Fair Game

This movie basically blows. But, it's fascinating to watch just because it's so bad. I find myself not able to turn the station when I stumble across it.

The acting is terrible, the plot is terrible. There are too many goofs to count. It just goes to show you it does not require a great script or even a great idea to make a movie.

Can Cindy Crawford act? Not really, but well enough to scream and run from one overblown action scene to another, taking the odd breather for showers (plural) and changes of clothes.

I kind of enjoyed this brainless tosh. Cinders looks great, adequately playing an uncompromising, smarty-pants attorney. Baldwin is the cop determined to guard her body when people start trying to kill her. He just about pulls off the hardass cop routine, but never really musters the enthusiasm to look like he's enjoying it.

The bad guys glower and plot, hunting the fleeing pair down with ruthless skill (and some rather suspect computer trickery), then cocking things up each time allowing them to escape. It's hugely violent, fast moving, loud, full of swearing etc., all the things you associate with nineties action fodder, and finishes off with a big enough bang. Don't expect much, and you shouldn't be disappointed.

Oh, and if you're wondering about nudity, Cindy does indeed ‘get them out for the lads', and Baldwin shows his butt.

Before it careens into total silliness, `Fair Game' is a lot of fun. After the rather absurd attempted shooting of Crawford in the opening scene, `Fair Game' begins rather effectively examining the loss of privacy in the digital world, a fresh idea in 1995 (`Enemy of the State' didn't arrive till three years later). Crawford plays a lawyer specializing in civil cases. While helping one of his divorce clients she inadvertently falls under the scrutiny of a group of former KGB assassins. William Baldwin (`Backdraft')is the cop assigned to protect her. Baldwin looks like a cross between his brother Alec and Nicholas Cage; in other words, kind of goofy. Cindy Crawford looks like …well, Cindy Crawford, one of the world's most beautiful women. Crawford received some pretty bad raps for this movie. That's really unfair, but not surprising, considering Hollywood's experience with supermodels. In the 50s, they used to dub supermodel Suzy Parker. Crawford's considerably better than that. Her voice and line readings remind me of early Farrah Fawcett.

The big problem here is neither Crawford nor Baldwin. It's a script that would have us believe former KGB operatives would miss Crawford with a machine gun as she stands by a storefront with no cover. It's a script that would have us believe KGB agents would blow up Crawford's house with C4 to cover a COVERT operation. It's the script that would give Baldwin endless supplies of 9mm ammunition, while he leaves behind machine guns and `street sweepers'. It's a script that has the intelligent, sensible Crawford running from Baldwin, her only ally. It's a script that would have us believe the feisty Crawford would surrender without a fight, etc., etc.

Production values for `Fair Game' are top notch, great color photography, sound, music, editing and stunts. Had producer Joel Silver substituted Jackie Chan for Billy Baldwin, `Fair Game' would have made a first rate martial arts movie, even with its other shortcomings. ‘Course, I'm not sure Cindy Crawford would've `gotten naked' for Jackie Chan. Well, topless, anyway.

`Fair Game' is a `dumb blonde' of a movie, but Crawford is anything but dumb. She deserved better and deserves another opportunity to prove her mettle as an actress. If she made another movie, I'd go see it, even if she become closer to an "8" than a "10".

Nonetheless, `Fair Game' is, at worst, a `fair' movie. I give it a `5'.

Before I start the review, I would just like to point out that Fair Game is not entirely bad because of Cindy Crawford's performance. Her acting is one note and monotone, but that's not the real reason why the film is bad.

The plot is so illogical it makes no sense at all. We are told that Crawford's character, Kate McQuean, is a Lawyer who has been marked for death by the KGB, the reason being they could lose their ship in a court case that McQuean is pursuing. This kind of story line would belong in a courtroom drama, not an action film. And why are the villains the KGB? This was 1995; the KGB was irrelevant by then. The film itself is one long chase, and concentrates more on action instead of paying attention to character detail, which is another of the film's failings.

The action scenes are well-staged, and are the only good point to Fair Game. But there are certain questions raised; for a start, how could the villains use electronic equipment to track every move they make? Not to mention the use of a heat sensor, which can allow the villains to see everything they do (since when has such a thing ever existed?). And by the time the villains have finally captured McQuean, they are then instructed to 'keep the girl alive'; why? You've just spent the whole time trying to kill her, why not just get it done and out the way? Instead we have to watch the story get dragged out for longer. By this point, you'll be glad when it's all over.

Only worth watching if you're curious about Cindy Crawford's acting debut.

Really bad and tedious with it. The mystery here was not who was trying to kill Cindy Crawford, but how her hair was magically dry and sexily tousled after a series of dunkings.

Cindy has exhibited better acting in lipstick commercials. And that scene where she uses her charms to persuade the geek in the computer shop to help her was reminiscent of Ginger trying to coax a coconut from Gilligan.

Silly from start to finish.