The Accountant (2016)

Directed by Gavin O’Connor; produced by Lynette Howell Taylor and Mark Williams

Christian Wolff (Ben Affleck) is a mathematical genius, a loner, because his autism makes him feel an outsider. His accounting skills, however, have made of him a favourite of rich businesses, not always legitimate, which are suffering irregularities in their books. His past and present assignments have brought upon him the attention of both the U.S. government and an underworld hit-man. What they don’t know, though, is that Wolff has deadlier skills than that embodied in a pencil.

An interesting and entertaining action flick with an unusual hero, The Accountant suffers a bit from an overly complicated plot, and, perhaps, a coincidence that’s rather too large. This is the fault of the writing which, however, compensates with an involving and sympathetic main protagonist and a decent script. Wolff is a man whose extraordinary behaviour we can appreciate, and with whose condition we can empathise. I don’t pretend to understand the complexities of autism, so I cannot gauge the accuracy of the character’s situation. (To be fair, I don’t think it is definitely stated in the movie that Wolff is autistic; at one point that condition is listed as something someone identified as Wolff might have.) Nonetheless, within the context of the story, that with which Wolff must contend is made realistic.

As well, Affleck’s performance is commendable. He is not an actor I favour greatly; in most of the movies I have seen him act, he tends to over-emote. Here, it is the opposite; he is reticent to the point of seeming emotionless, though the audience realises that this is a matter of self-preservation more than real feelings. The restraint Affleck shows as part of the character is perfectly suited for the portrayal, and accentuates the isolation in which Wolff lives, an isolation partly self-imposed.

Even so, Wolff’s personality is not simple. As others in The Accountant come to see, he lives by his own moral code, which usually places hm on the side of the angels. He has sympathy for those who have been treated poorly by life, and is ferociously loyal to the few friends he has made.

There is unexpected humour in the script, as well. This is usually provided by other characters than Wolff, or by their interaction with him. In particular, Jon Bernthal as a mysterious hitman and Anna Kendrick as a much less gifted fellow accountant do well. J K Simmons has a role that provides his character with unexpected depth - though this in itself makes one question his initial actions with regard to a colleague (Cynthia Addai-Robinson).

Such a movie as this must have a director who knows how to handle the genre’s scenes. O’Connor does very well in this regard. There are plenty of shoot-outs and hand-to-hand fighting, though none of it seems repetitious, which can be a danger in such movies. Though there is quite a bit of violence, there is surprisingly little blood and gore, which is to be applauded: this puts the emphasis on excitement, rather than brutality, which, really, has as little a place in a thriller as does gore in a horror movie.

The Accountant is a movie that has all the shootings and fisticuffs one would want in an action flick while providing character and sub-text that goes a little deeper than the usual superficiality of the genre.

Niagara (1953)

Directed by Henry Hathaway; produced by Charles Brackett

Two married couples check in to holiday cabins on the Canadian side of Niagara Falls. The union of George and Rose Loomis (Joseph Cotten, Marilyn Monroe) is already shaky just two years into it, with Rose bored with her husband and meeting with a lover (Richard Allan). Ray and Polly Cutler (Casey Adams, Jean Peters) have delayed their honeymoon for three years, but are still rather like newly wedded youngsters. Rose’s disillusion with her marriage has a dark side: she and her boyfriend are plotting to kill George and escape to Chicago, and the Cutlers, trying not to become involved in their fellow guests’ problems, find themselves unwittingly enmeshed in murder.

Niagara has a number of elements that should have contributed to a successful film. Hathaway is a very good director with a number of fine films to his credit (eg. The Desert Fox, Kiss of Death, True Grit), and his direction here is involving, especially during the climax. Use is made of a wide variety of locations, not just the majestic waterfalls. Hathaway includes touches that add to the story and characters, such as George Loomis standing near the base of the falls, becoming soaked, then instinctively trying to avoid lawn sprinklers as he walks back to his motel. There is one irritation in Hathaway’s work, to be discussed below.

The acting is good. Cotten, an old pro, easily captures the desperation of a man in love with someone he should never have married, hoping to recapture what he never had in the first place. Monroe’s performance is adequate, and she satisfactorily conveys the impression of a woman tired of what she sees as the constrictions of her life.

