| « Tired Weekend | Slaughterhouse Five (1972) » |
September 23, 2009
The Informant! (2009)

I don't like it when movies use exclamation points in their titles. It always makes punctuation difficult, because I don't italicize movie titles on my blog, so if I type the title in the middle of a sentence, it'll look like a sentence fragment. So, I'll try and write this whole review by either referring to it as "the movie" or ending my sentences with the movie title so the exclamation point feels comfortable.
Over the weekend, Ric and I went to see The Informant! (Now it just looks like I'm excited about describing my weekend.) The movie (ah, that's better) is lightly based on real life and stars Matt Damon, who continues to impress me, no matter how hard it is for me to disassociate him with the portrayal of him in Team America. His character is based on a man who agreed to work with the FBI to spy on his own company and help bring down the people at the top, who were guilty of price fixing in their industry.
The two agents he works with are played by Scott Bakula and Joel McHale (good to see both of them in a bit of a departure from their norms). These two patiently work with an amateur for several years trying to get the information they need. At first, he nervously narrates his life while wearing a wire, but eventually he starts to get the hang of things. Unfortunatley, the more they dig into the story of what they are investigating, the more their informant's story doesn't quite add up.
There's a lot of narration from Damon's character, Mark Whitacre. A lot of the time it shows the aduience what he's actually thinking about when he's supposed to be focusing on something important. In that aspect, as well as the randomness of some of his thoughts, it holds up as both funny and is also important in building up some characteristics that make sense later on in the movie. Sometimes they do seem like a bit much, but perhaps that's because I'm not always partial to use of narration.
Damon is great. He plays a character with a kind of crazy story. But he doesn't overexaggerate and overplay Whitacre. Instead of visibly unraveling on the screen, his story is what unravels, and the characters around Whitacre are the most visibly affected. I liked that a lot about The Informant! All of the supporting actors do a great job too, despite the unfortunate fact that the entire audience kept anticipating punchlines that never came (with actors like McHale, Patton Oswalt, and Tony Hale, it's hard not to expect an ace up the sleeve, but they all play it straight).
Did I mention that the movie is directed by Steven Soderbergh? I almost forgot to mention it. It feels so easy that I keep forgetting to mention him. He has added somewhat of a 70s feeling to the movie, despite the 90s time period. I think it works well because of the nature of the story. The only thing I didn't like were the bright purple titles that popped up once in a while. At any rate, the settings, costumes, colors, and even the somewhat nostalgic feel of how the characters were played definitely evoked an older time period, and it was an interesting touch.
Also co-starring in the movie is a familiar setting - the Red Robin and Holiday Inn in La Mirada. I am 99% certain about this, even though imdb does not list La Mirada as a filiming location for the movie. When you think about it, it's perfect - they were able to use it for a restaurant scene, a hotel lobby scene, and for other hotel room scenes. Way to be frugal!
Overall, the movie takes its time ajd does not come across as a loud comedy, as the advertising (and exclamation point) may suggest. It gathers momentum as it progresses, and by the end, there are some really funny pay off scenes, and Whitacre is more and more interesting. I had a good time with it, and I think I like it more the more I think about it.
Posted by Jeri
at 09:24:26 pm | movies, 2009 | 3 comments »
3 comments
I sympathize with you completely. I refuse to capitalize every letter of Inland Empire even though David Lynch personally indicated that is the proper form of the title, because it would look like I'm shouting or just very excited about it.
I am periodically tempted to italicize movie titles on my blog, especially to clarify the references if a review mentions a few other films, but what always keeps me from doing it is that I feel like it's the last step to finally becoming Mary in every way. I'm worried that if I cross this threshold, soon I will no longer be able to shorten long titles even in a review about that movie.
Anyway, I think it's hilarious that you identify Damon with his puppet. Even though I love Team America including the Damon gag, whenever I see Damon (the person) I never think about the puppet because it was such an alternate reality version of him. Whenever I mention him, someone around me always shouts "Matt Damon!" and it takes me by surprise--Oh yeah, that disfigured puppet was this guy!
It only works with him, however. Whenever I see Tim Robbins or Sean Penn I always think "the guarrrrds!" and whenever I see Alec Baldwin I always think he's going to start muttering "but... corporations and... corporations!"
I don't envision the puppet - I just hear "Matt Damon!" in my head. Didn't Mary use a bunch of underlines? It's so long since we've seen her online that I'm starting to forget!
Obviously there was a part of me that perversely admired her unwavering adherence to the MLA style sheet regardless of context, but mostly it made me laugh because it made her reviews resemble press releases. Unlike other vices, pedantry only exists when it is made public.