After watching The Tourist, I felt betrayed, like I had been lied to. Perhaps it’s unfair of me to have such high expectations for Florian Henckel von Donnersmarck. After all, every director produces a bad film once in a while. But I feel so let down when I was expecting champagne, and he came through with wine out of a box. And like wine in a box, it’ll get you drunk, but you won’t enjoy drinking it. And you sure as hell feel ashamed buying it.

The Tourist, as you might have guessed, centers around a bland man named Frank, played by Johnny Depp. Upon arrival in Venice, it’s hinted he’s mourning the end of a relationship, he becomes involved with an extremely mysterious woman named Elise, the stunning Angelina Jolie. She could be a cop, she could be the spouse of one of Europe’s most wanted criminals, she could just be a criminal herself. All that’s immediately clear, is she’s using Frank as a decoy to get local Italian police and Interpol off her back. Then there is exactly the number of twists and surprises you would expect out of a hacky mystery novella (which Frank happens to be a huge fan of).

This is Donnersmarck third writing credit, although the first is for a short film. But there are absolutely no signs of his Academy Award-winning talent to be seen. As a European making his first American film, you’d expect certain explorations of the American/European relationship. Unfortunately, he choose to shamelessly pander to American audiences. Instead of the ‘ugly American’ stereotype, Italians are portrayed as ignorant, incompetent, disbelieving Frank, and the real danger he’s in, writing him off as one of those loud Americans with no tact. This is all that’s expected of the peripheral characters in the story. It’s disappointing that one of the best directors of Europe feels he must indulge us on this side of pond the in this way. Ultimately, if this was done in sincerity, it means he has a very, very negative view of American movie-goers.

I’ve heard complaints of Johnny Depp’s acting. Words like ‘wooden’, and ‘dull’ have been floating around. I couldn’t disagree more. Sure, his performance is subdued, and there’s no much panache, but he’s meant to be playing a community college professor of math. It seems to me, he nailed it: wooden, boring, dull. And it takes a certain something to even the keel when playing opposite Ms. Angelina Jolie, which he did just fine. Jolie is the only thing in the film more stunning than the scenery of Venice. I will concede that she’s not asked to do much other than wear expensive jewelry and clothes, and to be sure they drape well over her figure. This isn’t to say her character is underdeveloped. It’s exactly as developed as it should be in a thriller of this mid-range caliber.

It seems to me that the demographic The Tourist was created for will, for the most part, be satisfied with the besotted and sloppy plot (a plot that would never hold up under the lightest scrutiny). But even as a guilty pleasure, this film, and it’s outrageously obtuse ending should disappoint anyone not looking for the most meager level of escapism. You get a buy on this one, Donnersmarck. Don’t let it happen again.

1 out of 4 stars

Immediately upon leaving the theatre, I would have had a different opinion, and mumbled something about how the script wasn’t Jolie’s fault, and her performance salvaged the weak plot.  I do still hold that she did the best with what she was given.  Unfortunately, she wasn’t given much.  And it can clearly be attributed both to Kurt Wimmer (Sphere, Law Abiding Citizen) who wrote the script, and director Phillip Noyce (The Bone Collector, Rabbit-Proof Fence).

The plot is as formulaic as action films go.  Jolie plays Evelyn Salt, a CIA agent, who’s accused by a Russian defector of being a sleeper agent still around from the Cold War.  Is she?  Or isn’t she?  You’ll have to wait and see, but it does seem suspicious that she goes on the run immediately after this accusation.

I’ll give props to Wimmer for this throwback to the Cold War.  There are plenty of movies already about it, but I’m so damn tired of movies based on Iraq and Afghanistan that any change of pace is welcomed.  And this movie coinciding with the discovery of real Russian agents planted in the US for years is a lucky, and intriguing course of events that whets the appetite for this sort of film.  But would it have killed you, Wimmer, to not write like a hack?  Seriously.

And what the hell happened to Chiwetel Ejoifor.  His career started out so promising.  Now he’s showing up in second rate action films, and stuff like 2012.  I get it, he has to pay the bills.  Liev Schreiber was pretty disappointing as well, playing Salt’s uber-boring boss with a monotone voice.  The studio basically didn’t end the film so, once reviewing the films gross, they can plan, or cancel any forthcoming sequels.  The whole thing felt like a sham, and although I got to ogle Jolie doing some pretty cool stunts and fight scenes for two hours, I feel dumber for watching it.  And even more foolish for being twenty five and going to see this alone.  I’ve made myself sad now.

The story is based on true events that came to pass in Los Angeles in the 1920s and 30s.  Christine Collins is a single mother, raising her nine year old son.  She works as telephone operator (and a damn good one at that).  She’s called into work on a Saturday, and leaves her son Walter at home.  When she returns, he’s gone.  She seeks the help of the insanely corrupt LAPD, but is met with ambivalence.  Five months later, the police return a boy that is four inches shorter than Walter, and doesn’t look like him at all.  When she tries to convince the police that it’s not her son, she’s thrown into an insane asylum until she’s willing to admit that the boy returned is, in fact, her boy.  Assisting her in her fight is Gustav Briegleb, an outspoken reverend who uses his weekly radio broadcasts to expose political and police corruption.  Also sprinkled in is a completely insane Canadian serial killer that may or may not have killed Christine’s son.

The drama is ultra compelling.  The lengthy two hours and twenty minutes flies by as Eastwood deftly works his magic.  And who could want a more talented cast than Angelina Jolie, John Malkovich (who plays the good Reverend), and Amy Ryan (who plays one of Christine’s fellow internees at the asylum).  Jolie is an acting tour de force who may have given the best performance of her career, if the Academy ignores her again (they completely ignored her compelling performance in A Might Heart) they need punched in the face.  The script writing was also a feat, albeit it slightly surprising, coming from J. Michael Straczynski who spent most of his time until now writing for Babylon 5 and Walker, Texas Ranger.  The chief complaint of most critics thus far is the fact Changeling gives into convention far too often.  While the plot is slightly formulaic, it doesn’t deter how much you’ll enjoy this film.  Don’t let the trailer fool you into thinking this is a light, sad story about a wronged mother either, it’s dark, really dark, and fantastic all the way.  Don’t listen to the naysayers, this is one terrific film.

3.5 out of 4 stars

Rottentomatoes: 54% – Cream of the Crop: 46%