Quote:
| I agree. The movie does not feel casual in the slightest. Everything from the camerwork, to the dialogue, to the character motivations feels artificial and forced. |
Funny, that's how I feel about 11 in comparison now. The acting and dialogue feels a little forced, while the performances and writing in 12 seem relaxed, improvisational and confident.
Plus, I think it's got a lot more meat on it than the first one...it's just harder to notice right away. A lot of folks are complaining about the lack of actual "heists" in comparison to the first movie...but I think that's the point. Soderbergh isn't interested in the heists...they've been done before...they've been done by HIM before. Notice the emphasis on performance, rehersal, acting and acting techniques....and also, relationships between audience and entertainer...thief and victim, in this case. Basher, fittingly, comments on accents. Willis complains about everyone being wise to the ending of the Sixth Sense. The entire crew is being filmed by the Nightfox the whole time and are forced to put on an elaborate act. That's why the two real (one botched) heist is rushed (one time, literally so). The emphasis is not on crime or cons, it's on acting, directing and performance. In a way, I see this more as a (superior) sequel to Full Frontal than Oceans 11. Here's an e-mail I exchanged with a friend of mine, containing a lot of our thoughts on the film. It's long, so be warned...but honestly, I think some of it is valid.
1) The opening scene, when CZJ announces to Pitt that by tomorrow she'll know everything about the thief,
including his choice of personal hygiene products. Pitt launches himself out the window. Is this
Soderbergh commenting on nosy fans and papparazzi? Could be. How about when CZJ marches through the Dutch recluse's house, trying to figure out what went down? I've interpreted her in this scene as that
person watching THE SIXTH SENSE or any thriller/mystery, wanting to know all the angles, trying to figure out if and how she's been duped. Why is she the only one to expose Tess as a Julia
Roberts impersonator by noting that Roberts is left-handed? Because she's a fan! The final sequence
-- as the whole gang sits around gambling -- is crucial. Isabel is invited in to the group, and the
next series of images are of her being entertained (and probably conned, much like the audience). The final shot is of her falling off a chair, drunk and laughing. She stands to exit frame left and
Soderbergh freezes her in mid-cackle, then puts the image out of focus. And notice that when the face
blurs it ceases to be CZJ or Isabel -- this could be any number of people. Since the film's title appears
over a shot of Isabel, and ends with a shot of Isabel, I'm pretty sure that she (and, ultimately, the viewer)
is meant to be the "twelfth" person, sitting at the table with these movie stars and being entertained for
a few hours.
2) Though CZJ is obviously portraying Isabel for the entire film, she is also on one level representing the
audience and sometimes (but never at the same time) herself. What scenes am I thinking of when I say
this? The big one is when she goes in to interrogate Robbie Coltrane, and makes him spill his guts within a
minute based on something she whispers in his ear that we do not hear. Notice that this entire scene is
framed by a two-way mirror, and the cops watching the proceedings (who don't believe she can break the
suspect) become an audience. What are we supposed to think here? On a literal level we understand that the character, Isabel, is so tough and so smart that she can make a professional criminal burst into tears,
which is extraordinary considering that many others have not even gotten the needed information from this
man. But...how about the idea that CZJ can break him SIMPLY BECAUSE SHE IS CATHERINE ZETA-JONES, MOVIE STAR? After all, we've paid admission to see Catherine Zeta-Jones play a tough broad -- not the
faceless extra who is interrogating Coltrane moments before she arrives. What are we to make of the moment when Isabel nonchalantly applies lipstick during an otherwise tense confrontation with Rusty? In front of a mirror, no less, framing the actress once again as she poses for the camera. Notice also the way
Soderbergh films her kiss with Pitt -- he starts in a long shot from across the bedroom and then zooms in
for an extreme close-up. Perhaps too extreme. It's supposed to make you feel voyeuristic. But then
again, part of why some people go to such movies is to see if their favorite movie star knows how to plant a
smoocher. Soderbergh has even said on his OUT OF SIGHT commentary that when characters take their
clothes off and make love in movies, it draws attention away from the character and puts it on the
actor. Viewers say to themselves "Wow, those are so-and-so's tits, that's so-and-so's ass," etc. Six
years later and here he is making a similar comment in one of his other films.