The Two Faces of January

Adapted by its director, Hossein Amini, from a little known novel by Patricia Highsmith "The Two Faces of January" turns out to be a highly satisfying tale of murder most foul very typical of Miss Highsmith. OK, so it's not on the same level as "The Talented Mr Ripley", "Plein Soleil" or "Strangers on a Train" but with its emphasis on plot rather than 'action' it's still a cut above a good many of today's so-called thrillers. Also typical of Highsmith is that the principal relationship in the film is between two men, (though one of them is married while the other starts to fall for the wife). The married one is Viggo Mortensen, apparently rich and touring Greece but also harboring a dark secret. The wife is pert little Kirsten Dunst and the man who falls for her is tour guide Oscar Issac. At first Issac thinks he has the upper hand, swindling Mortensen out of a few thousand dollars only to realize quite early in their relationship that he has bitten off more than he can chew. After awhile Dundst's character becomes almost redundant as the men start to play power games with each other. Whereas the male/male relationships in other Highsmith adaptations were mostly homo-erotic with at least one of the characters clearly drawn as gay. Here the relationship is meant to evoke a father and a son, (Issac's character has issues with his dead father). This slightly dilutes the dark heart of the picture. Movies like "The Talented Mr Ripley" and "Strangers on a Train" worked as well as they did because the villain was clearly homosexual and psychopathic and you never knew where his temper and jealous rages might take him. In this movie Mortensen is undoubtedly the jealous straight guy while Issac is just too nice, (he's too sweet to be a real con-man). Still, all three leading players are excellent and Amini tightens the screws very nicely as the film progresses. Filmed, for the most part, in Greece it will also prove something of a boost for the Greek Tourist Board this summer.

I agree with an earlier reviewer that this film derives much of its effect from being set in 1962. The period feel is beautifully communicated and the plot needs to work itself out in a world where places like Athens, Crete and Istanbul were not just exotic but isolated, where holidaying Americans would still be surprised and interested to meet other Americans, and people on the run could hope to hide away. The chemistry between the three leads, who are all well played, does lack fizz and there is a clumsy and rather hackneyed third act. But the film is never less than engaging and all the better for not resorting to surprise twists. The music tries too hard to be exciting, almost as if the director thinks the visuals need some extraneous help to keep the audience interested. I think he is wrong - there is enough going on here, including some fine acting and cinematography, to appeal to audiences who like films with substance, a trajectory, and a sound sense of place and time.

'The to faces of January' is an old-fashioned, decent thriller with a nice sixties setting and solid acting. Everything about it is immaculate. The plot is intelligent enough: a couple of rich tourists meet a young American tour guide, who accidentally witnesses the husband committing a crime. One thing leads to another, and soon enough the guide is caught in a web of lies and deceit, and it becomes impossible to escape without incriminating himself. The crime story is spiced up by the mutual romantic attraction between the guide and the young wife. There is even a sort of life lesson included: money is the root of all evil.

The movie is well worth seeing, if only because it is nice to see a film that's not experimental, violent, provocative, filled with special effects or in one way or another trying to be hip or trendy.

I can see why so many reviewers make references to Hitchcock. The film is set in the early sixties, the era in which Hitch made some of his best films like 'The Birds' or 'Marnie'. Still, this film lacks the touch of a genius like Hitchcock. The characters have no extra psychological layers, and the unconventional scenes and themes that make the Hitchcock-movies so special, are absent in this film.

A thriller centered on a con artist (Viggo Mortensen), his wife (Kirsten Dunst), and a stranger (Oscar Isaac) who flee Athens after one of them is caught up in the death of a private detective.

Not being familiar with the novel, I cannot really comment on if this is a good adaptation or not. But it definitely is not as good a film as it could be. Mostly because it starts out strong and remains strong for the first half hour before suddenly going flat and staying flat. If the film could have kept its earlier pace and tone, it would be an incredibly gripping thriller.

Kirsten Dunst is excellent and understated. Mortensen is not half bad as the con artist. But they seem trapped in this script that never fully allows them to show their potential.

Film opens at the Parthenon in Athens. A young male guide, played by Oscar Isaac, is guiding some impressionable girls. An older couple enter the scene. The male, played by Viggo Mortensen, is mature. His younger wife, played by Kirsten Dunst, looks like Doris Day. Thus we seem catapulted into the Hitchcock era. Film is in fact set in 1962, and all scenes seem authentic.

A central theme of far too many Hitchcock films to list, is that of an innocent man caught up in events over which he has no control. In this film, however, we quickly find that Mr Mortensen's character is no innocent. He is, however, quickly thrust into events that are out of his control.

Within the central trio of characters, it is unclear what are their individual motives, or, who is trying to con who. The sexual chemistry and tensions remind of 'Knife in the Water' (1962).

Film is a true Hitchcockian-style suspense movie rather than a thriller. As the tension rises so does the music, which also is pure Hitchcockian, and could easily have been lifted in great chunks from one or more of his movies.

As the tension rises, so too does the pace. From the start, the film moves at a decent pace, but this builds as the film progresses, and the pace gets faster and faster. Great camera shots, great chases, and iconic scenes, also suggest homage to 'The Third Man (1949).

All location shooting was superb. This reviewer, once attempting to follow in the footsteps of Plato, got lost in the mountains, and had to be rescued by shepherds. So it was with a fond familiarity that I saw those same mountains.

One explanation for the Hitchcockian-feel to the movie can be explained by the fact that the film is based on a novel by Patricia Highsmith. Alfred Hitchcock's classic 1951 film 'Strangers on a Train' was also based on a novel by Miss Highsmith. Thus perhaps it may be more accurate to describe the feel and touch of the movie as Highsmithian rather than Hitchcockian. Miss Highsmith is also the origin of the 'Ripley' stories.

This flawless and faultless masterpiece of a film, is the first full-length film directed by Hossein Amini. He also wrote the screenplay.

This film will appeal to all, though the 12A certificate means that it is unsuitable for young children. Suitable for all others, it is very suitable, and it will be very much appreciated, by classicists and Hitchcock fans.

A masterpiece! 10/10!