The story is a good one, if rather predictable. There is an inevitability to the actions which, to the director’s and writers’ credit, does not make the finale expected. The air of Greek tragedy pervades the tale, and the roar of the water over its precipice lends a background noise of doom.

Unfortunately, the actual script does not create sympathetic characters. None of the four major personalities are that likeable. The Cutlers are not unlikeable, but neither are they people anyone would go out of his way to meet. Adams (later to work under his birth name of Max Showalter) is annoying much of the time, something I ascribe to the writing and directing (the flaw in Hathaway’s work mentioned earlier) rather than his acting. Ray grins like a silly child most of the movie; I expected him to burst out giggling half the time.

Rose is meant to be the villainess of the piece, so her cold and calculating manner is deliberate. But George embodies the adage of ‘no fool like an old fool’ rather too well, and his petulant, abrasive behaviour does not invite sympathy. And though Polly tries to help, but even her willingness seems one of convenience: she wants to assist but only if it’s not much trouble. All of this means that there is no one to root for, no point of view the audience will favour.

Niagara is an entertaining movie to an extent, but the lack of sympathetic characters leave it with the feeling of watching events re-enacted for a true-crimes tv series, rather than a dramatic film noir.

Cornered (1945)

Directed by Edward Dmytryk; produced by Adrian Scott

Laurence Gerard (Dick Powell), a former Royal Canadian Air Force officer, returns to France shortly after the World War. When his aeroplane was shot down, he had joined the French Resistance, and married one of its members. After Gerard was captured, his wife and fifty others were executed on the orders of a Vichy French official named Jarnac. Though the latter was officially dead, few believe it, and Gerard sets off to find him, the trail leading through France, to Switzerland and, eventually, to Argentina, where the Canadian finds himself involved in a much bigger affair, with more at stake than mere vengeance.

An interesting and involving movie, Cornered’s only real flaw is the overly-convoluted plot, which may have some viewers lost, especially in the matter of an abundance of French and Spanish names that are only imperfectly identified with their owners. This is exacerbated by some aliases being used by those involved. It is a good story, though the writers seem so intent on it that they forget some issues. For instance, Gerard is too impatient to wait for a passport to travel to France, yet he has one very shortly afterward when journeying to Argentina.

Aside from the fact that the plot line is a bit too clever for its writers’ own good, the script is satisfactory. Gerard is a hothead, too anxious to find his wife’s killer to think things through in a number of cases. He comes up against several people who are cooler and more intelligent than he, which leads to complications, especially since there is no certainty as to whose side they are on. This creates a character who is fallible and credible. It’s interesting that others in the film - both friends and enemies - rightly discern Gerard’s flaws, and comment upon them.

Other characters are believeable, too, including the conniving Incza (Walter Slezak), the untrustworthy Madame Jarnac (Micheline Cheirel) and the steady and competent Diego (Jack La Rue). Unlike many secondary characters in other films, these hold their own against the lead, thanks to the writing that creates them.

The acting is also convincing. This is only the second of Powell’s movies after he determined on a change of course for his career, leaving behind the bouncy, young-at-heart characterizations from comedies and musicals, and taking on the tough, hard-boiled rôles of private detective, man with a mission, and the like. Gerard is cynical and single-minded, not even really sympathetic in many ways. Nonetheless, the personality fits well with the story.

The supporting players give commendable performances. Mention has been made of their characters; it is the acting that makes them ambiguous in their morals and motives, the actors giving credence to the writing. That writing, incidentally, does something clever in having Gerard told that Jarnac, a man well-versed in hiding and evading, won't be anyone Gerard knows, thus saving the audience the disappointment of trying to guess the villain from among the people they have already met.

Despite some troubles with the density of the plot, Cornered is an enjoyable, two-fisted film noir that rivals many from a richly entertaining movie era.

