The Recruit (2003)

A benign interpretation of this film is that it is harmless fun with some weak points. The plot is ridiculous, and generates pleasure insofar as one can pick holes in its premise, "twists" and developments. There were so many implausibilities in this film to relate, but I'll stick to one: we are asked to believe it plausible that *elite spies* would believe that someone who graduated "top of his class at MIT", and who clearly has what it takes to earn "200K a year and live a nice life", and who has failed to become a spy would take a *data entry job* at CIA headquarters.

Further, the technical aspects of the film are incredibly implausible: why make a techno-thriller when you can't even bluster a realistic maguffin? We are asked in all seriousness to believe that there is a "computer virus that can go down electrical cables", and that CIA's HQ has "no hard drives".

A more sinister interpretation comes when a bonus on the DVD claims that this film was made with the connivance of the CIA itself. That the film reveals nothing of substance about the CIA's training beyond what you could guess yourself, and shows the CIA to be techno-rich and brain-poor is either realistic and worrying, or, more likely, means that this is probably what they want you to think and that this film doesn't even work on an "insight" level.

In short - stick to Bond; compared to this it appears on *some* levels to be plausible.

Fmovies: The Recruit has too many sub-plots and twists and turns. Pacino takes on the role as a CIA recruiter with a vengeance. Colin Farrell is spectacular as the recruit. His CIA girl friend (Moynahan) is extremely sexy, but Farrell manages to steal the scenes from her, one by one. It's directed with plenty of drama, mystery and intrigue. But there's something wrong with the movie? Could it be the studio? Or the writing? Don't know, I wasn't there. What I do know is that it's a great idea, but someone along the way messed it up big-time. If I was Pacino, I would have final say on the script and final cut. He must have been fuming. To make him do a Scarface sort of thing was absolutely pathetic. When the movie was over I felt cheated. Out of my DVD money and out of a good ending.

James Clayton (Colin Farrell) is a brilliant hacker and was the first in his class in MIT. Walter Burke (Al Pacino) is a CIA recruiter and trainer and invites James to join CIA in Langton farm, using as motivation the disappearance of his father in 1990 in Peru. While being trained, James has a crush on his colleague Layla Moore (Bridget Moynahan) and he becomes closer to her. In a torture training session, James is invited to leave Langton farm. Later, Walter looks for James telling him that he was indeed very well succeeded and he was hired to follow Layla, who is under the suspicion of being a traitor. In the end, nothing is what it seems. A movie having Al Pacino in the cast is a synonym of a good or excellent movie. This one follows the rules. Specially having also the great actor Colin Farrell and the beautiful Bridget Moynahan. Although having many clichés, this film is a great thriller, full of plot points, and in the end, a good entertainment. Fans of this genre will not be disappointed. My vote is eight.

Title (Brazil): `O Novato' (`The Rooker')

The Recruit fmovies. Another in a long line of thrillers that aren't as smart as they think they are, populated with supposedly ultra-smart characters doing really stupid things.

"Everything is a test." "Nothing is what it seems." Doesn't anyone ever listen? And what sort of feeble recruit cracks under interrogation after a few personal questions about sex? If these are the types of people the CIA enlists, we're all doomed.

I'd hoped for more from the Pacino/Farrell interplay which is cute but uninspired, given their talents. The disappointment continues as Farrell and Moynahan generate about as much spark as a match under a cold shower.

Add that to a boring plotline about a dead father and a pointless car chase and it all adds up to a little more than a DTV potboiler with bigger names.

Ironic this movie's made by Spyglass? Or is it? Isn't there ambiguity there as well?

Nothing is what it seems.

Yes the writers could have gone over their screenplay and given it another one-two and that may have raised the caliber another notch, but this is still good entertainment. It won't change your life, but it will be a well spent couple of hours.

And it's true the movie could in theory have had a more sophisticated (ambiguous) ending, but there comes a time, after wading through all the trollop on the market, that one just sinks back and decides to enjoy a better movie for all it's worth.

And this is such a movie: directed by the capable Roger Donaldson who directed the taut thriller No Way Out and co-authored by a writer on The Natural, this one keeps going at a brisk pace with excellent editing and super soundtrack from Klaus Badelt of POTC1 fame. Farrell - who actually comes off smaller than life what with all the tripe written about him, and that's not a bad thing - and former fashion model Moynahan make the sparks fly. You feel for the protagonists and that's an essential ingredient of any good movie.

But Pacino: he's great at whatever he does but is he fated to have secondary roles now? Bah.

There's a bit of a 'Spy Game' feel to things but there's no shameless copying going on. There just aren't many movies in this genre. And Spy Game doesn't have the thrill and suspense this one has. Yes, you might eventually figure everything out before the denouement, but you won't be upset. And odds are you won't figure everything out anyway - some yes; all of it - no.

As for that ending: some people would perhaps prefer more ambiguity. On several planes. Others would say the ending is ambiguous enough. At least on one plane, perhaps several.

Nothing is what it seems.

When computer hacker and barman James Clayton is approached by CIA recruiter Walter Burke he is enticed by offers of information about his father who died in a plane crash, supposedly in the employment of Shell Oil. On the farm (the CIA training facility) Clayton learns that everything is all part of training. However in a world where every act is a deception and everyone holds secrets not everything is as it seems as friends and lovers conceal deception and treachery.

With two real good names at the head of the cast this was an easy draw for me – I wanted to see it before I even knew what it was about and was able to get preview tickets. The main thing to know is that this is a very mainstream thriller. I thought it may have some subversive comments to make about the role of the CIA in this post 9-11 world but it is very straight. As such it is very self contained and never really wanders outside it's parameters and even the computer programme that makes up the second half is never given a global view.

Although this may take away from the impact it can have as a bit of political commentary it does mean that it moves a little more freely and is very entertaining at it's best. The main weakness it has is that it is too twisty. Films that have shock twists usually are shocking because they only have one big twist as opposed to several. The Recruit has so many twists that, after the first 15 minutes, you expect everything you see to be a twist and thus you take away from it's impact. It still has clever bits but I found myself more surprised when things turned out to be what they seemed as opposed the twist I was waiting for.

Pacino is really good in the lead as he gets to play a mysterious sort of teacher type. It is nothing that really stretches his range but he is very watchable. Proving that he does have potential, Farrell is really magnetic when he is onscreen. I have seen him in Phone Booth only a few weeks ago and really like him now. He is sexy but also keeps an air of realism that makes me buy into him (even when his character is a bit Bondish). The support cast are OK but the male duo in the lead basically hold the attention by themselves.

Overall this was a pretty enjoyable thriller that maybe overdoes the twists to the point that you expect them. The leads are good and the film plays well with lots of spy coolness. One thing to watch for is the sign at one point that reads `The George Bush Centre for Intelligence', the audience I was in gave a murmur of laughter when they spotted it!