An editorial by Brooks Rich
Let's discuss Michael Mann's 2004 film Collateral, where Tom Cruise plays a contract killer who forces cab driver Jamie Foxx to drive him around as he completes his jobs for the night. I was eighteen when this movie came out and thought it was the coolest fucking thing I had seen in years. I still really like this film but I think two aspects of it prevent it from achieving masterpiece status. This is an editorial for people who have seen Collateral so spoiler alert.
I believe the third act betrays the rest of the film. For the first two acts Cruise and Foxx are playing a game of cat and mouse, each man looking to one up the other. It's a battle of wits punctuated by flashes of violence from Cruise. In the third act Cruise becomes a stereotypical villain chasing his prey. The sophistication of the interaction between the two men goes away and it's just Cruise chasing Foxx and the lady he met for five minutes and now feels he has to save. This film deserves better than to end with a standard Hollywood chase.
The second issue plays into the first. In the film Mark Ruffalo plays an LAPD detective who puts together that there is a contract killer in town. He is an important character and is killed by Cruise near the end of the second act. His death is what makes Foxx eventually fight back against Cruise. He crashes his taxi and the two separate and that takes us into the weak third act. Having Ruffalo's character basically act as a macguffin to jumpstart the climax feels cheap. There had to be a better way to have Foxx's characters finally rebel against Cruise. He's already seen him kill several people. Why is it the death of this one cop that sets him over the edge?
I really like this movie. But I do not consider it one of Mann's masterpieces like Heat and The Insider are. That third act is too detached from the rest of the film and Ruffalo's characters is mishandled near the end. Collateral is still a good movie but in my opinion, it never becomes a great movie.
Let's discuss Michael Mann's 2004 film Collateral, where Tom Cruise plays a contract killer who forces cab driver Jamie Foxx to drive him around as he completes his jobs for the night. I was eighteen when this movie came out and thought it was the coolest fucking thing I had seen in years. I still really like this film but I think two aspects of it prevent it from achieving masterpiece status. This is an editorial for people who have seen Collateral so spoiler alert.
I believe the third act betrays the rest of the film. For the first two acts Cruise and Foxx are playing a game of cat and mouse, each man looking to one up the other. It's a battle of wits punctuated by flashes of violence from Cruise. In the third act Cruise becomes a stereotypical villain chasing his prey. The sophistication of the interaction between the two men goes away and it's just Cruise chasing Foxx and the lady he met for five minutes and now feels he has to save. This film deserves better than to end with a standard Hollywood chase.
The second issue plays into the first. In the film Mark Ruffalo plays an LAPD detective who puts together that there is a contract killer in town. He is an important character and is killed by Cruise near the end of the second act. His death is what makes Foxx eventually fight back against Cruise. He crashes his taxi and the two separate and that takes us into the weak third act. Having Ruffalo's character basically act as a macguffin to jumpstart the climax feels cheap. There had to be a better way to have Foxx's characters finally rebel against Cruise. He's already seen him kill several people. Why is it the death of this one cop that sets him over the edge?
I really like this movie. But I do not consider it one of Mann's masterpieces like Heat and The Insider are. That third act is too detached from the rest of the film and Ruffalo's characters is mishandled near the end. Collateral is still a good movie but in my opinion, it never becomes a great movie.
Comments
Post a Comment