एक कानूनी फर्म एक वकील के टूटने के बाद स्थिति को ठीक करने के लिए अपने "फिक्सर" को लाती है।एक कानूनी फर्म एक वकील के टूटने के बाद स्थिति को ठीक करने के लिए अपने "फिक्सर" को लाती है।एक कानूनी फर्म एक वकील के टूटने के बाद स्थिति को ठीक करने के लिए अपने "फिक्सर" को लाती है।
- 1 ऑस्कर जीते
- 28 जीत और कुल 114 नामांकन
Tom McCarthy
- Walter
- (वॉइस)
Jonathan Walker
- Del
- (वॉइस)
फ़ीचर्ड समीक्षाएं
This is a well-made suspense film. It builds slowly, it features the key characters in sometimes agonising close-up, it weaves an intricate plot (a bit too intricate, in hindsight -- I'm still not sure why some events were included), and George Clooney is masterful as the morally conflicted character who does his best to hold his collapsing life together, while slowly realising that his role in life is not quite what he thought it was in any case.
There are some things this film is not. It's not an action film ... if you expect that, it will seem very slow. It's not a warm and friendly film that leaves you feeling good about the world -- it was shot in winter, just to emphasise its coldness. It's not a comedy in any way, not even through being over-the-top. It's reality rather than escapism.
If you like suspense, unflinching realism, stories of moral conflict, criticisms of corporate America, or George Clooney -- or if you're just in the mood to see that kind of film -- you'll love it. If you're in the mood for a film to wash away the cares of the day (as I was), choose something else.
There are some things this film is not. It's not an action film ... if you expect that, it will seem very slow. It's not a warm and friendly film that leaves you feeling good about the world -- it was shot in winter, just to emphasise its coldness. It's not a comedy in any way, not even through being over-the-top. It's reality rather than escapism.
If you like suspense, unflinching realism, stories of moral conflict, criticisms of corporate America, or George Clooney -- or if you're just in the mood to see that kind of film -- you'll love it. If you're in the mood for a film to wash away the cares of the day (as I was), choose something else.
Saw this at a screening at the Toronto Int'l Film Festival.
This movie is appropriately titled "Michael Clayton" because in it we are introduced to the man in his many life roles; father, ex-husband, brother, son, friend and businessman. Some things he's good at, others not so much.
Terry Gilroy's debut directing showed a controlled and restrained hand, allowing the multi-tracked storyline to expand and grow, but always with a pull back to the core. For a fairly busy plot with numerous sub-characters, he did a good job of turning over pieces of the puzzle to bring the audience back full circle to the opening scene.
Michael Clayton fixes things, but we see in his own personal life there are a trail of problems he's dealing with. It's when he works alone that he seems to do his best work. Once those close to him come into his decision-making process, he lets emotions rule rather than his head.
George Clooney always seems to have a message in his movies, wanting us to be aware of the evil-doers out in the world. His boyish charm and general likability makes you root for him. We can relate to him.
Michael Clayton is a flawed individual who has good intentions but often gets beaten by the world and the people around him. Can't we all relate to that too? This was a satisfying suspense flick. Key to enjoying it is to pay attention.
This movie is appropriately titled "Michael Clayton" because in it we are introduced to the man in his many life roles; father, ex-husband, brother, son, friend and businessman. Some things he's good at, others not so much.
Terry Gilroy's debut directing showed a controlled and restrained hand, allowing the multi-tracked storyline to expand and grow, but always with a pull back to the core. For a fairly busy plot with numerous sub-characters, he did a good job of turning over pieces of the puzzle to bring the audience back full circle to the opening scene.
Michael Clayton fixes things, but we see in his own personal life there are a trail of problems he's dealing with. It's when he works alone that he seems to do his best work. Once those close to him come into his decision-making process, he lets emotions rule rather than his head.
George Clooney always seems to have a message in his movies, wanting us to be aware of the evil-doers out in the world. His boyish charm and general likability makes you root for him. We can relate to him.
Michael Clayton is a flawed individual who has good intentions but often gets beaten by the world and the people around him. Can't we all relate to that too? This was a satisfying suspense flick. Key to enjoying it is to pay attention.
In a world over-run by corporations and lawyers, the little man rarely wins. It takes a big man to keep that world in order. But sometimes another big man comes along to show who really is the big man. Or is it a woman? That said, no big man would exist without the little man - the outsider.
While you can watch this movie and see a good story develop, the story makes an interesting shift. The people become the story once the initial story has laid to bare the reason for the peoples' existence.
I enjoyed it for that very reason. The characters were all extremely interesting thanks to great performances by everyone. Clooney, Wilkinson, Pollack and especially Tilda Swinton(White Witch from Narnia) - I am in love with her acting ability. I will be doing some back-tracking to catch up on what I have missed from her. In Narnia, she was deliciously evil and in Clayton, she couldn't be any worse at being evil, but that was her character. It was fun to watch how she made weakness such a strength.
