Half an idea is underdeveloped as Hollywood takes the easy way out

Rating: 2/10 (1 May 2008)

In an odd sort of way, The Devil's Advocate typifies what is wrong with so much Hollywood film-making today. To put it simply, there is just far, far less to it than meets the eye. Ostensibly it has so much going for it: Al Pacino, most certainly, and then Keanu Reeves and Charlize Theron, who as actors are both well the good side of mediocre. Reeves,especially, is far better than his reputation as a brainless, though good-looking, piece of meat would suggest. The are other things about this film which are not half bad: the central conceit of the Devil (some of us still feel that old bounder deserves an upper-case D) operating on Earth as a lawyer had potential, insulting though it is to your common or garden lawyer. Then there are the nuts and bolts of film-making. It is handsomely made, with the expected expensive Hollywood production values, and the early scenes 혰 for example, of Reeves in court where his ambition take second place to his scruples and integrity, and later where Pacino's Devil tempts Reeves to throw in his lot with his hotshot law firm 혰 are promising, and you are intrigued just how it is all going to pan out. The scene at Pacino's 'office' at the top of a New York skyscraper complete with what seems to be a small lake in the sky is rather good (and recalls, as it is supposed to, the temptation of Christ). Yet finally that is pretty much it. Characters aren't developed and there is no discernible storyline. The first hint that the hotshot law firm might not be all it seems is when Theron, the young lawyer's wife finding her feet in uptown Manhattan thinks the sees the face of her new friend briefly morph into that of a monster. But this isn't really followed up, either, and exactly why Theron should so suddenly crack up, more or less overnight, is raped by Pacino and finally cuts her own throat are never explained. What the Devil is up to masquerading as a the very rich boss and owner of a Manhattan law firm is also left unexplained. At one point there are vague references to all the evil in the world and how Pacino's firm represents the interest of arms dealers etc etc but this is done in such a throwaway fashion that it is hard to escape the conviction that the target market for this hokum are the Western world's morons. This is lazy film-making at its laziest. Characters and ideas 혰 or rather 'idea' 혰 are simply left undeveloped and any exposition of the central theme of evil in the world and how it flourishes because man's vanity and a lack of a moral compass is not just two-dimensional but one-dimensional. Too much about this film is strip-cartoon like and every last single element of its potential is wasted. After a very promising start it gradually dawns on the viewer that there is simply no point this film. It is not frightening, there's no horror, there is no thought, there is no development and there is no tension. It doesn't hang together and what ideas there are are simply thrown in to flatter those who might think they have half a brain. If they think that this film is in anyway good, then they will have all the proof they need that they don't. The very final scene is very odd indeed and would more naturally belong to a comedy, but nothing which has proceeded that scene would ever make you believe the film is intended as a comedy. Finally, the way the central idea and its potential are wasted is a great shame because Pacino (who never gives a bad performance, not even in downmarket nonsense like this), Reeves (who suggests there is quite a large acting talent there which still largely remain untapped) and Theron (who does rather well despite a hammy script) are rather good.