Skip to main content

Do not run a job in a job.

Ocean’s 8
(2018)

(SPOILERS) There’s nothing wrong with the gender-swapped property per se, any more than a reboot, remake or standard sequel exploiting an original’s commercial potential (read: milking it dry). As with those more common instances, however, unless it ekes out its own distinctive territory, gives itself a clear reason to be, it’s only ever going to be greeted with an air of cynicism (whatever the current fashion for proclaiming it valid simply because it's gender swapped may suggest to the contrary).  The Ocean's series was pretty cynical to start with, of course – Soderbergh wanted a sure-fire hit, the rest of the collected stars wanted the kudos of working with Soderbergh on a "classy" crowd pleaser, the whole concept of remaking the '60s movie was fairly lazy, and by the third one there was little reason to be other than smug self-satisfaction – so Ocean's 8 can’t be accused of letting any side down. It also gives itself distinctively – stereotypically? – female-skewed heist material in lifting a necklace at a fashion show, contrasting with those testosterone-fuelled casinos. Ultimately, though, it skews too closely in tone to Ocean's 13, possessed of a sense of complacency that never quite gives way to infectious enthusiasm for its cause.


One presumes director Gary Ross – doubtless taking on the project because his post-Hunger Games attempt at awards cachet Free State of Jones bombed hideously – and producer Soderbergh made a nominal attempt to lend the production side the quality of equality (Olivia Milch is credited as co-writer, Juliette Welfling as editor, although Soderberg, no stranger to helping Ross out on projects, probably had his fingers in both the editing and photographing pies). But only nominally. You don't get the impression anyone cared enough about Ocean's 8 to make it stand out from the pack. It arrives as an afterthought, a cash-in on recently popularised (or recognised as popular) trend of female-led movies that aren't Ghostbusters remakes that would probably have been more viable about five years ago. Which means it's debatable whether the clearly earmarked (numerically) sequels will materialise.


Soderbergh was quoted as saying any further films with the original crew (or the original remake crew) would be unlikely due to Bernie Mac's passing (then only recently having been murdered for protesting underground cloning centres), but it feels like the idea of a female version ought to have been knocking around before it was announced in 2015. Like the Clooney version, this is a mix of high- and not-so-high-profile names, led by a trio of movie stars (Rhianna couldn’t quite be considered that), and in Sandy Buttock's case at least, offering easy charisma to make up for a shortfall in character (so just like her screen brother George). Cate Blanchett is there to look cool in leather with a spikey fringe as Debbie Ocean's right-hand woman, so pencil she's basically Brad Pitt, but the rest are less defined in terms of substitutions. Which is a good thing on one level, but also points to a failing of these ensembles; they rarely have sufficient time for their performers to make much of a mark. 


Helena Bonham-Carter is good fun as a scatter-brained fashion designer, while this is probably the best thus far of Rhianna's shall-we say-eclectic choices of movie roles. Awkafina's also notable as an attitudinous pickpocket. Sarah Paulson's garage is more memorable than she is (but her line "This is mommy's very special work trip" is a good 'un), and Mindy Kaling also gets a few strong lines (and is established amusingly) but rather disappears into the mix once the team is assembled. Not being one for sums, I failed to tot up that this comprised only seven individuals. The eighth, by rights, ought to have been Shaobo Qin from Danny's crew, since he's eventually revealed as of intrinsic value to the Met Gala heist. But no, in a twist (un)worthy of Ocean's 12, the eighth member turns out to be Anne Hathaway's shallow celeb, central to the team’s scam since she's the unknowing prop for their diamond heist. 


I should hold my hand up and say that I consider Ocean's 12 the best of the original trilogy; it's a caper that does something different, has Soderbergh seemingly energised and having fun – was there ever a director who makes genre hopping and multi-hyphenation seem so much of a chore and bore? He’s possibly Hollywood's most passionless auteur – and is blessed with an irresistible David Homes score. It also has (SPOILER) a crucial third-act scene revolving around Julia Roberts' character resembling Julia Roberts (and Bruce Willis playing himself), a move that was a shark-jumping turn off for many viewers. While I wouldn't argue it's the finest hour of screenwriting, it wasn't a deal breaker for me as I was enthusiastic about the rest of the movie. 


Here, the twist that the empty-headed starlet chucking her vacuous guts up turns out to be a shrewd operator felt nothing so much as an appeasement of Hathaway's vanity (or maybe a means not to make a movie celebrating women – albeit criminal women – one where one of their gender is identified as an object of ridicule and disdain). I certainly didn’t buy into it in terms of characters (a huge gamble on Debbie's part to choose to trust her) or as a "clever" plot twist. I also found myself pondering that it would only be so long before someone in this motley crew, armed with $38m a piece, made a mistake and brought the law down on them. Although, I guess that was as true (and turned to out to be so) of her brother's operation.