Wilkinson is such an all around great actor and makes his character seem lovable although pitiful and downright nasty for reasons I won't bring up here. Wilkinson definitely delivers.
Clooney provided the best performance in a long time. I think Clooney has long been an interesting performer but this role is just one of his best - dedicated, sometimes mysterious, loving and charming; even funny and sad.
You may look for more in the story line but you may miss the best part if you don't accept that the people are the story once the movie gets rolling.
8 of 10
While you can watch this movie and see a good story develop, the story makes an interesting shift. The people become the story once the initial story has laid to bare the reason for the peoples' existence.
I enjoyed it for that very reason. The characters were all extremely interesting thanks to great performances by everyone. Clooney, Wilkinson, Pollack and especially Tilda Swinton(White Witch from Narnia) - I am in love with her acting ability. I will be doing some back-tracking to catch up on what I have missed from her. In Narnia, she was deliciously evil and in Clayton, she couldn't be any worse at being evil, but that was her character. It was fun to watch how she made weakness such a strength.
Wilkinson is such an all around great actor and makes his character seem lovable although pitiful and downright nasty for reasons I won't bring up here. Wilkinson definitely delivers.
Clooney provided the best performance in a long time. I think Clooney has long been an interesting performer but this role is just one of his best - dedicated, sometimes mysterious, loving and charming; even funny and sad.
You may look for more in the story line but you may miss the best part if you don't accept that the people are the story once the movie gets rolling.
8 of 10
I'm a student of noir. Its an American invention, something like jazz, and has colored film and therefore narrative deeply and permanently.
My definition of noir centers on the world between the viewer and the story. In the ordinary instance, the characters (usually one man and his girl) find themselves in a world where the laws of cause and happenstance are artificial. Things don't happen as they normally would in life, rather they are arranged. Things are artificially jiggered to produce a story that works for the storyteller. Odd circumstances. Strange coincidences. Unlikely relationships. Things serialized, compressed and displayed for the convenience of the viewer.
The thing that's characteristic of conventional noir is that the thing starts with a real reality. We have a common fellow, nominally a Jimmy Stewart type, who is living a normal life and who gets lifted into a noir fate. What makes this so flexible is that we the viewer become gods, jerking around the character. This allows for all sorts of clever ironies and narrative folding because we implicitly become agents in the story.
But if you are a modern screenwriter or filmmaker, your greatest challenge (usually) is what to do about this. Its something that Soderbergh and Clooney worry about. What we have here is pretty basic noir, elaborated in three dimensions.
The first is that they chose to make our noir hero a full character. No Philip Marlowe here; this guy is comparatively fleshed out and played by someone who knows how to do so.
The second twist has been done before. They add in the world of law. That world has a different ontology in matters of cause and truth, so is a handy one for noir games. For lawyers if something really is true it doesn't matter. Its only true if there is admissible proof that it is so. Cause, the basic thing that is at the root of noir fate, has a similar disconnect between the real and the legal. Normally, this would just be a background element. But here there is something novel.
Clayton's son has a fixation on precisely these matters of real and unreal worlds. There's lots of talk about how they blend, and a terrific device of a lawyer who decides to "change sides." That means shifting from the evil corporation to the ordinary girl, at the same time shifting from memos to a fantasy book he literally puts a "new cover" on a key document. And he shifts from sanity to madness. A key plot point, by the way is that he never did anything without leaving a memo.
This is terrific writing and reason to see the thing by itself. Kid, book, reality.
The third twist is that we have two noir characters. The woman here isn't just a moll along for the ride. She's Tilda Swinton for heaven sakes, someone equally caught up in circumstance. She's probably in her position because of past sexual favors and trying hard to "perform." She's as manipulated by the story as the Clooney character. Its a bit novel and very well done. She's good to have around.
Ted's Evaluation -- 3 of 3: Worth watching.
My definition of noir centers on the world between the viewer and the story. In the ordinary instance, the characters (usually one man and his girl) find themselves in a world where the laws of cause and happenstance are artificial. Things don't happen as they normally would in life, rather they are arranged. Things are artificially jiggered to produce a story that works for the storyteller. Odd circumstances. Strange coincidences. Unlikely relationships. Things serialized, compressed and displayed for the convenience of the viewer.
The thing that's characteristic of conventional noir is that the thing starts with a real reality. We have a common fellow, nominally a Jimmy Stewart type, who is living a normal life and who gets lifted into a noir fate. What makes this so flexible is that we the viewer become gods, jerking around the character. This allows for all sorts of clever ironies and narrative folding because we implicitly become agents in the story.
