To be fair, this movie has reasonable production value, glossy and technically competent as blockbusters go. But what's the point of spending one hour 50 minutes on this run-of-the-mill commercial release of......what genre? You see, luckless viewers, the film-makers evidently haven't really decided what they wish to make of the materials, which were nevertheless full of possibilities: how sex scandals were received differently by the ruling class and the mass, nature of loyalty in a film-noir twist, the larger meaning of credibility in politics and individual behavior, etc; failing everything else, the sights and sounds of London in the 70s under a totally different social mores can be rendered in a thought-provoking way that invites us to reflect on the present. Or, taking even history out and just give us a wimsical view of London, like Spike Lee did with New York in "Inside man", and David Fincher did with San Francisco in "Zodiac".
But Roger Donaldson is made of more dispassionate and disinterested stuff. Judging from the interview with the film-makers in the DVD, I feel that apart from turning into a well-paid Hollywood hack, Donaldson seems to have no other ambitions, and no side interest like the love of a major city that can deliver anything like gusto to his works. This is the sort of men born to make garbage. As a result, "Bank Job" looks like a graveyard of missed opportunities. Congrats, Roger; you did it.
正片
