‘In the Grey’ REVIEW: All For The Cash
‘In the Grey’ REVIEW: All For The Cash
When a well-known filmmaker hits a certain point in their career, their trademarks and fixations may become much more notable after a long period of time, and one of those filmmakers who could be slotted in this categorization is British genre director Guy Ritchie. Sure, he has once made a retelling of Arthurian legend, a duology of reimaginings of Arthur Conan Doyle’s most prolific literary creation, and a couple of fantasy family films (which inexplicably include a late 2010s Disney remake, which may be the ground zero of their current live action remake industrial complex).
The main crew (from L-R: Henry Cavill, Eiza Gonzalez, Jake Gyllenhaal) making a move
But at his core, he is well-known for his multitude of rollicking action crime films, rife with quick, witty exchanges, meticulous planning, and some blasting gunplay alongside some low-brow humor thrown in the mix (remember, near half-a-decade ago now, when Jason Statham told Post Malone to suck his own extremities before shooting him in the head? Par for the course).
I mention all of this because In the Grey is one of the more intriguing films I’ve seen all year. It’s a film that possesses all of what Ritchie is known for, yet does so in a seemingly stripped-down fashion. No big flashy formal moves, character moments, or his distinctly regional British flavor. But what we have, regardless, is still quite pretty effective for what it is, and what it is is the bare essentials done straight to the point in the most entertainingly convoluted fashion.
That directness is made manifest immediately in how it executes its logline: when a billion dollars loaned by a sizeable banking firm to a criminal overlord (Carlos Bardem) isn’t returned, a covert group led by one Rachel Wild (Eiza Gonzalez) and overseen by commanders Sid and Bronco (Henry Cavill and Jake Gyllenhaal) aims to get it back, in exchange for a certain cut of the payout. Of course, things go a bit south in terms of the variables placed within, but will the three’s cutthroat planning aid them in hitting the jackpot?
Things may have gone wrong
Of course, most of the fun in the film is seeing how those dominoes are knocked down in escalating fashion, from the smallest of exchanges into the biggest of explosions. Much of the film is incredibly rife with exchanges of information and planning, and even physical practice of whether said plan or information would pay off, often at a pace that’s quite dizzying. It never feels rushed, though: there’s a certain, labored laser-focus that Ritchie imbues while throwing a lot at the viewer to follow that its 98-minute run quickly without any lag. I was even surprised when the film cut to credits, a big plus in my books. The rapid-fire itself isn’t quite sensory-overload levels either, so it really does allow a quick hook into the meat of the plot immediately.
There is a trade-off to all of this, however, and it’s in the things that could’ve given this some extra spice. While there are still the usual barbs and humor that a Ritchie film could provide (including some memorable gags with the on-screen text and stylus doodles), there is a lack of a distinct punch in the character work that could’ve added to all the chaos. It’s not as if the actors give bad performances: the main trio does especially well with the material (with this and Ambulance, Gyllenhaal really is making a name for himself in the ‘20s as a smarmy heist guy) and Carlos Bardem and a bit underused Rosamund Pike give memorable supporting turns, but there isn’t really compelling meat to hold on to that made his classics pop off. All of them are likeable (some in their hateability), fun archetypes, and still I can’t help but think that a little bit more may push their positives over the edge.
Here’s the thing, though: what do I necessitate from the positives at this point when I engage with this on the greater picture? The feeling I’ve got watching In the Grey is something that really fascinated me after it’s ended, because it does feel like an abstraction of these genre pieces into the beats, and how well-played the beats are. Granted, despite my descriptions, this isn’t an immediately experimental film (even on a visual front, this is merely a well-looking, glossy studio picture aided with incredibly sharp cuts to keep the pace up).
Locked and loaded
There really is a distinct worth in really poring over the specific rhythms of this, as if it is a director deep in oeuvre, well-aware of what he’s sticking to and just doing it on his subconscious wavelength. In a way, it reminds me of fellow 2020s actioner, Christopher Nolan’s Tenet, in how it unabashedly just cribs and dissects a lot from prior works into something that feels distilled: a bit to a fault, but leaving a stamp.
Even beyond my own pontifications, In the Grey is just a damn good time at the cineplex, a breezy heist pic that goes on with its own schemes with such confidence that you can’t help but be swept along. Where it lacks in weight more than makes up for it in nimbleness, and goes to show that Guy Ritchie’s still got the genre guns blazing.
‘In the Grey’ was shown in Philippine cinemas through CreaZion Studios.
