More to this than meets the eye

Rating: 8/10 (23 December 2012)

Here is a unabashedly geeky review of the movie that I enjoyed tremendously.
This film--and I mean film--is lean and brutal. It has been criticized for being predictable and fans of the Reacher novels have decried the choice of Cruise to play this character on screen. The main complaint about Cruise is that he does not fit the description of Reacher in the novels. I believe that both criticisms are unwarranted--you may of course disagree.
First, the story. As far as the story is concerned, this not a mystery which is solved in the final reel. It was not supposed to be one either and so I am not sure about why some people are unhappy about the plot. All the cards are placed on the table about 70 percent of the way in and I had no issues with that at all.
Director/screenwriter McQuarrie has done an excellent job of structuring the narrative and filming Cruise in such a manner that I loved the "predictability" because the film does a great job of setting up the bad guys that you are just itching for their comeuppance at the hands of Reacher--and the film delivers this in full satisfying measure! This action film does not wimp out in the climax and the on screen events are completely consistent with the remainder of the story.
As for Cruise, well he has toned up and looks mean and moves very fluidly and I had no problem accepting this guy was a brute force with tremendous intelligence --not to be trifled with. The genius of the film is that the director and the ace cinematographer Caleb Deschanel (the father of Bones' Emily) have composed every shot featuring Cruise to maximize his on screen presence: they shoot him ground up; they swoop down from the top; the camera swirls around him and even in medium shots they shoot Cruise to fill the wide screen. This is so well done, I was not the least bit concerned that Cruise, physically, is not the man described in Lee Child's novels.
As for the movie itself, there is not a single jitter shaky cam shot to be seen (at least that registered to my mind). Wow! How refreshing. To add to this bounty, here is a rare (for today when everything is digital) example of filming on film using an anamorphic lens (i.e. CinemaScope). To me it was obvious that a great amount of thought had gone into framing of the compositions. Full use is made of the widescreen aspect ratio. And unlike what happens in numerous "Super 35" films, this director does not crop off heads at the forehead in close ups!
The result? A gorgeously "filmed in Panavision" action thriller. Mr. Deschanel's (he has filmed the Patriot and the Natural and other good looking films) lensing here is a sight to behold: warm colors, sharp focus, and a steady image where you can see and relish the film makers taking you for a ride. Kevin Stitt's editing is also noteworthy (he did Mel Gibson's Payback an underrated action movie leaving aside Mr. Gibson's personal issues). The action scenes are cut to thrill and not disorienting in the least. The car chase is one of the best edited sequences I have seen in recent years. I say this not because the stunts are eye-popping but because you know exactly what the hunter and the hunted are doing or are trying to do at each moment of the chase.
So what we have here is a lean to the bone (crunching) tale, with brutal bad guys who are over matched by a relentless foe who is able to match their brutality measure for measure but one whose moral compass is unwaveringly pointed in the direction of justice, fairness and right. So its a fantasy, no question, but a highly satisfying tale: Well told, well filmed; well acted. I got my money's worth on this one.