Out of Sight Review

Like when I first began buying VHS movies, when I purchased my DVD player, I wanted to only own the old classics and excellent new, indie films. The first DVD I purchased was Steven Soderburg's Out of Sight. It had the indie cred I desired, plus it was by a director I admired. And I am the type of person to admire directors over actors, genres, and type. Plus it didn't do well at the box office so I could feel justified in my ability to overlook the big blockbusters and snuggle into something small and arty. I have since realized that trying to impress some film buff that will never show himself at my house is both immature and not very practical. After a few additional classics (2001, Taxi Driver, and Evil Dead II) I came to realize that there are some extremely popular DVDs that are must haves. It's hard to claim indy cred when you're picking up Jaws and Animal House. Plus my DVD player came with free copies of crap like Michael and Basic Instinct. Add that to the odd assortment of movies I keep picking up as gifts and swiping from my brother via Mom and you have a whole heap of DVDs not worth bragging about.

All of this is simply to say I like Out of Sight a great deal. I have watched it every six months or so since I bought it 5 years ago and have never been disappointed. It is a crime story more interested in characters than crime. Though some of the plot points are on the implausible side, the film is so overwhelmingly enjoyable it is easy to forgive such faults.

Soderburg is a talented artist, though as a director he is a bit of a mixed bag. He has created some truly brilliant films (Traffic, the Limey) but also a few bombs, artistically speaking (Full Frontal, Oceans 11). After starting the indie revolution with Sex, Lies, and Videotape he created the first of several experimental films, Kafka. Thus developing a theme for his films: smart, original films followed by artistic experiments that mostly fail. With Out of Sight he began what I would call his attempt at being main stream. It is based on a Elmore Leonard novel, produced by Danny DeVito and Barry Sonnefeld, and stars a couple of up and commers looking for a hit. For those of you that scoffed at my labeling this movie "indie" do understand that this movie was pre Erin Brokovich, Traffic, or the Oceans series for Soderburg. George Clooney was a television star from ER, but had yet to have a successful movie. And Jennifer Lopez was still Jennifer Lopez rather than J.Lo, Jenny from the Block, or Bennifer. In 1992 it was, well, not exactly an indie movie, but it definitely was not a sure fired block buster. Point of fact, it rather bombed at the box office.

Continued on the next page Page 1 — Page 2

Article tags

Spread the word
Bookmark and Share
Profile image for mat-brewster

Article Author: Mat Brewster

Mat Brewster is a periodic ex-pat wondering if he'll ever find a home. You can find him musing on pop culture, and obsessing over concert bootlegs at The Midnight Cafe.

Visit Mat Brewster's author pageMat Brewster's Blog

Read comments on this article, and add some feedback of your own

Article comments

  • 1 - mrbenning

    Mar 03, 2005 at 11:31 am

    When Jaws came out it was pretty edgy. Spielberg back in the day was comparable to many indie directors working today. You don't lose any cred for picking it up, in my book.

  • 2 - DrPat

    Mar 03, 2005 at 11:51 am

    Thanks for the review, Mat - I had avoided Out of Sight because I can't stand Clooney or J.Lo. I think I will reconsider based on your review.

    BTW, you need to close the italics tag after Animal House.

  • 3 - Mat

    Mar 03, 2005 at 12:12 pm

    Jaws is certainly a good movie. Originally I had this idea that my DVD shelf would be full of semi-obscure, art housy kind of flicks, which Jaws is not. But I am well beyond caring now, and just get what I like or what is cheap.

    Out of Sight is rather good as well. Nothing amazing or insightful, but well made fun. Thanks for the heads up on the italics.

  • 4 - evanw60

    Mar 09, 2005 at 10:53 pm

    The DVD culture, or more, the way people purchase them is interesting. For me, I try to only buy movies I've never seen and never will see otherwise, but are pretty much universally known to be good. OR movies that I've already seen and absolutely loved. I love the idea of having a collection that my grandkids can look at and waste time with. Although NO DOUBT the dvd medium will be long gone by then. That's why I have to by a dvd player and keep it wrapped up! I'll put it in my will.

  • 5 - Mat

    Mar 13, 2005 at 12:14 pm

    Sorry for the delay in reply. I had a bit of a computer problem. My brother's DVD collection is filled with movies he hates, but that were exceedingly cheap at Wal-Mart or where-have-you. My VHS collection was filled with a number of selections like that, but my DVD collection had yet to be hindered in that direction. Although my copy of 2010 is a product my brothers cheap buys.

Add your comment, speak your mind

Personal attacks are NOT allowed.
Please read our comment policy.
Please preview your comment.

blogcritics lists for Feb 11, 2012

fresh articles Most recent articles site-wide

fresh comments Most recent comments site-wide

most comments Most comments in 24hrs

top writers Most prolific Blogcritics for January

top commenters Most prolific Commenters in 24 hrs