Michael Clayton

Michael Clayton – ein weiterer Film, der so wirkt, als ob er zu uns aus der Vergangenheit gekommen wäre. Es hätte auch ein Film aus den 70er Jahren von Sydney Pollack (es war übrigens eine tolle Idee, ihm hier eine Rolle zu geben) oder Sidney Lumet sein können, und zwar am besten mit Robert Redford oder Gene Hackman in der Hauptrolle. Aber zurück in die Gegenwart. Wir haben hier eine einfache Geschichte, die man schon mehrmals gesehen, gelesen sowie gehört hat. Sie ist aber ausgezeichnet geschrieben, hat hervorragende Dialoge und dermaßen vieldeutige Figuren, dass es Spaß macht, sie zu verfolgen. Die Regie von Tony Gilroy ist langsamer (Michael Clayton ist ja auch kein Actionfilm, Gott sei Dank), sie kommt aber mit vielen Ideen. Eine Reihe von Szenen (die Pferde, Arthurs Wohnung, die Taxifahrt) ist unvergesslich. Dazu spielt die dezente, aber stimmungsvolle Musik von James Newton Howard… Viereinhalb. (10.12.2011)

Der ausgezeichnete Anfang mit dem alarmierenden Monolog von Tom Wilkinson und den Aufnahmen des kalten Glasbüros schafft eine Stimmung, die das Publikum gefangen nimmt und bis zu der letzten Aufnahme mit Michael Clayton nicht loslässt. Der Drehbuchautor der Bourne-Trilogie Tony Gilroy hat ein beachtliches Regie-Debüt gedreht und dank der tieferen Dimension die Genre-Konkurrenten Steven Zaillian (Zivilprozess) und Sydney Pollack (Die Firma) überrascht. Tilda Swinton ist famos, Wilkinson und Clooney sind ausgezeichnet. Ein Drama, das stolz die Kategorie "Hollywood-Art" repräsentiert. (21.01.2008)

Tony Gilroy. Another in a row of quality screenwriters who let himself be lured into the director’s chair. He wrote a screenplay for himself that focuses on a fascinating topic dissects the psyches of the (a)moral protagonists and that is sophisticated and intelligent. Many mention its similarity to Syriana. It reminds me more of The Firm or Coppola’s Interview. Everything in this movie urges the viewer to try to be a step ahead of Clayton’s investigations. What is the strongest side of this movie? Is it that outstanding screenplay? Or is the truth that sell-out bitch played by Tilda Swinton who long ago smothered any hint of conscience inside her? Or is it Tom Wilkinson and his character who, conversely, is resuscitating his conscience at the end of his career? Or is it George Clooney in the role of the lawyer “Mr Wolf who takes care of bothersome problems" who has experience, ability and, primarily, knows what people are like? Not forgetting that perhaps it is the precise direction. In the end, you reach the conclusion that Michael Clayton has no strongest side. All of his sides are in an unusual symbiosis and serve one single purpose. To make a good movie. And it worked, although it has a fault. And that is the ending which is just ordinary. It’s not bad, not stupid, not illogical. Simply what we’ve already seen so many times before. And in view of the fact that the movie is overflowing with hints, the unsaid, a parallel with a story for kids and even some metaphors, this is simply disappointing. But a niggling feeling that somewhere deep inside the finale there is “something more" provokes a desire to watch it again, after which it will hopefully be possible to give it full a set of stars. Because it just can’t be possible that the result could be so... ordinary. P.S. A month after seeing Gilroy’s debut at the movie theater, I can’t get it out of my head and so I gladly give it full marks. (17.01.2008)

Cold, distant, and unforgiving. Tony Gilroy is a very wise man who has managed to make his name a trademark, under which he is going to distribute goods of the best quality. You’ll be so chilled by Tom Wilkinson's opening monologue alone that you won't melt until the closing credits. This high-level legal game with lives on the line knocks you out with its formal austerity, which gives ample room for narrative peripeteia and theatrics in which the venerable academy has once again crowned the wrong person. Tilda Swinton spends the few minutes she gets looking like an uptight spinster, and immediately the golden statuettes come tumbling down. But otherwise, apart from the hasty introduction, I have no major complaints. 4 ½ (with the promise of a reunion coming soon). (29.03.2008)

In the face of Clooney's convincing warrior expression and Howard's emotional tones, I may feel guilty with my assessment, but any saving idea, warning finger, or suffocating statement drowns in the inarticulate and yet unnecessarily entangled boredom, which minute by minute increasingly flows towards an unsurprising conclusion. (21.08.2008)