Matchstick Men
It’s not often these days that I go to a film and have no idea what I’ll be watching. Usually the process begins a year before the release date, and goes something like this:
“They’re adapting [FAVOURITE TEXT]!!! [FAMOUS BUT ARTISTIC DIRECTOR] is in charge!!”
“They’ve cast [HANDSOME YET CHARISMATIC ACTOR] and [INSANELY HOT YET INTELLIGENT SEEMING ACTRESS]…”
“The trailer’s coming out in a month, should be awesome…”
“They’ve changed WHAT??? I suppose it’ll be alright…”
“Jeez, cool trailer. [ACTOR] looks perfect. [KEY SCENE] not quite as I expected…”
“I suppose I can live with changes to the text, as long as they make sense movie-wise.”
“Woah, new trailer!”
“Seems to have gotten decent reviews in the US. Oh bugger, I read a spoiler. Can’t be important…”
“Ah, the film. Hmmm. Well. That all went pretty much as I expected.”
This of course is completely irrelevant to Matchstick Men but I just thought I’d share. In this case, all I knew was that a bunch of reviewers had enjoyed it, and that Nicholas Cage was in it. No trailers, no plot details, nothing. The sensation was refreshing, but frankly I suspect that having known a bunch of stuff about it wouldn’t have changed it, since Matchstick Men is one of the freshest and brilliantly directed films I’ve seen in a while.
Having been one of the six people who didn’t enjoy Gladiator particularly, Ridley Scott’s name didn’t thrill me, but almost as soon as I saw it I was shushed by the beautiful direction obvious even in the titles. I found the film completely immersive — a key scene where Roy Waller (Cage) is flummoxed by a sliding door open to the buzzing, hot and bright outdoors completely conveyed all the reasons why our obsessive compulsive conman would rather be inside.
Of course, the more obvious factor in explaining Roy’s foibles and character to the audience is the actor, and Nicholas Cage doesn’t disappoint. After this and Adaptation, I’m just about ready to forgive him for making Con Air. While we feel the suitable pathos for a man in his position, Cage also manages to show a genuinely kind and charismatic personality at the same time as presenting horrendously irritating tics.
While as with any crime film, there’s exceptionally cool criminal dealings and clever little twists, this film works as well as it does mainly due to the strong but never shmaltzy relationship between Roy and his daughter Angela (Alison Lohman). Cage is at his best in his scenes with Lohman, and the two strike up an engrossing relationship, despite running through the sort of father-child arguments that we’ve seen a hundred times before. At times I was disturbed to sense a kind of sexual layer to the relationship — but I’m willing to accept that this might just be my attraction to Miss Lohman translating onto the screen. As it turns out, the actor is 24 and not 14 — a cause for relief amongst men everywhere.
The supporting characters work well also, especially Sam Rockwell as Roy’s wisecracking partner Frank — do partners come in any other variety? The script is tight across the board, especially in representing the peculiar morality that Roy applies to his work — his final comment on the matter is succinct and brilliant in that way that you’d usually never find in the last five minutes of a film.
I’ve probably gone overboard with my praise. But Matchstick Men falls into that category of movie that is so refreshing — a movie that won’t change your life or wow you, but is near-perfectly put together, and gets you thinking a little more than normal.
615