A hired hit man snags a cab on his way to put down five targets. When things go wrong and the cabbie learns what is going on, he improvises and creates a plot not only filled with mystery and action, but ethical and moral questions. Vincent (Tom Cruise) has been working as a private hired hand for six years and he is now back in L.A. fulfilling his most recent assignment. But what he least expects is to find a cabbie who questions everything and is not as willing to cooperate as some of his predecessors were. Max (Jamie Foxx) has his head screwed on straight and has a clear image of his future, but when this crazy hitman steps into his cab offering him a huge amount of cash, his future blurs and his ethics crack. Where does that leave our duo of tragic figures?

The acting in Collateral was a high point of the film. Jamie Foxx (Ali, Bait) reunites with Michael Mann (Ali, The Insider) and is quite enjoyable here, probably more than in any other film I have seen him in. He still had the comedian air to him, but it was subdued and fit into his character quite well. Foxx, of course, is the moral character who has his life in check and is tortured by the corrupt will of Vincent. He develops feelings for District Attorney, Annie (Jada Pinkett Smith), after a profound drive to her office the night he meets Vincent, and finds her a solid rock in his hectic world soon to become even more strenuous.

Yet, Tom Cruise (The Last Samurai, Mission Impossible) brings Vincent in as an alternative to Foxx's hardworking, blue-collar world. He is from the other side of the law where you make a quick buck by being a hired gun. He offers Foxx a chance to be on this side of his world by offering him the money to hire out of his cab, even though Foxx knows it is not the right thing to do. Cruise brings a much-needed attitude and ferociousness to Vincent that not many other actors could bring and he does an impressive job, despite his silver hair, which is reminicent of Richard Gere. Vincent is slick, he is no nonsense, and he reads humans as well as Foxx seems to.

Likewise, Mark Ruffalo (13 Going on 30, Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind) is clandestine in his role as Detective Fanning. Not only does Ruffalo shed his recognizable demeanor, he creates a character wholly his own. Fanning is, of course, a stock character. He's a policeman who has something to prove, because his toes are being stepped on, but Ruffalo portrays this with such finesse, it is impressive. If it weren't for his voice, I probably would have been shocked to find that this was Mark Ruffalo at all. Not his best role, but probably his most impressive acting job to date. Completely becoming your character without any previous strings attached is hard. Ruffalo accomplishes this and becomes a likeable and sympathetic character within the plot.

Somehow, though, despite the wonderful acting talent, the layout of events was a tad predictable. I, for one, am not the type to predict endings and claim I knew what was going to happen next in a movie, but this film makes the direction of its unraveling too obvious and pretty much tells the audience what will happen as the film unfolds. The "hints" are made too explicit and make the film somewhat less entertaining for its lack of technique.

I have seen a growing trend lately in the quality of picture with action films. The trend is not as great as maybe some directors would like us to think. I first noticed it this year with The Bourne Supremacy. Too many times I wanted the camera to stop moving and focus so that I could get a clear image of the impressive action sequence that was unfolding. This time I saw it in Collateral. Too many times the picture is blurry in the background and lacking in clarity, especially with the characters moving as much as they do. Many shots, when the characters are not in the cab, have them at very close range and so the the character is in sharp focus, while nothing else is at all distinguishable. When this occurs in the cab and Cruise moves, you are forced to readjust to the image. There are too many scenes with which I have problems picturing the exact setting in crisp focus and this film style begets that.

Another visual problem is with the shaky camera work. Mann attempts to create a gritty and personal feel to Collateral and while he achieves this, it mildly detracts from the film. When the final plot points unfold, this awkward style of filming slowly dissipates and events becomes more clean and clear cut, but because of these two particular styles Mann has decided to implement it becomes hard to stay absorbed in the film and the audience is forced to constantly remember they are merely viewers and not one of the passengers along for the harrowing ride.

Michael Mann does not direct this project as well as he has others in the past, but does an estimable job with the shallow plot. I will give him credit for breaking free of the horrible style evident in Manhunter, and overall he is a competent director. He guides his cream-of-the-crop cast with ease and despite the camera flaws, does a does a decent job bringing everything to a head. I think the shoddy camera work harkens back to Manhunter, which was also distracting and jarring to look at. He might need to spread his wings more and we'll see where he goes in the next five years.

Collateral is an action packed ride. Maybe not as action driven as say Kill Bill Vol. 1 or Spider-Man 2, but more so than Phone Booth, which is a pretty decent comparison as the protagonists in both films are kept exposed and confined in an urban death trap by cold-blooded and psychoanalytical killers. It has its moments of amazing events and it has its scenes where you might wish you had walked out or you were made to feel uncomfortable, but overall Collateral delivers and follows through with what the previews and commercials promise. Visual marring aside, the film is sure to please a wide audience and it is certainly worth a night out at the theater.
 

<<<Back