Espion(s)

I was looking forward to this bilingual European movie. However it turned out to be quite preposterous. The music was very good, cinematography reasonably good, interesting locations. But it became hard to believe in the characters, especially the leading man. On the one hand he is a thief, he drinks incessantly, using drugs frequently and yet he is set up to portray a doctor involved in international humanitarian work and has to pull that off against masterful forces in espionage. Not only does he tackle characters written as heavyweights in the spy business, but he clearly defies those who are giving him a break and then unbelievably gets caught up in tearful grieving for one of the characters whom he is disobeying. The script seems to have been written as the movie proceeded from one scene to another. There is no real connectivity or logic to the protagonists actions whether in his role as the humanitarian or as the hapless degenerate druggie who got caught out. The premise of using such a loser for an important international espionage event boggles the mind. The principal women of the film while reasonable good actors and very attractive really are unable to pull off two of the films turning point events, solely because of the impracticality and unbelievability of their tasks - again, it looks like a script written on the fly. Finally, what is it about films that have the central stars locate each other in one of the world's busiest airports? Most of us have trouble finding a washroom.

Previous reviewers have poured scorn on a plot they find threadbare, disjointed, and derivative. One is even upset because it seems insouciant about the geography of London, as if works of imagination have to conform explicitly to street plans.

Coming from a cinephile nation, the film's mismash of works like "Notorious", "Vertigo", "Blow-Up", and "Frantic" offers us a cheerful reuse of plot elements from iconic directors of the past in deliberate homage. Like so much of French art, it is not really concerned with plot mechanics but with people, with characters and how they interact.

Watch it for the things like the hesitations as people are unsure how others will react, the statements that the speaker cannot wholly believe or expect the hearer to wholly accept, the ever-varying play of emotions between a man and a woman who are attracted to each other. Enjoy the parallels beween the multiple deceits of spying and those of love.

I do think that Guillaume Canet is one of our best French actors (and he may become one of our best directors).He is fluent in English (the movie is half French half English for most of the action takes place in London).But this is not a movie he will be remembered for. After a promising start,when Canet seemed to be "framed up" and caught in a mysterious cobweb (kudos to Hippolyte Girardot ,who makes the best of a non-existent part and is the only one to generate some thrills ),the movie sinks into "dejà vu" .

As soon as Canet arrives in London town ,all that must happen happens: obviously the usual suspect has a gorgeous wife ,a wife who falls for (well have a guess?) ;the hero just pretends but he is in love too obviously as the last sequences show;there's the obligatory chase scene in the tube;there's the obligatory terrorism subject.A computerized screenplay based on too many American thrillers .Stephen Rea and his unfortunate son bring the melodramatic touch.

This nice little European thriller offers a mix of romance, drama and even some bits of action. The premise is simple. Vincent (Guillaume Canet) is a smart, educated young man who has a history of "illicit activities". One day, at his job at the airport, he and another corrupt colleague look at diplomatic luggage in the hope of scoring some valuable. Instead, Vincent is catapulted in an international terrorist conspiracy that will change the course of his life.

Espion(s) features an international-flavored cast and takes place in the UK and France. The movie features dialogs both in French and English and will be best enjoyed by those fluent in both languages since it switches so often. I think this gives an air of authenticity to this movie that I would like to see more often but those who aren't bilingual or hate subtitles might not appreciate it as much.

Nicolas Saada's direction is effective. There is an air of big budget movie, yet firmly European feel. The music of composer Cliff Martinez is punchy, effective yet elegant. The photography is crisp and clean if a little uninspired at times. We wish for more memorable shots and more glimpses of the cities, of the sets, of the action. But Saada mostly concentrate on the characters. Vincent is thrown in this world of agents, high rollers, opportunists, innocents and terrorists. A world he doesn't know much about but that seems to give him a second life.

Vincent is a classic underachiever and is Claire (played by beautiful Géraldine Pailhas), the disenchanted wife of a rich businessman who simply took the easiest way to security. Their relationship, their romance, is somewhat understated yet pleasant to see unfold. Veteran star Stephen Rea gives his usual solid performance but it feels like he was underused. It was also nice to see the talented Archie Panjabi do the best she could with her smaller but important role. If there was a disappointment, it was with the antagonist Alexander Siddig, who mails his performance despite having perceivable charisma and magnetism. He has very little to work with and we never care much for him, which makes the movie's main threat less palpable.

Where this movie shines is as a drama. Guillaume Canet gives yet another solid performance. He's been consistently proving that he is leading man material in whatever he is featured in. He gives multi-dimensionality to a sparsely written character. Where the movie lacks the most is action scenes. Not the number of them, but the execution. They do fall a little flat and uninspired. As everything else, the golden rule is that if you are going to do something, do it well. The knife fight scene and the final airport scene were not essential to the story and the script could have been reworked to avoid those. If they are kept, a director must inject more conviction and character in there.

This is a recommended movie and very enjoyable, although repeat viewings are not very likely.

Well, Canet and Geraldine beat Cassel and Bellucci but at the end, both movies should be taken with gloves. It's funny to see that Canet does a lot of losers, destructive characters and he is rather good here. Unlike Hollywood productions and similar to British spy literature, the case is not a question of technology but relies on ground job. For a french movie, it's a good thing that the action happens in London because for one time, we discovered the real city (more beautiful and easy than Paris !). But Geraldine is a bit transparent as the french wife being probed. Furthermore, the audience isn't candid and when a country releases a movie paying tribute to its intelligence services, we know what we can expect