Skip to main content

British Gangster Month: Sexy Beast (2000)


Aside from the kid who helps around the villa, there was not a significant character in Sexy Beast who was under forty. If nothing else that’s impressive, especially for a film with the word ‘sexy’ in its title. Fortunately there are a number of other impressive aspects to this film. It too is a directorial debut this time from Jonathan Glazer (who most recently directed Scarlett Johansson in Under the Skin) and also pays off as quite a good starting point for a director. Not amazing, but a good one.
Gary “Gal” Dove (Ray Winstone) is a safe-cracker who after some prison time has put his criminal past behind him and retired to a villa in Spain where he lives in luxury with his wife Dee-Dee (Amanda Redman) and their friends Aitch and Jackie (Cavan Kendall and Julianne White). However his former associate the manipulative sociopathic Don Logan (Ben Kingsley) arrives to recruit him for one last job. He wants Gal to participate in an elaborate bank heist organized by crime lord Teddy Bass (Ian McShane) and won’t take no for an answer. Each time Gal refutes him, Don gets even more infuriated and dangerous and it becomes increasingly apparent that Gal may not find a way around it.
Okay so we’ve all seen the retired professional called back in for one last job cliché, be it a cop, an athlete, or indeed a gangster, and while that is the set-up for the movie it’s thankfully not the focus. The focus instead seems to be on the unsettling atmosphere that permeates the situation and action. The dread that Gal may not be able to avoid returning to a world he’s been trying to keep away from. And for the first half of the film this tension really builds brought on by Don invading their serene environment. Honestly the first half feels like one of those dark and intense plays focussing on a small cast in one claustrophobic place as they interact, escalating to chaos and violence somewhere in the vein of Jez Butterworth’s Mojo. That alone could have worked as a movie but around the halfway mark we suddenly jump forward in time leaving the previous situation ambiguously resolved slowly revealing what happened there as the film progresses. It took me by surprise and worked well but in a way that also could have been one film on a whole: the ambiguous starting point with the details of how we ended up there being revealed little by little throughout. Both these types of presentation have been done and done well in film before, but I’m not convinced Sexy Beast entirely succeeded in merging the disparate styles. Especially as they’re done back to back rather than side-by-side and I think if they focused more cohesively on one of these styles of narrative (I think I’d prefer the latter as it more effectively engages the viewer in the mystery of the premise), the film might have felt less uneven.
That being said the film did manage most of its job, particularly through the performances. Winstone is fairly subdued as Gal and not really interesting, but that’s how the character is supposed to act. Just about everything he does in the movie is with reluctance, nervousness, and anxiety and his quietness in this contrasted with the characters around him, doesn’t leave him much room to emote. Luckily Ben Kingsley does enough of that for the both of them bringing to life a really terrifying character in Don Logan. The performance is brilliant, rightfully an Oscar nominee, with Kingsley making the most of his character’s psychological instability. The way he talks rapidly, minor anxious twitches and oddities make it clear something’s not right with him. And for Kingsley, the same man who won an Oscar for playing Gandhi, to so fully embody this polar opposite character really speaks to his strengths as an actor. Ian McShane is also fantastic as Teddy portraying this seemingly calm and collect man who beneath is just as dangerous as Logan. And he’s also got that super smooth voice that puts you on edge each time he speaks! The supporting cast is mostly fine with notable props going to James Fox as Harry, the banker victim of the heist, but they don’t quite have the opportunities or talent to match up to Kingsley and McShane.
The last thing I should mention is that the film has a discrepancy in tone. For the majority it gets across that it’s a dark intense drama, however the opening and closing sequences imply this was at least partially a comedy, which doesn’t at all fit with everything else we’ve seen. There are a couple scenes like the awkward silent reunion between Gal’s friends and Logan that could be interpreted as comedic, but I think generally people would agree are more unnerving. The opening features some cheesy retro music set against no action happening and showing us too much of an almost naked Winstone. Yeah it could be pointing out the irony of the film’s title which also doesn’t seem to have a lot of relevance to the plot and feel, but it’s such a strange addition of a comedic overtone that seems to come out of nowhere.
Though there are problems in the fundamental story structure of Sexy Beast, it’s certainly worthwhile for its performances and for the fact that the tension is heightened effectively in both styles. It’s interesting enough to hold your attention and keep it, and that’s very important especially for a debut feature. Just don’t go into the film on the title alone. Unless you’re titillated by middle-aged pink pot-bellies.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Strange History of the American Spoof Movie

Parody movies have been around for a lot longer than we tend to think of them. Even from the earliest days of Hollywood there were movies meant to satirize a particular subject or genre. In the silent era, Buster Keaton was responsible for a few. And in the early sound era, almost as soon as the monster pictures took off did you see comic versions of them -Abbott and Costello hosting a few. But parody movies tended to be subtle for most of cinema history, or parody came in conjunction with another goal of the comedy. It really wasn’t until the 1980s and 90s that it took off and became popularly understood. And there is perhaps a line to be drawn to the counterculture comedy explosion that began in the 1970s through avenues like  Saturday Night Live , which frequently parodied from even its earliest years popular movies and cultural properties of the time. But that is still a way’s back. To my generation though, ‘parody movie’ is perhaps a less known term than the more blunt ‘s...
Post a Comment
Read more

A Stylish and Charmingly Reinvented David Copperfield

The Personal History, Adventures, Experience and Observation of David Copperfield the Younger of Blunderstone Rookery (Which He Never Meant to Publish on Any Account)  is the most important book Charles Dickens ever wrote. It is not the most famous or influential by any means (that would of course be A Christmas Carol ), but it is the book that is the purest expression of the authors’ style, identity, and worldview. It is his most personal work, semi-autobiographical in its story of the chronology from infancy to adulthood of a character who overcomes great loss and hardships to find a fulfilling life as a writer. To read David Copperfield  is to understand Dickens himself. Armando Iannucci knew this when he decided to make a new adaptation of the novel for a twenty-first century audience. He also knew that Dickens adaptations are ubiquitous at this point. Films are a bit rarer, but every few years a new television adaptation rears its head to keep the authors’ unique world an...
Post a Comment
Read more

Notes on the Title Cards of The Lord of the Rings

It might be sacrilege for one who both considers The Lord of the Rings  trilogy to be one of the greatest triumphs of cinema and has been an avid lover of the films since adolescence, to declare that the original theatrical cuts of the films are better than the much beloved extended editions. Easily it’s my most controversial opinion regarding these movies. Don’t get me wrong, I do like the extended editions quite a lot, especially as someone who just enjoys spending time in that universe. They flesh it out more, add extra flavour, and in increasing the length by about an hour really emphasize the epic quality of these films. But I find that the original cuts are generally more cleanly paced, more seamlessly edited, and much more accessible to audiences. All the stuff there is to love about The Lord of the Rings  is there in the original versions, the plethora of new and extended scenes merely add to that for fans. And of those, they fall into three camps for me: 1....
1 comment
Read more