The Recruit (2003)

Cynthia Fuchs

For all its protests to the contrary, in this movie, everything is exactly what it seems.

The Recruit

Director: Roger Donaldson
Cast: Al Pacino, Colin Farrell, Bridget Moynahan, Gabriel Macht
MPAA rating: PG-13
Studio: Buena Vista Pictures
First date: 2003
US Release Date: 2003-01-31

If CIA agents are really so hung up on father issues and rocky romances as they always seem to be in the movies, the so-called free world is in dire straits indeed. (On tv's Alias, it's another story, as Syd seems perfectly capable of handling her emotional baggage and saving the planet, week in and week out.) It appears that the most popular way to put the CIA on a big screen for two-hour stretches is to saddle its reps with all kinds of unworked out pain, need, and anger.

Roger Donaldson's The Recruit offers up James (Colin Farrell) as the number one troubled young gun. The first scene introduces his tendency toward flamboyant self-destruction: a top-of-his-class grad student at MIT, he oversleeps on the morning of a crucial demonstration. When his teammates call in a panic, he jumps on his bicycle and races down to the job fair, where he reveals his brilliant invention: Spartacus (named, say the students, for the slave revolt), a wireless webcast program that wins over the initially dubious Dell rep.

In the background of this elaborate whiz-kid show skulks Walter (Al Pacino). The camera picks him out and sets up an exchange of glances between him and James, so you know he's significant. (Depressingly, there's little in this "thriller" left to chance or nuance.) Walter shows up again later that night, at the bar where James works in order to pay tuition or rent or, most likely, just look cool. Walter knows his mark, insisting that "The most important thing you need to know is that you don't know shit," then listing all James' achievements (he's a grand student, scores "off the charts" on "psych tests," etc.). At this point, Walter drops the major bait: he knows something about James' father, reportedly killed in a plane crash while employed by Shell Oil in Peru. Maybe dad was a spook. Maybe not. Walter won't say. James is interested: "Did you know my dad?" Again, Walter won't say.

All this reticence hooks James, who agrees to take the aptitude test despite the fact that Walter warns him he has no "answers" to give, "only secrets." He tells James that he can't trust anyone or anything, not even his five senses. The only thing you can trust is "that little voice inside you." So that's why the CIA and the FBI don't talk to one another -- they all answer only to their "little voices." James at first looks hurt when Walter tells him that, now that the courting is over, he won't be his friend or his father. But in fact, Walter is all too happy to play daddy, laying down rules, demanding loyalty, even setting James up with a rocky romantic interest, Layla (Bridget Moynahan, last seen surviving nuclear holocaust in The Sum of All Fears).

For much of the film's running time, James, Layla, and a third recruit named Zack (Gabriel Macht) learn how to be spies at a training facility called "the Farm" (there are many recruits in sight, but at the camp, the camera only singles out these three white kids). That is, they learn to disguise, kill, cheat, lie, and deceive one another, abuse one another's trust, all in the name of patriotic duty. Or, as Daddy Walter puts it, they're all in this not for fame and fortune (their successes will never be known, after all), but because they believe in "good and evil, right and wrong," and most of all, that their "cause is just" and their "enemies are everywhere." No wonder kids with family trauma are such popular recruits.

These particular trainees are apparently much impressed by the news that "everything is a test" and "nothing is what it seems," because they repeat both phrases like mantras. They also work with those large-type movie-computers (where every webpage has a huge logo and every password is typed out slowly, to ensure that every viewer catches every dull point), emote flagrantly, drive like crazy people, and miss obvious cues concerning plot turns, all of which suggests they're not exactly cut out for the spy biz, where acumen and precision are reputedly valued.

The Recruit's emphasis on melodrama over any sort of intriguing secret agent plot is hardly unusual, but it is disappointing. The developing relationship between Layla and James serves as obvious metaphor for the basic questions of confidence and self-reliance that supposedly dog spies as a matter of course. But these questions are turned into mushy stuff, like, will the boy trust the girl who looks so obviously untrustworthy? Once the two are pitted against one another at Langley, it's only a matter of time before they just can't stand it anymore and have to rip each other's clothes off, then have to check each other's computer caches. The cutting between them in different rooms builds very standard "tension." And you know long before they apparently do, where they're headed.

The father-son business also looks stale, especially because Pacino has played this role a few times already (Donnie Brasco, Scent of a Woman, Insomnia, Any Given Sunday, and most loudly, The Devil's Advocate). It also glosses over the broader, more pressing background for any CIA movie at this point in time. As voiced by James early in the film (and repeated later, because The Recruit repeats everything it deems "important"), this is the PR problem that stems from real internal workings problems: the CIA, he asserts on first meeting Walter, is "a bunch of fat old white guys who fell asleep when we needed them most."

