Código Preto

This taut spy thriller from Stephen Soderbergh doesn't exactly reinvent the wheel of the spy fiction genre, but it's definitely and thoroughly well-made and well-acted. Viewers should first and foremost know that this is a small-scale drama/thriller without action scenes and mostly set in a handful of relatively confined locations, so it is definitely not like a James Bond or Mission Impossible-style spy movie. For patient and sophisticated viewers who enjoy a lot of cleverness with their mystery and intrigue, "Black Bag" will prove to be an entertaining watch. The cast is generally pretty good, especially Michael Fassbender and Cate Blanchett, who are the two leads.

The film feels stylish and polished despite its small scale and brief running time. Soderbergh's deft direction keeps things running quickly and efficiently, paying special attention to the psychological and intuitive motives of the characters. The plot developments aren't particularly unique compared to other spy films, which is what holds back "Black Bag" from being truly great, but its commitment to creating intriguing narrative tension in an entertaining way and at a small scale is commendable. Recommended. 7/10.

There's just about enough intrigue in David Koepp's efficient script to hold the attention in trying to decipher what is going on in Steven Soderbergh's underwhelming spy thriller which is more like a theatrical play than a cinematic experience.

All of the assembled cast do a sufficient job in delivering a very talky script. I especially liked Michael Fassbender's concise and measured performance as the spy ordered to get to the bottom of a leaked top secret software program that could jeopardise national security where his wife, Cate Blanchett, is one of the suspects.

For me Soderbergh never quite scratches my itch when he attempts to do 'cool' like he did with the Ocean trilogy. There's a cold aloofness that prevents me as a viewer to get completely wrapped up in the story he is trying to tell. Also with Black Bag I wasn't keen on the cinematography which looked like a creative decision to make most light sources seem diffused, presumably to make this look like an old fashioned espionage thriller from the 1960's. Fassbenders character certainly has shades of Harry Palmer to him, especially wearing those trademark black glasses.

Despite it being talky and smart it's not that taut and I would like to have seen a bit more action and a few surprise twists for there to be a better payoff for all the concentration the viewer has to endure to get to a rather mediocre finale.

It started off slow and it is difficult to understand their accents in the opening dinner scene, but it finished off strong towards the end. Don't expect a lot of action but good narrative. Fassbender plays a good robot agent that makes Spock look really human. Typical Soderbergh movie with the pacing of an Ocean's 11 type movie but with a lot less comedy and minimal twists and turns. Blanchett and Fassbender have minimal chemistry, but maybe that was more of a lack of character development in the script. Seems like it should have been a Hulu release as releasing it in the big screen seems a waste. They wasted Pierce Brosnan as an actor for his minimal role.

This is not your average spy thriller: it's mainly talk, tons of it, between a small group of British intelligence employees who all seem to live their personal and work lives in each others pockets and beds. To attempt to add gravitas to the production, the colour has been desaturated and the light dialled down to dull and grim, so viewers know it's a serious drama, not James Bond.

There are a few effective action set pieces to keep viewers awake ( not my wife, unfortunately, she slept through most of it ) but not really enough, I'm guessing, to satisfy the action fans.

For film fans who try to see everything that opens in cinemas, only.

I find myself increasingly weary of the spy film genre, especially those that center around a romantic couple. It has become a trope so familiar, so predictable, that the very notion of it now feels like an exercise in the mundane. Each iteration feels almost mechanically constructed, as if there is an unspoken formula at play, one that prioritizes style over substance, a kind of cinematic sleight of hand designed to keep the audience distracted from the lack of originality beneath the surface. In this particular instance, however, the dialogue attempts to elevate itself above the usual banter of its kind, but only to the point of indulging in an almost ostentatious, borderline pretentious, air of intellectualism. There's a certain artifice to it all-an effort to sound clever, to sound profound, that ultimately rings hollow. The conversations between the characters, rather than offering any real emotional depth or compelling insight, instead feel like performative displays of wit, which do little more than alienate rather than engage. This was a film that seemed more concerned with showcasing its own perceived sophistication than with crafting any meaningful connection with its audience. And yet, despite all its verbal flourishes, it never once managed to grasp my attention in any truly significant way. The pacing felt sluggish, the stakes hardly compelling, and the emotional core-if one could even call it that-was so underdeveloped it barely registered. In the end, it was less a work of cinema and more an exercise in style over substance, one that never captured my imagination or curiosity.