The Missing Juror (1944)

Directed by Oscar Boetticher Jr; produced by Wallace MacDonald

Young Harry Wharton (George Macready), convicted of murder and sentenced to hang, was pardoned after new evidence of his innocence was uncovered by reporter Joe Keats (Jim Bannon). That didn’t save him, however, as his mind was unhinged by his ordeal and he killed himself. Months later, members of the jury that voted for Wharton’s guilt are being killed off, and Keats is back on the case, trying to solve the murders and save lives.

What made me watch The Missing Juror was principally the fact that it is an early work by Bud Boetticher (here credited under his birth-name). Best known for his westerns, especially those starring Randolph Scott, Boetticher’s straight-forward style is deceptively simple, and here he shows its origins, embellished by some interesting flourishes. One of those is the technique of changing scenes by taking advantage of the three-walled sets that movies use, and simply rolling the camera ‘through’ the set’s incomplete wall, from one room to another. Subtle swings of the camera give movement to otherwise static scenes. In short, the direction did not disappoint.

Almost everything else about The Missing Juror did, however. The principal culprit is the script. It has the makings of a very good mystery story. No attempt is made, though, to put any mystery into it. It gives the appearance, in fact, of being sabotaged in its attempts to mislead the audience in terms of the killer’s identity. Nor is any motive but the obvious one suggested for the killings, thus limiting the possible suspects.

The first problem is that someone’s body is ‘burned beyond recognition’. To any viewer or reader of mysteries, this is a patent sign. Later, an observation is made by a character that links another character to Wharton. I thought at first that this was a red herring, thrown in by a clever writer. There is no clever writer. Basically, it is the writer figuring that his audience is so dumb that they need a huge arrow pointing in the right direction.

As well, when a character in a movie set during a decade when full facial hair was rare has a beard and moustache, in addition to glasses, one knows that the appearance is perfect for a disguise. Again, one might suspect a false trail. Again, one would be let down. An added discouragement is that this particular character is the most interesting.

The acting is adequate, about par for b-level film noir. Bannon was initially a movie stuntman, and makes a decent hero; he later turned to small roles in westerns. He and most of the other performers are unknown today, though Macready - whose real-life culture and erudition comes through in his acting - had a prolific career in a variety of roles.

With much potential and its few good touches wasted, The Missing Juror spends two thirds of its running time as an obvious, rather heavy-handed tale of demented vengeance. Commendable direction only goes so far.

The Siege of Jadotville (2016)

Directed by Richie Smyth; produced by Kevin Brodbin, Alan Moloney, Ted Sarandos and Richie Smyth

In 1961, a battalion of the Irish Army is sent to the Congo to act as peacekeepers in that country’s confused and violent civil wars. One of the companies is stationed at Jadotville, a hamlet near a prosperous uranium mine. The mine’s profits are needed by the rebellious State of Katanga, which sends a mercenary-led brigade to take the site. For five days, the inexperienced Irishmen endure attacks by their enemies and abandonment by their friends.

The Congo was in a disastrous condition in the early 1960s. Belgium had done nothing in its colony to promote black natives into positions of responsibility. No black African in the Force Publique - the Congolese army - held a higher rank than sergeant. With no one of experience or expertise in control, and no sense of nationhood, the Congo collapsed into rival factions, rebellions and chaos. The central government, with minimal authority and no resources, asked the United Nations to stabilise the situation. This meant, in large part, coercing the break-away republic of Katanga back into the national fold. But Katanga was immensely mineral-rich, could afford a relatively large army commanded by veteran mercenaries, and was backed by rich mining companies and governments eager to control its wealth.

This is the background for The Siege of Jadotville, an exciting and well-made war movie. In any such action film, the battle scenes are those which largely determine its success or failure, and the scenes here are gripping. The siege comprises a number of assaults, attacks by aircraft and tense truces, adding to the suspense of the film.

The non-action scenes can be divided into two groups, those dealing with the soldiers before deployment and between gun-fights, and those showing the political posturing behind the scenes. The former are rather bland, with the usual scenes of farewell among families and the like. There is only so much a script can do with those. The writer wisely left most of the characterization of the soldiers to how they reacted to combat and the situation in which they found themselves.