Walter means to disabuse him of this notion, to demonstrate the lingering relevance of the agency, which is to say, his own relevance. This potentially compelling aspect -- the film's investigation of how creaky institutions and outdated worldviews seek to maintain dominance -- is lost in a shuffle of mundane (and foreseeable) plot twists. For all its protests to the contrary, in this movie, everything is exactly what it seems.

So far J. J. Abrams and Rian Johnson resemble children at play, remaking the films they fell in love with. As an audience, however, we desire a fuller experience.

As recently as the lackluster episodes I-III of the Star Wars saga, the embossed gold logo followed by scrolling prologue text was cause for excitement. In the approach to the release of any of the then new prequel installments, the Twentieth Century Fox fanfare, followed by the Lucas Film logo, teased one's impulsive excitement at a glimpse into the next installment's narrative. Then sat in the movie theatre on the anticipated day of release, the sight and sound of the Twentieth Century Fox fanfare signalled the end of fevered anticipation. Whatever happened to those times? For some of us, is it a product of youth in which age now denies us the ability to lose ourselves within such adolescent pleasure? There's no answer to this question -- only the realisation that this sensation is missing and it has been since the summer of 2005. Star Wars is now a movie to tick off your to-watch list, no longer a spark in the dreary reality of the everyday. The magic has disappeared… Star Wars is spiritually dead.

Keep reading... Show less

This has been a remarkable year for shoegaze. If it were only for the re-raising of two central pillars of the initial scene it would still have been enough, but that wasn't even the half of it.

It hardly needs to be said that the last 12 months haven't been everyone's favorite, but it does deserve to be noted that 2017 has been a remarkable year for shoegaze. If it were only for the re-raising of two central pillars of the initial scene it would still have been enough, but that wasn't even the half of it. Other longtime dreamers either reappeared or kept up their recent hot streaks, and a number of relative newcomers established their place in what has become one of the more robust rock subgenre subcultures out there.

Keep reading... Show less

​'The Ferryman': Ephemeral Ideas, Eternal Tragedies

The current cast of The Ferryman in London's West End. Photo by Johan Persson. (Courtesy of The Corner Shop)

Staggeringly multi-layered, dangerously fast-paced and rich in characterizations, dialogue and context, Jez Butterworth's new hit about a family during the time of Ireland's the Troubles leaves the audience breathless, sweaty and tearful, in a nightmarish, dry-heaving haze.

"Vanishing. It's a powerful word, that"

Northern Ireland, Rural Derry, 1981, nighttime. The local ringleader of the Irish Republican Army gun-toting comrades ambushes a priest and tells him that the body of one Seamus Carney has been recovered. It is said that the man had spent a full ten years rotting in a bog. The IRA gunslinger, Muldoon, orders the priest to arrange for the Carney family not to utter a word of what had happened to the wretched man.

Keep reading... Show less

Aaron Sorkin's real-life twister about Molly Bloom, an Olympic skier turned high-stakes poker wrangler, is scorchingly fun but never takes its heroine as seriously as the men.

Chances are, we will never see a heartwarming Aaron Sorkin movie about somebody with a learning disability or severe handicap they had to overcome. This is for the best. The most caffeinated major American screenwriter, Sorkin only seems to find his voice when inhabiting a frantically energetic persona whose thoughts outrun their ability to verbalize and emote them. The start of his latest movie, Molly's Game, is so resolutely Sorkin-esque that it's almost a self-parody. Only this time, like most of his better work, it's based on a true story.

Keep reading... Show less

There's something characteristically English about the Royal Society, whereby strangers gather under the aegis of some shared interest to read, study, and form friendships and in which they are implicitly agreed to exist insulated and apart from political differences.

There is an amusing detail in The Curious World of Samuel Pepys and John Evelyn that is emblematic of the kind of intellectual passions that animated the educated elite of late 17th-century England. We learn that Henry Oldenburg, the first secretary of the Royal Society, had for many years carried on a bitter dispute with Robert Hooke, one of the great polymaths of the era whose name still appears to students of physics and biology. Was the root of their quarrel a personality clash, was it over money or property, over love, ego, values? Something simple and recognizable? The precise source of their conflict was none of the above exactly but is nevertheless revealing of a specific early modern English context: They were in dispute, Margaret Willes writes, "over the development of the balance-spring regulator watch mechanism."

Keep reading... Show less
Pop Ten
Mixed Media
PM Picks

© 1999-2017 All rights reserved.
Popmatters is wholly independently owned and operated.