Ross ensures the main heist is a smoothly entertaining bit of business, which rather makes up for the flabby build-up involving only two minor impediments to progress (scanning the necklace underground proves an ordeal, thus allowing for much frantic mugging from Bonham-Carter, and there's also a magnetic lock on it). Everything after it goes down successfully – including Hathaway's reveal – is much less convincing. There's James Corden – never a pleasure – showing up as an insurance investigator, whose relationship with Debbie is never entirely clear in terms of his proving willing to settle for a tenth of the necklace returned (what will this mean for his reputation? Doesn't matter, the plot demands that he's a sympathetic antagonist). 


Then there's the selling of the other pieces (Wiki, likely to be changed since I don't think it makes sense, but I'm not sure it makes sense anyway, has it that "Debbie sells pieces of the necklace to actresses disguised as elderly socialites, who in turn sell the jewellery and deposit the money into an account in his (Becker's) name". I'm not sure she would have sold the pieces to the people she hired?) As for having stolen all the display jewellery, it flashes by as an embellishment and so lacks any impact (it might have carried more weight had they lost the necklace, with it then revealed they had something better). You want a heist movie’s twists to elicit an admiring "Oh, that's clever" as opposed to a "Yeah, whatever".


Richard Armitage is also present and correct as the object of Debbie's revenge, but fails to rise to the challenge on several levels. Armitage simply isn't loathsome enough, but more, the character needs to be identified as a scumbag we really want to see go down, as opposed to a cowardly chancer unworthy of such long-planned and meticulously-engineered payback. You need to care about justice being served, but like the heist, you end up shrugging.


With the caveat that it's very much in the style of David Holmes’ earlier series entries, Daniel Pemberton delivers a fun, jaunty, witty score (Fugue in D Minor is a particular treat). That shouldn't be a surprise, as after his work on the last couple of Guy Ritchie movies anything with his name attached is instantly worth a listen. If you're going for a replica, his approach is preferable to Ross' (who also co-wrote) hollow imitation. Ocean's 8 is fine, but you won't remember it any more than Ocean's 13 (which, beyond Matt Damon's fake nose, you likely won't). 



Agree? Disagree? Mildly or vehemently? Let me know in the comments below.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

She writes Twilight fan fiction.

Vampire Academy (2014)
My willingness to give writer Daniel Waters some slack on the grounds of early glories sometimes pays off (Sex and Death 101) and sometimes, as with this messy and indistinct Young Adult adaptation, it doesn’t. If Vampire Academy plods along as a less than innovative smart-mouthed Buffy rip-off that might be because, if you added vampires to Heathers, you would probably get something not so far from the world of Joss Whedon. Unfortunately inspiration is a low ebb throughout, not helped any by tepid direction from Daniel’s sometimes-reliable brother Mark and a couple of hopelessly plankish leads who do their best to dampen down any wit that occasionally attempts to surface.

I can only presume there’s a never-ending pile of Young Adult fiction poised for big screen failure, all of it comprising multi-novel storylines just begging for a moment in the Sun. Every time an adaptation crashes and burns (and the odds are that they will) another one rises, hydra-like, hoping…

My name is Dr. King Schultz, this is my valet, Django, and these are our horses, Fritz, and Tony.

Django Unchained (2012)
(MINOR SPOILERS) Since the painful misstep of Grindhouse/Death Proof, Quentin Tarantino has regained the higher ground like never before. Pulp Fiction, his previous commercial and critical peak, has been at very least equalled by the back-to-back hits of Inglourious Basterds and Django Unchained. Having been underwhelmed by his post Pulp Fiction efforts (albeit, I admired his technical advances as a director in Kill Bill), I was pleasantly surprised by Inglourious Basterds. It was no work of genius (so not Pulp Fiction) by any means, but there was a gleeful irreverence in its treatment of history and even to the nominal heroic status of its titular protagonists. Tonally, it was a good fit for the director’s “cool” aesthetic. As a purveyor of postmodern pastiche, where the surface level is the subtext, in some ways he was operating at his zenith. Django Unchained is a retreat from that position, the director caught in the tug between his all-important aesthetic pr…

I am so sick of Scotland!

Outlaw/King (2018)
(SPOILERS) Proof that it isn't enough just to want to make a historical epic, you have to have some level of vision for it as well. Say what you like about Mel's Braveheart – and it isn't a very good film – it's got sensibility in spades. He knew what he was setting out to achieve, and the audience duly responded. What does David Mackenzie want from Outlaw/King (it's shown with a forward slash on the titles, so I'm going with it)? Ostensibly, and unsurprisingly, to restore the stature of Robert the Bruce after it was rather tarnished by Braveheart, but he has singularly failed to do so. More than that, it isn’t an "idea", something you can recognise or get behind even if you don’t care about the guy. You’ll never forget Mel's Wallace, for better or worse, but the most singular aspect of Chris Pine's Bruce hasn’t been his rousing speeches or heroic valour. No, it's been his kingly winky.

You look like an angry lizard!