But if you are a modern screenwriter or filmmaker, your greatest challenge (usually) is what to do about this. Its something that Soderbergh and Clooney worry about. What we have here is pretty basic noir, elaborated in three dimensions.
The first is that they chose to make our noir hero a full character. No Philip Marlowe here; this guy is comparatively fleshed out and played by someone who knows how to do so.
The second twist has been done before. They add in the world of law. That world has a different ontology in matters of cause and truth, so is a handy one for noir games. For lawyers if something really is true it doesn't matter. Its only true if there is admissible proof that it is so. Cause, the basic thing that is at the root of noir fate, has a similar disconnect between the real and the legal. Normally, this would just be a background element. But here there is something novel.
Clayton's son has a fixation on precisely these matters of real and unreal worlds. There's lots of talk about how they blend, and a terrific device of a lawyer who decides to "change sides." That means shifting from the evil corporation to the ordinary girl, at the same time shifting from memos to a fantasy book he literally puts a "new cover" on a key document. And he shifts from sanity to madness. A key plot point, by the way is that he never did anything without leaving a memo.
This is terrific writing and reason to see the thing by itself. Kid, book, reality.
The third twist is that we have two noir characters. The woman here isn't just a moll along for the ride. She's Tilda Swinton for heaven sakes, someone equally caught up in circumstance. She's probably in her position because of past sexual favors and trying hard to "perform." She's as manipulated by the story as the Clooney character. Its a bit novel and very well done. She's good to have around.
Ted's Evaluation -- 3 of 3: Worth watching.
I love this movie - I have watched it many times, most recently last night. It has one of the best collections of superb performances you'll find, wrapped in an anti-corporate Erin Brokovich-like story structure. But what's really going on is the individual characters. George Clooney is so under rated. He has a clear understanding of his role at his firm - he's a fixer, a janitor. But he's really good at it and it's allowed him to fund his other hobbies. The interaction between him and his brother is so subtle New York class structure: brother's a cop so sees his brother as a fancy lawyer; Clooney's coworkers know his background and see him as a cop. Tom Wilkinson is incredible. Lead attorney at the firm, leading their defense of their client, a giant ag company accused of poisoning people. A non-showy naturalistic performance showing someone going off their medication. Or is he just waking up and deciding not to sell his soul anymore? It's a Peter Finch/Network level performance, I kid you not. And finally, my girl Tilda Swinton. She is never ever boring. She is ostensibly the face of the villain in this story. And yet Tilda does something really interesting here. She allows you inside this character's job in a male-dominated corporation, in an awful industry, you understand her ambition, but she lets you see how over her head she feels she is. She makes her character's anxiety palpable. And yet, when the inevitable confrontation happens: she deserves it. You get the feeling, though, that had she been smarter and stronger, the men she works for would never have allowed her to be around. So ultimately they did this to themselves. Finally, the elegant plot structure. You begin near the end, go back to the beginning, and then go past where you started to the end. "I am Siva, the god of death"
क्या आपको पता है
- ट्रिवियाIn a November 2020 interview, George Clooney stated that the case in the film, while about a completely different industry, was based on the Ford Pinto case, where it wasn't that Ford had a car that was unsafe, but that an internal memo showed that they had calculated the cost of recall versus the individual suits from people being killed in the car, and determined it was cheaper to pay off claims and not do the recall.
- गूफ़When Michael and Marty are talking in Marty's home, the glass doors on the bookcase behind Marty change positions several times, probably to avoid reflecting the camera and crew in the glass.
- भाव
Michael Clayton: I'm not the guy you kill. I'm the guy you buy! Are you so fucking blind that you don't even see what I am? I sold out Arthur for 80 grand. I'm your easiest problem and you're gonna kill me?
टॉप पसंद
रेटिंग देने के लिए साइन-इन करें और वैयक्तिकृत सुझावों के लिए वॉचलिस्ट करें
विवरण
- रिलीज़ की तारीख़
- कंट्री ऑफ़ ओरिजिन
- आधिकारिक साइटें
- भाषा
- इस रूप में भी जाना जाता है
- Michael Clayton
- फ़िल्माने की जगहें
- उत्पादन कंपनियां
- IMDbPro पर और कंपनी क्रेडिट देखें
बॉक्स ऑफ़िस
- बजट
- $2,50,00,000(अनुमानित)
- US और कनाडा में सकल
- $4,90,33,882
- US और कनाडा में पहले सप्ताह में कुल कमाई
- $7,19,910
- 7 अक्टू॰ 2007
- दुनिया भर में सकल
- $9,29,91,835
- चलने की अवधि
- 1 घं 59 मि(119 min)
- रंग
- ध्वनि मिश्रण
- पक्ष अनुपात
- 2.39 : 1
इस पेज में योगदान दें
किसी बदलाव का सुझाव दें या अनुपलब्ध कॉन्टेंट जोड़ें