The plot: After an injury cuts her career as a ballerina short, Dominika (Jennifer Lawrence) is left with a terrible choice: Submit to her circumstances or work for the Russian government as a Sparrow.
As she learns the ways of the Sparrow, using seduction and psychology to intercept targets, she becomes entangled with CIA agent Nate Nash (Joel Edgerton) after accepting an assignment to find a Russian mole that Nate works with. Between the government forcing her hand, her fellow agents showing signs of distrust and the actual warmth shown by Nate, it seems Dominika will have to think fast if she wants to get out of this situation alive.
As troubling as it is that Lawrence’s stock
character appears to “woman pushed into extreme circumstances at the whims of
men”, between this, mother! and the Hunger Games series, credit to her for
selling every compromised emotion that she’s given. Alluring, conflicted,
traumatised, sharp; whatever the story requires her to be, both in and out of
universe, she manages to fit the mold. Edgerton, playing the CIA agent with the
most American name in the history of espionage, works well with the more
socially isolating aspects of spy work and his chemistry with Lawrence evens
out, but something tells me that his inclusion in the plot could have been
handled better (starts well with the opening, feels intrusive in the first act,
and then back to fine for the rest of the film; it’s weird).
Charlotte Rampling as the
Matron of the Sparrow School is as cutthroat as the Soviet sickle, embodying
the very confronting politique at the heart of this story, and her scenes in
the… uh… I guess it can be called a classroom, are very effective because of
her sheer unnerving presence. Jeremy Irons and Ciaran Hinds as two Russian
colonels only manage to occupy space and deliver pretty basic ‘progress report’
dialogue, and Matthias Schoenaerts as Dominika’s very Putin-looking uncle adds to
Rampling’s performance as far as furthering the spirit-breaking core of the
film.
So, we’re looking at a female-lead spy thriller
centred on a conflict between the U.S. and Russia… again. As easy as it would
be to just go straight to the comparisons between this and Atomic Blonde, they
are ultimately playing from completely different playbooks. This is far more
moody than action-oriented, striving to dig into the audience’s skin rather
than get their hearts racing. The way that director Francis Lawrence chooses to
get this across skates the line between gritty and gratuitous with alarming
regularity, never holding back on the blood and bruises while also letting some
rather classical Russian architecture balance it out. The opening, featuring
Dominika performing ballet intercut with Nate Nash (that name isn’t getting any
less silly) out on an assignment, shows this work of contrast at its purest.
Of
course, it can get rather confronting when the film’s approach to murder, sex
and spy work intertwine, resulting in moments in the Sparrow school that enter
mindfrag territory in how jarring they can be. Add to this the rather plain spy
narrative, which plays out suspiciously close to the main plot of Atomic Blonde, and you have definite skill behind the camera, but not the deftness
of touch to make it fully bloom.
That makes things a little difficult when this
film has quite a bit of textual gold to be unearthed. For a start, this film’s
approach to sex and sexuality is very pointed and has a definite point to make.
Given the West’s familiarity with gentlemen spy tropes thanks to the proclivity
of James Bond, “probing for information” is a recognisable double entendre.
Here, that idea of sex on the job in espionage is put under the microscope and
we are shown how a body is tempered to prepare for such encounters. Knowing the
right buttons to push, being able to separate one’s emotions from one’s work,
even submitting to the act against one’s own will.
Yeah. This film’s use of
rape is more than a little suspect, given how tonally awkward it can be in
places, but at the same time, the filmmakers seem to understand the real intent
behind such an act: Not sexual gratification, but exerting power. And that is what this film uses sexuality
as: One of the more potent means in the arsenal to get close to a target. It’s
weaponised as a means of creating control, and not only do the scenes involving
sex work because of how just much pain had be gone through in order to reach
that stage, but also because they highlight something real and tender between
Dominika and Nate.
Of course, the use of sex as a weapon and
tempering tool for the human body is just a slice of the film’s bigger motif:
The power of the Russian state. Much like Leviathan from a few years back, this
film’s depiction of Russian society is a harrowing one, one that boils down the
individual identity until all that’s left is what can serve the whole. What
makes the more brutal scenes involving Dominika hit as hard as they do is
partly due to the graphic details involved, but also because we know that every
single situation Dominika is in has been forced upon her. She is not a person in
her own right. Her will, her body, her being; all of it belongs to the state,
and they will use it as they wish or she won’t even have a body anymore. A
recurring motif of the film involves characters saying that there is no such
thing as luck and that everything happens for a reason; this certainly shows
the more depressing side of that stance.
This is where the spy plot actually
manages to pick up a bit, as we see Dominika not only being forced by her
government to do their dirty work but also surrounded by
potentially-untrustworthy faces. It builds on the usual sense of paranoia that
spy capers make their names on by drawing attention to how much reason Dominika
has to be paranoid. As a result, we have a film that seems well-fitted for
today’s rather shaky climate as far as Russian involvement is concerned, and
yet doesn’t enter the realms of propaganda; it’s brutal, but it also seems to
come from a learned place.
All in all, while quite rich as far as writing goes (bit of
a surprise, coming from the writer of A Cure For Wellness) and boasting a
pretty solid performance from Jennifer Lawrence, it doesn’t keep up its own
momentum for enough of the far-too-lengthy running time. It makes interesting
points on communism, espionage and sexual power, yet seems far more interested
in regular spy shenanigans to focus on it too much; most of the good stuff ends
up relegated to the first half of the film. This is a situation much like
2015’s Joy where the film could easily work solely off of Lawrence’s
performance, but the presence of more gripping material between the lines just
gives me the feeling that there is a more focused, shorter and altogether
better film lying in wait somewhere in here. As it stands, though, it’s decent.
Not great, but decent.
Great review..comprehensive and insightful.
ReplyDeleteLOL...I enjoyed the movie but didnt really understand why until you explained it to me.
Ive just added your blog to my bookmarks knowing that in the future you'll help me out of a similar predicament.
Keep producing critique like this and you'll go places.
Cheers and all the best.