I'm not a big fan of the original "Thomas Crown Affair," even though it stars Steve McQueen one of the least appreciated actors these days. The opening bank job, done multi-screen style, is well done. And the seduction scene played out with chess pieces shows that very suggestive eroticism can be done with class and wit. But overall, its a very forgettable film (and you can keep the "Windmills of Your Mind"). So, this is not a film that the idea of a remake triggers that urge to go maim studio execs. Considering how dated the original is, updating it made a lot of sense. The casting of the underused Rene Russo with Pierce Brosnan was a good choice. I point all this out so I don't have to pull out my mea culpa when I say it didn't exactly bowl me over (or bowler, if you've seen it already).
Mostly, this is a film that wants to be thought of as smart and sophisticated. Overall, the filmmakers succeed in giving us film that is that occasionally. I think what I didn't like about the film is that it never trusts the audience. Any time a point is made, it has to be underscored so that there is no doubt we got it. Early on, Crown (Brosnan) is shown entering a building with a prominently framed sign for Crown Acquisitions. When a Suit in the lobby hurries a new security guard away who doesn't realize who Crown is, not only do the producers have to throw in the guard saying off screen "What, he own the building or something?" but they have to insult the audience even more my adding "Yes, he does." Following a scant few minutes later is a scene meant to show Crown as a top dog financial whiz, but again the filmmakers can't help themselves by pounding the nail on the head to make sure the dumbest members of the audience get that he just bested the other players in the deal.
"Affair" hits it's roughest waters once it becomes a cat and mouse game between the trying-to-retain-his-cool Brosnan and trying-not-get-too-hot Russo waiting for the other to make both professional and emotional mistakes. When the central mystery becomes "will she figure out how to nail him for doing it?" versus a standard whodunit an audience expects a lot of intelligence from the filmmakers. Imagine pitching an idea for a weekly TV show about a detective who solves crimes that the audience already knows the culprit of and the brilliance of "Columbo" is much more impressive. Also, instead of a selfish rich man who wants to keep masterpieces all to himself the audience is given the very likable cad Thomas Crown. You want him to succeed. Sort of.
Yet, in this period of cat and mouse, "Crown" manages to give us something rare and probably more in demand than studios realize: an adult, mature, frank sexual relationship. Both the producers (of which Brosnan was one) and Ms. Russo should be applauded for once not having the forty-something male actor cavorting around with a twenty-something flavor-of-the-month actress. Reportedly using no body doubles, Ms Russo frolics au naturel giving us more than a glimpse of her forty plus form.
Then comes the ending, featuring another elaborate heist. And "Affair's" dalliance with smarts turns around and bites it in the ass. A film can't tell an audience to keep it's brain in "Drive" and then expect them to shift to neutral when it decides to play it dumb. After showing a well thought-out and very plausible purloin-the-masterpiece sequence in the beginning, plausibility goes out the window for the closing art snatching scene. Again and again the audience is asked to buy one preposterous turn after another. Then comes a big blunder by the director, John McTiernan, in order to keep brain-challenged with the rest of the crowd. To describe it would be to reveal too much. Just ask yourself should you see it, did you really have to watch each step of the way as the painting is revealed or wouldn't a slow pan up have worked much better? The way he chooses to shoot it is par for the course of the rest of this not-quite-as-smart-as-they-thought film
Mostly, this is a film that wants to be thought of as smart and sophisticated. Overall, the filmmakers succeed in giving us film that is that occasionally. I think what I didn't like about the film is that it never trusts the audience. Any time a point is made, it has to be underscored so that there is no doubt we got it. Early on, Crown (Brosnan) is shown entering a building with a prominently framed sign for Crown Acquisitions. When a Suit in the lobby hurries a new security guard away who doesn't realize who Crown is, not only do the producers have to throw in the guard saying off screen "What, he own the building or something?" but they have to insult the audience even more my adding "Yes, he does." Following a scant few minutes later is a scene meant to show Crown as a top dog financial whiz, but again the filmmakers can't help themselves by pounding the nail on the head to make sure the dumbest members of the audience get that he just bested the other players in the deal.
"Affair" hits it's roughest waters once it becomes a cat and mouse game between the trying-to-retain-his-cool Brosnan and trying-not-get-too-hot Russo waiting for the other to make both professional and emotional mistakes. When the central mystery becomes "will she figure out how to nail him for doing it?" versus a standard whodunit an audience expects a lot of intelligence from the filmmakers. Imagine pitching an idea for a weekly TV show about a detective who solves crimes that the audience already knows the culprit of and the brilliance of "Columbo" is much more impressive. Also, instead of a selfish rich man who wants to keep masterpieces all to himself the audience is given the very likable cad Thomas Crown. You want him to succeed. Sort of.
Yet, in this period of cat and mouse, "Crown" manages to give us something rare and probably more in demand than studios realize: an adult, mature, frank sexual relationship. Both the producers (of which Brosnan was one) and Ms. Russo should be applauded for once not having the forty-something male actor cavorting around with a twenty-something flavor-of-the-month actress. Reportedly using no body doubles, Ms Russo frolics au naturel giving us more than a glimpse of her forty plus form.
Then comes the ending, featuring another elaborate heist. And "Affair's" dalliance with smarts turns around and bites it in the ass. A film can't tell an audience to keep it's brain in "Drive" and then expect them to shift to neutral when it decides to play it dumb. After showing a well thought-out and very plausible purloin-the-masterpiece sequence in the beginning, plausibility goes out the window for the closing art snatching scene. Again and again the audience is asked to buy one preposterous turn after another. Then comes a big blunder by the director, John McTiernan, in order to keep brain-challenged with the rest of the crowd. To describe it would be to reveal too much. Just ask yourself should you see it, did you really have to watch each step of the way as the painting is revealed or wouldn't a slow pan up have worked much better? The way he chooses to shoot it is par for the course of the rest of this not-quite-as-smart-as-they-thought film