Ronin Review
by Chad Polenz (ChadPolenz AT aol DOT com)October 5th, 1998
Ronin
Chad'z rating: *** (out of 4 = good)
1998, R, 121 minutes [2 hours, 1 minute]
[thriller/action]
Starring: Robert De Niro (Sam), Jean Reno (Vincent), Natascha McElhone (Dierdre), Stellan Skarsgård (Gregor); written by J.D. Zeik, David Mamet [as Richard Weisz]; produced by Frank Mancuso Jr.; directed by John Frankenheimer.
Seen October 4, 1998 at 1:40 p.m. at the Rotterdam Square Mall Cinema 6 (Rotterdam, NY), theater #6, by myself for free using my Sony/Loews critic's pass. [theater rating: ***: good seats, sound and picture]
Mercenaries never get a good rep in the movies. They always come off as cold- hearted, inherently evil guys who enjoy killing people they don't know for money. Maybe they're not really so vile in reality, maybe they're the same flesh-and-blood people as everyone else, and that's the angle "Ronin" takes with its story of modern day warriors just looking for a purpose for their existence.
The problem the huge blockbuster Hollywood films about international espionage, terrorism and other such things that will lead to double-crosses, shoot outs, explosions, and other forms of action is that they try too hard to create a convincing story. They just drop tons of meaningless details on us as if we could really follow them. This film takes just the opposite angle. It barely tells us anything, five minutes into the film and we're already in the middle of something. It's significance is unknown at the time, but it's pretty exciting because it doesn't try to dumb its story down.
We meet a group of international mercs who have been hired, apparently, by an Irish revolutionary lead by a stern woman named Diedre (McElhone), who is as gruff as any of the men she has hired, but still has a sense of delicateness to her. Her team is the generic multi-pack of specialist mercs. There's Sam (De Niro), an American with great detective and field skills - he's probably ex-CIA as he uses tactics to further his and the group's mission that anyone could do, such as take a picture of the enemy and test his reflex skills without seeming remotely suspicious. De Niro is great here, as if he's wanted to be in a role like this for years - he's practically Batman. Jean Reno co- stars as a French operative named Vincent. If Sam is Batman, then he's Robin - not quite as cunning, but learns fast and then applies his knowledge. Other members of the group include a cocky British merc, an American car and weapons specialist, and a Russian computer specialist named Gregor (Skarsgård) whose brain is his best weapon, although it does tend to backfire on him.
The crew's mission is to retrieve a steel suitcase from a group of generic, well-armed and equipped villains who will be intent on stopping them. Sam constantly questions the contents of the case, but he never gets much in the way of answer. All we know is it's worth killing people over and thousands of dollars in compensation to the mercs if they can get it.
This plot setup might seem a little basic, but that's where the film throws us for a loop. What seems like such a simple task (well, if using computers to track the villains and lots of heavy artillery to slaughter carloads of them is considered simple) turns out to be quite complicated. We don't know what's in that case but its importance continues to escalate once the massive action scenes kick in showing the mercs attempts to nab it.
And the action scenes are totally fantastic in all meanings of the word. Those kinds of car-chases-through-narrow-city-streets-while-firing- machineguns-and-blowing-stuff-up scenes have become generic to the extreme over recent years, and yet they're captivating here, even when the "fruit cart!" is obvious and the precise driving at tremendously high speeds are Hollywood staples all the way. Why do such cliches work here when they rarely do elsewhere? I can't answer that honestly, but I guess it's because there's a sense of old-school roots here. Director John Frankenheimer is no stranger to action, in fact, he's one of the founding fathers of the genre. His direction makes for a sense of organized chaos, not just chaos as other directors might go for. There's a real sense of danger and reality here. Setting the film in the old, narrow streets of France, mostly in Paris is a nice change of pace from the freeways of L.A. and the back alleys of New York.
But the story is not as simple as car chases and fire fights. As intense as they are, the sense of mystery is just as compelling. One of the mercs has turned out to be a traitor and the rest are then disbanded and some killed. Sam and Vincent stick together forming a friendship and a real trust for each other. They reveal what they've learned over the years and continue to demonstrate their excellent detective skills. They don't have access to a roomful of computers and high-tech gadgets, they use common sense and the reliable gut instinct. Sometimes this takes them places, sometimes it nearly kills them.
In any case the story is constantly evolving, revealing more and more about the nature of all the parties involved. Who's REALLY working for who and what their goal is. The significance of the case continues to shape the story, not only in terms of the people who want it, but its simpler aspects such as where a duplicate could be bought and switched. It's this kind of basic logic that the film uses to show how clever it can be.
What's also unique is the film's use of selective scripting. David Mamet co- wrote the film under a pseudonym, and his scenes of dialogue and mood are quite obvious. I suspect he had much to do with the film's idiosyncratic and detailed moments between the action. The scene in which the title is explained, that is, of warriors in Feudal Japan whose masters were killed and were then dishonored before of it, is one of the best. These men could certainly serve their counties well, but why don't they? Perhaps they once did but found that playing by the rules sucks, or perhaps they were at one time and were evicted in one way or another and are convinced that being a mercenary is the way of penance or perhaps just to spite the world.
Not only are the effects and direction convincing, but it's the words the characters say to support each other that show a sense of initiative. In Hollywood, blood is only to be splattered, good guys never get shot, and wounds are taken care of by just wrapping them in gauze. Here we're shown a few scenes in which one of our main characters has been shot and needs real medical attention, not just first aid. How many other action movies take bullet-removal from the abdomen seriously?
The only major problem is the final act could have been a bit stronger and more plausible. The film is very complicated but why does it feel the need to slow down as it approaches its climax? The climax isn't that much more thrilling than what had come before, and doesn't answer many questions.
I don't think Jerry Seinfeld would have liked "Ronin." He claims to be "the guy you see standing around in the parking lot afterwards saying, 'Oh, you mean that was the same guy from the beginning? Oh.' and the guy that keeps asking, 'Wasn't he with them? Why'd they kill him if he was with them? Oh, he wasn't really with them? It's a good thing they killed him then.'"
****************************************************************** Please visit Chad'z Movie Page at:
http://members.aol.com/ChadPolenz - over 200 new and old films reviewed in depth, not just blind ratings and quick capsules.
e-mail: [email protected]
(C) 1998 Chad Polenz
Member of:
The Online Film Critics Society
The Internet Movie Critics Association
The Online Movie-Goers Academy
Originally posted in the rec.arts.movies.reviews newsgroup. Copyright belongs to original author unless otherwise stated. We take no responsibilities nor do we endorse the contents of this review.
