The idea of honor among thieves is…well…is there such a thing? Are partners in crime truly partners, or rivals? These are the topics that are covered in “”Criminal””, a film from first time director Gregory Jacobs (although he been a crew member on numerous movies, in various other capacities) and remake of the Argentinian “”Nine Queens””.
Putting aside any comparisons between the original and remake, “”Criminal”” is an entertaining flick (although the final payoff seems a little too, well, basic), with the characters continuing playing off one another and seemingly working together, or are they—and people not being what they seem. The set-ups could be in any number of pictures about heists, but what stands out here is John C. Reilly as Richard Gaddis, a master con artist–or least so he thinks until his latest endeavor becomes increasingly complicated. Gaddis definitely is one despicable individual and, as is pointed out, not above exploiting his own family for lots of change.The other lead in the story is Rodrigo, played by Mexican actor Diego Luna (“”Y Tu Mama Tambien””, “”The Terminal””, “”Dirty Dancing: Havana Nights””). He starts out as a small-time grifter, trying to swindle casino waitresses by asking for more money than he’s paid them, when he gets “”arrested by Richard. As it turns out, the latter is no LAPD member, but rather an expert con who plans to teach the young man some tricks of manipulation.After taking on the part of mentor, and choosing to call Rodrigo “”Brian”” (more Anglo sounding, he feels), Richard goes about showing his new protege how to get people to part with their money. He starts by pretending to be an elderly woman’s grandson, and later moves to making a scene in a restaurant, asking a waiter for change for the $100 bill he “”gave”” the waiter. Rodrigo/””Brian”” questions his new teacher’s methods, but goes along with it and even shows off his own abilities, this in regards to a woman and her purse.The two men become partners for a time, with Richard explaining that his regular partner has gone away, but this arrangement is soon tested with an opportunity to make some real dough. This presents itself through Ochoa (Zitto Kazann), one of Richard’s co-horts, who has passed out in a Beverly Hills hotel–the one in which Richard’s sister, Valerie (Maggie Gyllenhaal), works as concierge, and his brother Michael (Jonathan Tucker) works as bellboy. After dealing with Valerie, the pair learn from Ochoa that he’s encountered a rare silver certificate, one thought long lost, particularly by the U.S. Treasury Department–and that a certain businessman, about to leave the country, would be willing to pay handsomely for such an item.After hearing this information, and confirming it with Ochoa’s son-in-law (who works as a custodian for the Treasury Department), Rodrigo and Richard decide to seek out William Hannigan (Peter Mullan, actor/director who helmed “”The Magdalene Sisters””, among other projects). As it turns out, Hannigan is staying at the same hotel where Valerie and Michael are employed. Despite the possibility of running into his sister again, with whom he is continually feuding, Richard, along with Rodrigo, look to make a deal regarding the silver certificate.During the attempted transaction with Hannigan goes underway, various complications ensue. This includes a copy of the key item getting stolen, and other people involved want a cut of the money being handed over…a “”piece of the action”” as it were. Then there are revelations about the two leads, with Richard seemingly in a court battle of some sort with his sister, and Rodrigo trying to help his father out—who apparently owes money to a Russian guy.[pagebreak]The real appeal with this film, other than the twists and other story developments, is the relationship–the contrast, as it were, with the two main characters. There is Rodrigo, a young man who is concerned about his father (from the way it sounds, ‘there’ is a lot to be concerned about—plus dad is diabetic), to the seasoned shyster Richard, who has no qualms of fooling old ladies into handing over cash, or making enemies of his own family. The other individuals in the film do well, though it would have been nice to see more of them (especially Gyllenhaal and Mullan), but Luna and Reilly are really the leads here.Another strong point, though some may not think so, is the rapid pace of the flick–events move quickly, from Richard and Rodrigo meeting, to the former showing the latter some tricks of the trade, to the setting up the deal with Hannigan. There are no opening credits (just as in the original movie), as “”Criminal”” begins with Luna’s character standing outside a casino, then entering, then a 360 turn, indicating that Rodrigo is surveying the scene, before interacting with the first waitress. Between the early scenes, and those involving the transaction, the film does well in keeping one’s interest.Despite the movie’s strong points, this doesn’t change the fact that it is a remake. For those who have not seen “”Nine Queens””, there is plenty to enjoy about “”Criminal””. However, for the viewers who have watched the Argentinean movie, much of “”Criminal seems like a retread. This ranges from the basic story and plot developments (although the prized object here is a silver certificate, as opposed to stamps in the first film), to dialogue (the “”more offended you are, the less suspicious you appear”” bit), and even to a character’s name (Valerie, whose counterpart’s name in “”Nine Queens”” was Valeria—and both worked in concierge in nice urban hotels). The two movies are virtually identical—props go to “”Nine Queens”” for coming out first. Still, the American version has a certain dynamic between the protagonists–maybe it’s partly due to age difference–but the contrast between the youthful, ‘nice’ Rodrigo, and the older, cynical (whether criticizing family, jobs, or even sick people), and supposedly seasoned Richard provides something more unique to this film version. As for how events in the movie turn out, well, it is somewhat satisfying, given all that has occurred before, but seems a little too, well, maybe Hollywood-ish (true, it’s like the original, but seems a little bit more ‘safe’ here). The thrill is in seeing what happens along the way then.As far as acting goes, Reilly (who, after appearing in flicks like “”Magnolia””, “”Boogie Nights””, “”Chicago””, and “”Gangs of New York”” in smaller roles, finally gets the lead…and one as a less scrupulous individual too) and Luna both do well, as do the rest of the cast. The movie moves at a brisk pace, and thus keeps the viewer continually involved. On the other hand, it’s virtually the same as its predecessor, and for those who have seen the earlier movie there isn’t much new here. Still, as far as remakes go–and in a year that is full of them (especially re-doing foreign films for Americans)–this is certainly one of the better efforts, and generally makes for an entertaining flick. Grade: B+EM Reviewby Andrew Haas9/10/04