The back-room politicking is, perhaps, little different than in some other movies, but the level of cynicism displayed - at least in the film - by both the high-ranking UN officials and those of the Irish Army may come as a surprise. Representing both the United States and Irish Army in what was both entities’ first war (the Korean conflict was essentially run by the U.S.), the company at Jadotville found itself the pawn in not just confusing operations but in perception and reputations. This element includes an interesting aspect in the drama.

As well, the mere fact that events in the Congo, and the fighting at Jadotville in particular, are almost unknown, even to historians, makes for greater suspense. Unlike most battles and wars, this one’s outcome will be largely a mystery to viewers.

The acting is uniformly good, Ireland sharing with Britain the apparent ability to find competent actors without effort. Jamie Dornan heads a cast that is probably anonymous to most North American audiences, the only recognisable name being Mark Strong, who plays diplomatist Conor Cruise O’Brien, and not in the most flattering way.

Though it has flaws - the dialogue is unmemorable and, among the soldiers, uninteresting, and the accents make some of it unintelligible - at 108 minutes, The Siege of Jadotville movies along swiftly, and any slow moments are soon finished. This is an entertaining action flick, with a moderate dose of new history for most people.

The Steel Trap (1952)

Directed by Andrew L Stone; produced by Bert E Friedlob

Jim Osborne (Joseph Cotten) has a good job in a bank, a loving wife (Teresa Wright), a happy child and a comfortable home. It is all nice and routine; has been for eleven years, and probably will be for eleven more. But within his grasp are millions of dollars, and the opportunity to take it. The possibility becomes an obsession to Osborne, until he decides to act on it. He has one weekend to whisk his family and a fortune off to Brazil - will he make it?

This is a suspense film that depends almost exclusively on the star for its success. Cotten gives an excellent performance as a man who has his plan all figured out but is swiftly confronted with the fact that the margins that he has allowed for his actions are too narrow. The story-line that follows a well-laid plot gone awry is a familiar one in caper movies, but in The Steel Trap, Osborne’s plan looks viable - if he has enough time. It is Cotten’s frantic attempts to fit his scheme into its necessary chronology that creates tension.

Cotten does not play Osborne as a cool mastermind. He is nervous, becomes agitated, loses his temper; he is clearly not cut out for a life of crime. Yet seeing an ordinary and decent man try to be a criminal makes the character realistic and identifiable, if not quite sympathetic. This is to the actor’s credit.

Admirable support is given by Wright, as Laurie Osborne. She and Cotten worked together as the leads in Shadow of a Doubt (1943) and established that they had fine chemistry together. Playing husband and wife in The Steel Trap, they show that they still have that working relationship, and give the impression that their characters are, if rather mundanely settled in their lives, still full of love and affection for each other. Laurie’s growing concern over her spouse’s unusual behaviour leads to the movie’s climax.

The writing - by the director - is less laudable. For one thing, Osborne’s plan depends on the bank closing at a certain time. In the next week, it turns to its ‘winter’ schedule and adjusts its hours, rendering his opportunities for larceny very slim. He must compress his efforts into a few days. It would have been more plausible for Osborne to wait half a year until the schedule provides him once more with the necessary time-table, as well as with the requisite time to accomplish all that needs to be done, such as secure visas, arrange cover stories, buy aeroplane tickets, etc. It might be argued that Osborne’s obsession with the plan drives him to immediate action, but there is a sense of contrivance to it.

Also, much of what he does leaves a trail of evidence behind him which, while it might not lead to his arrest, would certainly warrant investigation and, considering the resolution of the story, might cause him trouble in the future. Other aspects are more obviously questionable. A customs inspector (Walter Sande) finds a million dollars in cash in Osborne’s suitcase and, though greatly suspicious, releases him after finding that Osborne’s superior at the bank can’t be reached for comment. Luck plays a part in every successful venture, but it is less feasible in fiction than in fact.

The direction, surprisingly, does not contribute much to the suspense. Stone is a competent director, but, if at all, creates tension pretty much through his star, as stated above. There is good use of location, but the action is less than it should be.

The Steel Trap is about a greatly imperfect heist committed by an ordinary man. Thanks to its star, the movie itself is lifted rather above the level of imperfection.