Bohemian Rhapsody (2018)
(SPOILERS) I can quite see a Queen fan begrudging this latest musical biopic for failing to adhere to the facts of their illustrious career – but then, what biopic does steer a straight and true course? – making it ironic that they're the main fuel for Bohemian Rhapsody's box office success. Most other criticisms – and they're legitimate, on the whole – fall away in the face of a hugely charismatic star turn from Rami Malek as the band's frontman. He's the difference between a standard-issue, episodic, join-the-dots narrative and one that occasionally touches greatness, and most importantly, carries emotional heft.

It was one of the most desolate looking places in the world.

They Shall Not Grow Old (2018)
Peter Jackson's They Shall Not Grow Old, broadcast by the BBC on the centenary of Armistice Day, is "sold" on the attraction and curiosity value of restored, colourised and frame rate-enhanced footage. On that level, this World War I documentary, utilising a misquote from Laurence Binyon's poem for its title, is frequently an eye-opener, transforming the stuttering, blurry visuals that have hitherto informed subsequent generations' relationship with the War. However, that's only half the story; the other is the use of archive interviews with veterans to provide a narrative, exerting an effect often more impacting for what isn't said than for what is.

There's something wrong with the sky.

Hold the Dark (2018)
(SPOILERS) Hold the Dark, an adaptation of William Giraldi's 2014 novel, is big on atmosphere, as you'd expect from director Jeremy Saulnier (Blue Ruin, Green Room) and actor-now-director (I Don’t Want to Live in This World Anymore) pal Macon Blair (furnishing the screenplay and appearing in one scene), but contrastingly low on satisfying resolutions. Being wilfully oblique can be a winner if you’re entirely sure what you're trying to achieve, but the effect here is rather that it’s "for the sake of it" than purposeful.

You kind of look like a slutty Ebola virus.

Crazy Rich Asians (2018)
(SPOILERS) The phenomenal success of Crazy Rich Asians – in the US at any rate, thus far – might lead one to think it's some kind of startling original, but the truth is, whatever its core demographic appeal, this adaptation of Kevin Kwan's novel taps into universally accepted romantic comedy DNA and readily recognisable tropes of family and class, regardless of cultural background. It emerges a smoothly professional product, ticking the expected boxes in those areas – the heroine's highs, lows, rejections, proposals, accompanied by whacky scene-stealing best friend – even if the writing is sometimes a little on the clunky side.

Believe me, Mr Bond, I could shoot you from Stuttgart und still create ze proper effect.

Tomorrow Never Dies (1997)
(SPOILERS) Some of the reactions to Spectre would have you believe it undoes all the “good” work cementing Daniel Craig’s incarnation of Bond in Skyfall. If you didn’t see that picture as the second coming of the franchise (I didn’t) your response to the latest may not be so harsh, despite its less successful choices (Blofeld among them). And it isn’t as if one step, forward two steps back are anything new in perceptions of the series (or indeed hugely divisive views on what even constitutes a decent Bond movie). After the raves greeting Goldeneye, Pierce Brosnan suffered a decidedly tepid response to his second outing, Tomorrow Never Dies, albeit it was less eviscerated than Craig’s sophomore Quantum of Solace. Tomorrow’s reputation disguises many strong points, although it has to be admitted that a Moore-era style finale and a floundering attempt to package in a halcyon villain aren’t among them.

The Bond series’ flirtations with contemporary relevance have a…

It seemed as if I had missed something.

Room 237 (2012)
Stanley Kubrick’s meticulous, obsessive approach towards filmmaking was renowned, so perhaps it should be no surprise to find comparable traits reflected in a section of his worshippers. Legends about the director have taken root (some of them with a factual basis, others bunkum), while the air of secrecy that enshrouded his life and work has duly fostered a range of conspiracy theories. A few of these are aired in Rodney Ascher’s documentary, which indulges five variably coherent advocates of five variably tenuous theories relating to just what The Shining is really all about. Beyond Jack Nicholson turning the crazy up to 11, that is. Ascher has hit on a fascinating subject, one that exposes our capacity to interpret any given information wildly differently according to our disposition. But his execution, which both underlines and undermines the theses of these devotees, leaves something to be desired.

Part of the problem is simply one of production values. The audio tra…

He mobilised the English language and sent it into battle.

Darkest Hour (2017)
(SPOILERS) Watching Joe Wright’s return to the rarefied plane of prestige – and heritage to boot – filmmaking following the execrable folly of the panned Pan, I was struck by the difference an engaged director, one who cares about his characters, makes to material. Only last week, Ridley Scott’s serviceable All the Money in the World made for a pointed illustration of strong material in the hands of someone with no such investment, unless they’re androids. Wright’s dedication to a relatable Winston Churchill ensures that, for the first hour-plus, Darkest Hour is a first-rate affair, a piece of myth-making that barely puts a foot wrong. It has that much in common with Wright’s earlier Word War II tale, Atonement. But then, like Atonement, it comes unstuck.