good movie but a bit disappointing

Rating: Null/10 (19 October 2002)

After reading all those positive, nay, ecstatic reviews from top critics all over the world about this movie, being a big Spielberg fan (if not as big a Tom Cruise fan) I had to see what all the fuss was about. OK, although this movie isn't anywhere near bad, it wasn't nearly as original or as brilliant as many critics claimed. At certain times I felt really uneasy and depressed watching this movie, especially during the scenes with Peter Stormare, whose character is neither funny, nor scary, nor cynical, just plain unlikable in every way. Also the scene with the old woman explaining every detail of the plot in the middle of the movie was blatant exposition and it went on forever. The look of the movie is also extremely ugly at times. Why did it all have to look either blue or grey, why couldn't there be some life and color? I hate Spielberg's new cinematographer Janusz Kaminski, the only movies he shot well were Schindler's List, Saving Private Ryan, and A.I. It baffles me how some people praise the shooting style of the film, and it's even more infuriating to realise that desaturating the color actually demanded a special process, and therefore money. With Private Ryan it worked well, but why the hell was it needed in this film? Sometimes I could barely tell what I was seeing.
Now, I'll admit that was one of the few things that bothered me about the movie. The script is at times unpredictable and clever. The performances are all solid. The Cruiser isn't nearly as arrogant and annoying as usual, like he was in Vanilla Sky (awful movie). The effects are quite imaginative at times, although the ugly cinematography never really allows you to appreciate them (completely unlike in A.I.). Some of the direction is inspired, like when the spiders are searching the building, although mostly Spielberg's touch seems absent from the picture. You can tell by the film that there was nothing personal for him in the script; often the direction is flat and obvious. I think the best decision Spielberg could make now is to fire his cinematographer. I can't tell you how irritated I was by the lighting in certain scenes. Just get Dean Cundey back or something! It is truly, extremely ugly at times; it's almost like Kaminski was experimenting on how bad an effects-laden, expensive movie like this could possibly look, and I think he succeeded. I think he tried to do the same with The Lost World, but only with this film he succeeds in making it look ugly all the way through.
Now, of course there is a lot to admire as well about the film. The most enjoyable scenes come near the end when we discover just how everything worked, who the real bad guy is, why Cruise was set up. It's handled with admirable clarity and cleverness. Also, at those rare times when the movie intends to be humorous, it succeeds. And of course, it's a lot of fun to see all those surprisingly realistic future gimmicks on the screen.

All in all, MR is better than 90% of this year's movies and it's Cruise's best performance since Magnolia. The story is original and complex but never incomprehensible. It's just that it doesn't compare to classic sci-fi movies like The Matrix, Terminator 2, or even Star Wars Episode 2 (although that opinion really is a minority report :-)). Some critics are saying it's better than those films, but trust me that's not true. Among Spielberg's movies I would say it ranks about in the same league as A.I. and Saving Private Ryan (both of which were good but not great movies in my opinion).