Michael Clayton

[Gamblour.]

Boring Academy members.

It's a good movie, don't get me wrong. But I haven't thought about it since. The actors are great, the story's very monochrome.

[Alexandro]

The sudden upswell of acclaim for this movie has caught me totally off-guard.  If anyone had given a crap about it back when it came out, I probably would have gone and seen the damn thing.  Seriously, when this movie opened, was there a single person out there saying, "This is a Best Picture contender"?  What's different between then and now?

It's all about Clooney's star power. If he had been the lead in Zodiac, that one would have 18 nominations now.

[hedwig]

although it doesn't deserve all the oscar acclaim and is easily the 2nd most overrated of the best picture nominees, this is a good movie. clooney was great but the real powerhouse in this film was TOM WILKINSON. he stole every scene he was in.

[cinemanarchist]

I still can't quite figure out the Michael Clayton hate (or at least indifference) on here. Perhaps it's because my name is Clayton and I'm just happy to finally get some Oscar name recognition...but I saw this for a second time on Friday and it played even better and I loved it the first time. The score, cinematography and writing are really incredible and if this wasn't such a great year for movies this could have easily been in my top 3. Mark my words, 2008 will be the year of Clayton.

[JG]

i don't remember anything about this movie. i remember thinking the music was really silly (was it?) and that the movie was uninteresting and a waste of time.  i wish i could say more. but i think that this means that i don't think its very good.

[cinemanarchist]

I thought the music really added to the dark and "blue" atmosphere of the film. This and TWBB are the only two scores I've actually wanted to own this year. Well it's certainly not an edge of your seat thriller but I found the writing to be very sharp and it was a great paranoid corporate 70's throwback. It's far from the genius levels of No Country or TWBB but I'm not at all insulted to see it nominated for so many Oscars.

[Tommy Both]

I was really impressed after watching this several months ago.
Because this was playing at my local movie multiplex
I thought it would be way more mainstream, also because of clooney and bourne connectios.
But no, it wasn't, it had a very mature script and terrific supporting roles.
I don't think the academy loved this because of clooney. although his best actor nod was maybe too much.
Everything just felt right with this one. I'm glad the academy recognized it for its plusses (supporting roles, score, script).
After TWBB and NO COUNTRY this film is #3 on my list.
(go ELSWIT! thank god u recovered after American Dreamz (worst movie of last year no doubt) )

[The Red Vine]

This is a very good little movie and I'm pleasantly surprised it's being recognized at the Oscars. I have never been a fan of George Clooney but this performance has caused me to reconsider his talent as an actor. His personality was a perfect meshing with this character. Tom Wilkonsin and Tilda Swinton are always good, of course.

The film has a fairly slow pacing that allows the story to take it's time unfolding. There is little trickery or standard plot devices beyond a time-shifting structure. Some people have compared it to the work of John Grisham, but I don't remember his work being this patient or intellegent. Give me "Michael Clayton" instead.

[Alexandro]

I don't think the academy loved this because of clooney.  )

Let's say instead of Clooney there was Bill Macey or Steve Buscemi or even John Turturro...in any of those cases, Michael Clayton would have fallen in oblivion with the oscars. At least that's what I think.

[grand theft sparrow]

I need to see this a second time.  I definitely didn't hate it but there's still an aftertaste in my mouth.  It's like Tony Gilroy pulled a Funny Games, only with lawyer movie devices.

The first 45 minutes were solid.  I kept saying, "Why the hell didn't I see this the first time around?"  But into the second hour, it never commits to being an Erin Brockovich-type treatise on corruption in corporate America or a Grisham-esque lawyer thriller or a lawyer-needs-to-be-better-to-his-family drama, all of which it was at one point.  And it ends up feeling very superficial in regards to all the subplots, like they're all just macguffins and the real story hasn't revealed itself yet.  By the time the end rolls around, you get a "maybe I missed something" feel because you'd swear that the movie was about something else. 

However, the dialogue is sharp, there are some good moments and great performances (Tom Wilkinson in particular).  He does a raving lunatic like no one since Peter Finch in Network.  It just doesn't add up to enough though.  Or maybe it adds up to too much?  I don't know; that's why I need to see it again.

[SiliasRuby]

I don't think the academy loved this because of clooney.  )

Let's say instead of Clooney there was Bill Macey or Steve Buscemi or even John Turturro...in any of those cases, Michael Clayton would have fallen in oblivion with the oscars. At least that's what I think.

So true.....Still waiting for mac's review.

[MacGuffin]

Still waiting for mac's review.

I thought it was an acting Tour De Force across the board. It may be described as a thriller, but this is more a character study, and I would put it along the likes of The Verdict in that respect. Because, like Newman's character, Clooney's low-man-on-the-totum-pole "janitor" is finally given his date in court (figuratively speaking). I'm glad Clooney was recognized for his acting here, because it may seem understated, but you can see his character thinking. It's in his eyes, and that's what makes his performance great and a nice balance to Wilkenson's character.

[Gamblour.]

I just rewatched this (along with every other best picture nominee at an AMC) and I have to say it will definitely make my top ten. I agree with mac's assertion that it's more of a character study than a genre piece. Clooney is very very good in this, and the writing is extremely solid and even though I knew what was coming, it still kept me on my toes.

[Sleepless]

I finally saw this yesterday (missed the first 15 minutes due to a jobsworth manager at AMC who hadn't seen a press pass before, but even so...) I wasn't totally sure what to expect having read everyone else's reactions here, but I thoroughly enjoyed it. Great acting everywhere. I thought the film had a good balance - definitely not a family drama, and not really a genre film either. The quick ending really took me by surprise. It was a good, tight film. Not a masterpiece, but definitely very good. Now that I've seen it, I'm going to renew my prediction for this to win Best Picture tonight. It's the safe choice for academy members who weren't taken by NCFOM, and let's face it - nothing else has got a realistic change of snapping up the little golden dude. And I'd be perfectly fine if this did win, to be honest. I think this year every big film is going to be rewarded in some way. Nothing is going to sweep the board.

[Jeremy Blackman]

SPOILERS



I'm sorry, but that was one of the best payoffs ever. Seriously. I'm going to have to let it fade before I decide what I actually think of the movie.