooney, he seems ill-suited for the role of a putzy patsy taken for a ride by a nitwit like that played by Tobey Maguire. Maguire may be Spiderman but take away the web slinging and the costume and he is no match for the star wattage of Clooney.

As the alleged mastermind of this plot, Maguire is tremendously over-matched. With his high pitched voice and slight frame, Maguire is the least believable tough guy ever to start a bar fight in a German grog hall. Opposite Cate Blanchett in romantic scenes early in the film, scenes in which he is supposed to be intimidating, Maguire looks as if Blanchett could break him in half if she had to. Blanchett is more of a mother figure to Maguire than a lover and I don't believe that was the film's intention.

As for Ms. Blanchett, hampered by an ugly German accent, and despite her remarkable talent, she is at a loss to make this underwritten character work. As she attempts to evoke Ingrid Bergman, Blanchett at times crosses the line from serious drama to melodramatic parody. As the character is written, as a classic femme fatale, Blanchett is all grandiloquent gesture and emotional projection. Sometimes it works, other times she seems something out of Ed Wood.

The technique is the star of The Good German. Credit director Steven Soderbergh for his bold ideas and loving homage. What a shame that the same care was not taken in crafting a plot to match the technique in depth and complexity. As it is, The Good German is a notable failure. A wonderful experiment in the possibilities of film technology but not a movie that will be remembered for anything other than its technique.