The Spanish Prisoner (1998)

Undescribable Perfection

It’s fine. It's literally the definition of a fine movie. You’ve seen it before, you know every beat and outcome before the characters even do. Only question is how much escapism you’re looking for.

There is, somehow, an interesting story here, as well as some good acting. There are also some good scenes

By the time the dramatic fireworks start popping off, each one feels earned.

The late 1990s were a great time for Hollywood motion pictures, but there were three Buried Treasures during this period which I'd like to highlight the next three months. Let's begin in 1997. This was the year "Titanic" scored that rarest of hat tricks – It was the year's box office champ, it was critically acclaimed, and it won the Best Picture Oscar. But Hollywood churned out some other great feature films that year too: Curtis Hanson's thriller, "LA Confidential," Ang Lee's "The Ice Storm," and Paul Thomas Anderson's breakout picture, "Boogie Nights." Veteran Actors Peter Fonda and Robert Duvall turned in their best performances ever in "Ulee's Gold" and "The Apostle," respectively. And Matt Damon and Ben Affleck shot to stardom in "Good Will Hunting." Lost in the shuffle was perhaps the best David Mamet screenplay ever filmed. Coming on the heels of his successful big screen adaptation of his play "Glengarry Glen Ross" in 1992, Mamet's 1994 offering "Oleanna" was a rare bomb – both critically and at the box office. He was due for a hit. And boy did he score – with critics and (by Mamet's metage) with filmgoers. Unfortunately, few people remember "The Spanish Prisoner," and it deserves a second look.Campbell Scott (son of George C.) stars as Joe Ross, a corporate engineer who has developed a new industrial process. The plot revolves around an elaborate scam to steal the intellectual property behind this process. Initially, this may sound boring, but remember this is David Mamet. Not since Hitchcock's "North By Northwest" and Polanski's "Rosemary's Baby" has a writer/director so excelled at presenting average Americans immured in machinations over which they possess no control. "The Spanish Prisoner" falls under the same umbrella as Mamet's directorial debut, 1987's "House Of Games" – the story of an intricate con game to swindle money from a wealthy author. The parallels between "House Of Games" and "The Spanish Prisoner" are many, although I prefer the Campbell Scott vehicle, if for no other reason than the hustlers are after intellectual property rather than the more standard money or tangible goods.Playing about as radically against type as possible, Steve Martin turns in one of the best performances of his career as a wealthy traveler who meets Ross on a corporate retreat in the Caribbean. Martin does an excellent job building trust yet still seeming as though he may be hiding something. He asks Ross to deliver a book to his sister when he returns to New York. Turns out, the sister doesn't really exist (a confidence game known as the Spanish Prisoner), Ross unknowingly opens a Swiss bank account, and unknowingly buys a one-way ticket out of the country. Thus begins a sophisticated swindle involving Ross' boss and an FBI agent who was present at the corporate retreat. But Ross is no dummy. He knows Martin's fingerprints are on the book he gave him, which initiates his reaction to the scam.This is classic Mamet. A labyrinthine plot entrapping a common man into an axiomatic contrivance of grand proportion. The story unfolds layer by layer, in a deliberate yet headlong manner, as Mamet reveals only what we need to know, when we need to know it. And if you've never heard Mamet dialogue, you're in for a treat. His characters speak in choppy, staccato sentences, always reaching for just the right words – often saying more in their silence than in their verbiage.There are no wasted scenes in "The Spanish Prisoner." Everything we see and hear will mean something eventually. It's a tight, alluring story, and a true joy to experience. "The Spanish Prisoner" is one of those films you'll want to re-watch immediately upon its conclusion.

An employee (Campbell Scott) of a corporation with a lucrative secret process is tempted to betray it. But there is more to it than that.Roger Ebert wrote of David Mamet, "His characters often speak as if they're wary of the world, afraid of being misquoted, reluctant to say what's on their minds: As a protective shield, they fall into precise legalisms, invoking old sayings as if they're magic charms. Often they punctuate their dialogue with four-letter words, but in The Spanish Prisoner there is not a single obscenity, and we picture Mamet with a proud grin on his face, collecting his very first PG rating." I am still unsure if I like Mamet, but I am leaning towards yes. This film starts a bit slow, but after the first fifteen minutes or so, the twists begin and it is hard to know who to trust. It gets faster and faster and keeps us constantly in doubt. One would have to watch it at least twice to catch all the nuances.

Sometimes actors get type casted. One of those actors is Steve Martin. Known for his starring roles in comedies, in this movie he plays a completely different kind of part and plays it well, which is surprising as the movie is a crime drama. The movie itself is great. It has a clever plot, interesting characters, an engaging style, and strong finale. The bad guys are wonderful and their hapless victim, worthy of empathy. The movie is about greed, and false appearances. The bad guys seem good and the good guy is, well, we don't know; the audience is kept guessing. The entire cast is excellent. After watching this movie, one can leave feeling that they have been entertained and also shown what can happen when you let your guard down and trust others just because of the way they look. Yes, appearances can be deceiving and this movie shows how.

There are many kinds of cinemas. This one is one of the top examples of story telling. You won't notice any camera work, any music (was there any?) etc. You are just absorbed by how well the story is told. Trust me, within 5 minutes (though you won't get to understand what's exactly happening there in such short time) you'll be absorbed. Even Steve Martin is watchable.Also perhaps the only movie (at least for grown-ups) with no swearing. At all. Except for a short scene showing a stabbed body, this is a film for everybody (if the youths can get it). In this regard, the exact opposite of "Glengarry Glen Ross".I find it very strange that the less people have to say, the more they shout and swear. As if even their ordinary words require some kind of 'strengthening' to be taken seriously. You can't just say something is good, because, you see, nobody would take that. However, when saying "something is f... good", you suddenly receive all the attention you've wanted, and they even believe you. Going further down that road, I suppose one day we have to kill our loved ones, to convince them that, indeed, we love them. Exaggerating? Really? Remember LOST TV series and its throughout gratuitous violence, like the scene when Locke, burdened with the memory of something bad in his life, being hit with the car by Desmond, so that he would let go? Figure that out: I care so much for my friend that when I see him troubled by something I hit him with my car (violently, by the way) so that he would let go and start smiling again.Back to the movie at hand, I'll have to warn you that after seeing this one, you won't anymore enjoy your daily movie rubbish. That happens, you know, when you have the courage to open up your eyes.In the same evening, I also saw 'Harrison Bergeron' (1995), another story-teller, and now I'm having trouble finding MOVIES (you know, the ones that you can watch beyond their first 10 minutes).So, if you're comfortably numb (as Pink Floyd put it a few decades back), stay away from movies like this one.