The third big screen treatment of crime novelist Elmore Leonard's work to be released in as many years, "Out Of Sight" is probably the weakest of the bunch. Although it's not horrible by any stretch of the imagination and fares better than a great deal of the flotsam sent forth by the studios year after year, it doesn't compare well with the other recent adaptions, "Get Shorty" and "Jackie Brown." While all three have interesting and diverse criminal characters, the first two films balanced them with well conceived, complicated, and often twist-filled plots.
None of that's to be found in this version from director Steven Soderbergh ("sex, lies, and videotape"). Since I haven't read the original novel, I can't state whether Soderbergh and screenwriter Scott Frank (who received an Oscar nomination for his adaption of "Get Shorty") have changed things much. I can say, however, that the plot here is the weakest element in the film.
While Soderbergh jumps back and forth through time -- a storytelling style that definitely makes the proceedings vastly more interesting than had they all been laid out in a strict linear fashion -- it's not done with as much fun as in "Jackie Brown" nor as effectively as in Tarantino's "Pulp Fiction." Mainly used to introduce other characters and exposition, the nonlinear approach is welcomed, but offers the only zing to an otherwise mundane plot.
Of course some moviegoers will love the complex, quirky and often well defined characters that populate the story. My main objection is that such interesting characters alone can't carry a movie and that's all too apparent here. Part of that does lie, however, with my own predisposition toward strong plots -- and the more twist-filled and undulating they are, so much the better for my personal liking.
Now, I must also admit that I went into this picture unfamiliar with the source material and assumed it would be similar to "Get Shorty" and "Jackie Brown. Thus, I'm guilty as charged for having preconceived notions and wishes regarding how the film would play out. Yet, when it begins with what has to be the one of the most uneventful bank robbery opening sequences in the history of cinema, I knew something was amiss.
Sure, I understand that such a nonchalant scene effectively shows us the lead character's charming disposition and modus operandi, but for a crime caper it comes off as leaden and dull. At other times, such flat scenes are completely unbelievable. When Buddy picks up Karen and carries her toward the trunk of her car, does she scream to get the attention of the prison guards who are just yards away? Not a chance.
My biggest problem with the script is the extremely important moment that follows that particular scene. To make the rest of the film and the lead characters' motivations believable, we're supposed to buy into the notion that enough romantic electricity is generated between them to completely alter their better judgement. As they briefly compared old movies and touched on wondering how things might be different had they met under other conditions, I was able to partially go along with Jack falling for her.
After all, he's that smooth operating con man, and having just spent some time in the joint, would probably be attracted to any member of the opposite sex, especially if they're a "looker" like Jennifer Lopez. However, I didn't accept that same hook being sunk deep into her. Although that notion plays into the "hardened professional woman who has a soft spot for a guy from the wrong side of the tracks" scenario, there's nothing there to make us believe it for a moment (unless you're a hopeless diehard romantic).
Had Karen's character been introduced with a more believable flaw for falling for the wrong kinds of guys (which is somewhat hinted at), I could have bought the whole notion of her being mesmerized by Jack. Without that, however, everything that follows is hard to swallow and the lackluster plot is consequently weakened even more.
Fortunately, and despite those motivational problems, the interestingly drawn characters partially save the day. George Clooney ("The Peacemaker," "One Fine Day") -- who's always seems better in romantic-based roles than pure action films -- gets to utilize that winning charm he so effortlessly exudes in nearly any role he inhabits. With that winning smile and "come hither" stare, his performance should delight his female fans. For the guys in the audience, there's the beautiful Jennifer Lopez ("Selena," "Anaconda"). Playing a determined and professional woman while constantly remaining pleasant to the eye (is there any other way in Hollywood?), Lopez delivers yet another solid performance.
The supporting characters are also nicely constructed, but unfortunately there's just not enough time for all of them to shine. Ving Rhames ("Pulp Fiction," "Mission Impossible") is as good as always, Don Cheadle ("Bulworth," "Boogie Nights") plays yet another tough hoodlum (for which we hope he's not going to get typecast), and Albert Brooks ("Mother," "Broadcast News") is quite funny in his brief role as the wealthy, but crooked tycoon. The rest of the dream cast also includes crime movie favorite Dennis Farina, wacky Steve Zahn, and even uncredited cameos by Michael Keaton and Samuel L. Jackson (briefly, but cleverly playing off their characters from "Jackie Brown").
It's just too bad that director Soderbergh didn't pay as much loving detail to the rest of the film as he did the characters. While he's infused the picture with a 1970's look (bland colors and plenty of meaningless freeze frames), and given Clooney's character the strange habit of snapping his fingers to ignite an old-fashioned cigarette lighter, the plot doesn't carry such fine characteristics.
Unfortunately, the clever and mostly likeable characters (considering most of them are criminals) can't entirely carry the picture by themselves. Without any proven box office draws within the cast, and noting the disappointing performance of "Jackie Brown" (which was, after all, Tarantino's highly anticipated follow up to "Pulp Fiction"), this film seems destined for a brief theatrical run before hitting the video shelves. Okay, but certainly not great, we give "Out Of Sight" a 5 out of 10.