Spy Game

Or is it? Maybe it is easier to ... play it, if you consider it a game? One thing is for sure, Tony Scott is a masterful player ... behind the camera. You can tell with this movie, how he likes to shoot movies and how he likes to create tension, even in a simple scene, where Redford is only holding a cup of coffee and going from one room to another ... insert, camera moves with him, towards him, cut little snippets in and make it seem like something urgent ... masterclass in shooting and editing I'd say.

But that is not all we have here. You also have two wonderful actors ... two people who surely admire each other and play off each other very well. Even if their characters may not agree on many things ... there is some level of respect even in the movie and their playing off each other.

The Spy Game is not something that can be seen lightly ... and something that plays with human life. Where certain scenarios are considered wins, even if a lot has been lost ... you'll know once you see this. I'm surprised I never had seen this before the other day ... but there is only so many movies one can watch, right?

There are many reasons why we like a movie or not. For me, this is the case in witch small things were enough to like it: the two main actors, the places in which the action occurs, and the fact that it has more to do with a love affair, in a tragic atmosphere than about spies. Well, of course this is about spies - two of them - and mostly about the relation between them; if they are similar enough to understand each other, they are also different enough to generate some tension in the relation.

Maybe this is more about how the characters move around each others than about action or intrigue. In fact this is so obvious that the way in which the story is told is mostly in flashback, with Muir (Robert Redford) introducing all of them and narrating part. So, the story is the story and the spy game is what Muir does within the CIA, in 24 hours or so. The distinction is important because if you think of this as a traditional spy movie (maybe like the Bourne Identity or Supremacy) it has two obvious flaws for the genre: the plot is very simple (maybe predictable) and there's no bad guy, no one to kill or to revenge; there's also almost no genuine action, and, as far as I can remember, Bishop (Brad Pitt) only fires one weapon in the whole movie. Maybe what mislead most of the people was the title of the movie, and maybe that's why most of them didn't like it. However, in my opinion, this is a very good movie, with strong leading roles and a compelling story.

No gadgets, no arms, no villains, no action...oh, no,this is a whole different game, and it's a serious and a dangerous game: the game of people and their relations.

That's my big takeaway for this film. It reminds me of good old-fashioned filmmaking where there was a good script, there were good actors and there was good videography. You just can't make them like this anymore. People who have seen the Sting with Robert Redford will feel a bit nostalgic watching this film. I also put the Mechanic in my title because it reminds me of when Jan-Michael Vincent and Charles Bronson made another fabulous film about spies and espionage.

Some people call this a spy film but I disagree, this is a film about two spies who have a deep respect for each other and know their craft well - or at least Mr Muir knows his craft so well that he fools even people he works for, anticipating their suspicions. It's about not leaving someone behind.

Redford is such a stand out actor, he's truly one of a kind. Many reviews mentioned that Redford and Pitt seem to work well together but what a lot of people don't know is that Redford actually hand-picked Brad Pitt and his first feature chatacter was in a Redford film called A River Runs Through It in 1992. Redford is quoted as saying that Pitt reminded him of himself and he had big plans for him. So one would assume they are probably friends, which probably also answers the question someone else had which is why Pitt did not choose to star in the Bourne identity instead of Spy Game - he already had a successful working relationship with Redford. Furthermore Pitt did not need to do the Bourne identity, he had already done Oceans 11 and Ocean's 12 along with a myriad of other incredibly High grossing films, much higher grossing than those that Matt Damon did in a similar time period.

As for people saying that the plot was confusing or poorly written, I disagree on that point as well. Because it has a beginning, it has a middle and it has an ending. The film starts out showing us how Pitt's character gets thrown into prison in a foreign country; the middle part is kind of shown along with the present activities of Muir setting up Tom's rescue while at the same time telling how he and Tom met and worked together in the past. And all this while the audience knows that Muir is planning to rescue Tom but we don't know how until really the final moments of the film, which is the sting more or less. The inserted memories were masterfully done.

For anyone who watches AGT and wonders how those illusionists trick the panel into saying certain numbers and drawing certain pictures, you will learn a lot by watching this film because those psychological mind games of training your audience of what to chose and what to see are very real and they did, in fact, start in the spy arena.

Spy Game is everything we're not supposed to expect from a major Hollywood movie: engrossing, intelligent, well written, acted and directed. But that's just what it is and more, this is definitely the best thing I've seen since Memento. Although Pitt is really good and Redford plays himself as well as he has in years, I think the most credit should go to Tony Scott. In the hands of a lesser director this could have been something more like Mission Impossible. But Scott stays right on target, keeping us interested, developing the characters, and keeping the pacing nearly perfect. Scott also shows us that he's stayed with the times: he employs the full array of modern camera tricks like fast motion, reverse zooms and funky lenses but in a way that actually makes the film better instead of being an annoying distraction. The dialogue feels natural, all the actors do good work, no one tries to steal the show or be the star. The story is interesting and almost never lapses into the kind of hyper violence or sappy sentimentality one has come to associate with modern studio pictures. You get a feeling this is pretty close to how the CIA really operates, a place with fantastic technology at its disposal but who's ultimate effectiveness is determined by the fallible people who run the missions and take the chances. I really enjoyed this film, I hope it's a sign of things to come and not a rarity.

Spy Game will probably never be considered among the best spy movies to come out of Hollywood, however, it is a really entertaining movie with quite a few surprises.

The movie is set in the early 1990's. Nathan Muir (Redford) is a retiring CIA officer who learns that his former protégé Tom Bishop (Pitt) has been captured while attempting a prison rescue in China and will be executed shortly. CIA brass want to know what motivated Bishop to attempt this unauthorized action and they interview Muir to find out. Muir tells the story of how he met and trained Bishop: from Vietnam to Berlin to Beirut. While Muir is setting the background, he is also working secretly behind the scenes to free Bishop. Will Muir's cloak and dagger antics be discovered before he has a chance to free Bishop? Overall the movie is not as good as other spy genre films such as Three Days of the Condor, Spy Who Came in From the Cold, or Hunt for Red October. I think Redford does well in the role of the retiring, slightly jaded CIA officer Muir. Pitt does well with what he's given, though I think his character suffers from poor writing, especially near the end of the film. Think of Spy Game as a more sophisticated Mission: Impossible (that's no knock on M:I) and you'll be pleasantly surprised.