At about the halfway point this changes and Pacino takes centre stage as he tries to get Crowe’s important information on the air for the world to know. This is perhaps where the film becomes a little less engaging. Crowe’s character is more interesting than Pacino’s, not least because he has more to lose. We sympathise with him, connect with him, and root for him to succeed in not only the overall picture but in whatever specific problem he has to face at any given moment. That’s not to say the latter half is not engaging, quite the opposite actually (with some specifically compelling and powerful scenes involving supporting actors like Bruce McGill or Christopher Plummer), but I felt Pacino’s segment was the weakest of the two.
This is perhaps Pacino’s last great performance before he entered his ten-year quality hiatus (with maybe the exception of Christopher Nolan’s Insomnia); he is as intense as he’s probably ever been. His less interesting character is made up for by his brilliant performance. And Crowe is, needless to say, exceptional here, his performance ranking among his best (and I think you’ll agree that’s saying something indeed). He and Pacino play off of one another very well; it’s a joy to watch Pacino’s more imposing TV guy interact with Crowe’s strangely timid family man.
Does the film need to be as long as it is, clocking in at 150 minutes? Maybe not, but this can easily be forgiven if what we simultaneously get is brilliant direction, a savvy script, and outstanding performances. The director’s trademark scattershot approach is nicely complemented with the attention to human emotion and ultimately, even though the film has the attributes of a thriller, it plays out as you would expect from an engaging drama.
Article comments
1 - Jen
This was a brilliant film indeed-- thought Crowe was robbed of an Oscar and you're right, I love Michael Mann and he's a seriously underrated director.