Confidence

Rating:
Summary: It's Always the $$$
Review: Jake Vig (Edward Burns) is brimming over with Confidence and the cool quotient of a Robert Mitchum in James Foley's "Confidence." Like all great Con films, Jake's story is told in flashbacks: think "D.O.A" or "Farewell My Lovely." We know Jake is dead, we just don't know how he got that way. The success of this type of film depends on the journey the characters take, not on where or when they arrive.
Ed Burns has amped up his basic laidback personality a notch or two to play Jake Vig. And he is ultra-cool and exceeding street-wise and intelligent: he's sexy and more importantly he's able to engender trust so that we are willing to make this trip with him. Brian Van Holt and Paul Giamatti are first rate as members of his posse; particularly Van Holt who, especially after his dynamic turn in "Basic," appears destined for great things.
It is also good to see Dustin Hoffman leap off of his pedestal to play "King," a man on the edge. His first scene with Burns is a classic: the Method actor meets the natural actor, both men bouncing off each other's physical and mental cues.
James Foley has directed "Confidence" with an eye and an ear for the details: his mise en scene is spotless. Even though there are numerous double, tripe and quadruple crosses, Foley directs in such a clear and concise way and he arranges the scenes with such crisp authority... the whole film snaps together without a seam showing.

Rating:
Summary: Watch the cons at work.
Review: This movie should have been subtitled DEAD MAN TALKING. In reflections of the past few days, this con man appears to be on the verge of his demise. But, is he? In CONfidence, we find that it is a game where everyone knows his part. Sometimes, things go awry and can't be changed. However,...Lion's Gate Films are coming out with some strange movies right now, and this is something weird. In some places, it is a porn lover's special. In others, the dialogue is worthy of a Woody Allen feature.

Though these grown men sound like frustrated adolescents with the emphasis on homosexuality, some of the occasional tantalizing tidbits appear out of nowhere -- like the word "analogy" actually used by a hippie-style undercover cop, something being explained as "a fluke, a mistake," the use of the phrases, "interesting imagery" and "limited consumer demand," and describing the prostitute as "that's a lady." When she changed her hair from black to red, the comparison to the vicious redhead, Lizzie Borden, was applicable. She made eating an art.

The "bird" scarf was symbolic as it is said that when a bird enters the house it means death.

Sometimes style can get in the way. The Larry Flynt character as portrayed by an old, grizzled Dustin Hoffman dressed like he'd just stepped out of JC Penney with the white outfit, suspenders, and seersucker coat, but he was high class all the way. He played a shady character with a double persona. As the gum-chewing psycho, he exclaimed that he is "above" being violent, practicing "temper" management. His fashion flaw was the ugly tie: "I'm partial to it."

When they pulled the con game on the man in the jewelry store,it was right out of THE TALENTED MR. RIPLEY. The hi-tech heist pulled on the Vice President banker was right out of CATCH ME IF YOU CAN when the runner disappeared. It was a Catch-22 situation which backfired. Finding the dead owner of El Euclid bar (which the gang took over) was right out ot WEEKEND AT BERNIE'S.

The transformed tart named Lily (of all things) appeared as a typical starlet out of the thirties. She took her revenge on the main character as he spilled his guts, then left with him in that fab convertible right out of the fifties. That car was worth sweating through the rest.

Brian Van Holt who played Miles looked like a young David Keith. The scene with the pigeons in the park was nice. And the joke bandied around about ...king" was good. The volatile woman on the street was funny.

Playing the big "con" was like putting on a play where everyone knows his part."

Rating:
Summary: Highly entertaining, very slick, and good laughs
Review: This is a good film. And this review doesn't have any spoilers so read on!

I liked Confidence. Why? Simply put, I felt like I was included in this group of heisters learning about what makes them suspicious, how they work, and what they're absoultely paranoid of.

I fell comfortably into the film so much that the heist they pulled worked on me too right up until the very end! Maybe I'm stupid...or maybe I was distracted by Rachel Weisz...doesn't matter, this film was a joy to watch from various angles. The directing was solid, editing was for the most part right on point considering that there's a bit of jumping around in this film.

There are some scenes that just stuck because they were executed perfectly. For example, pay attention to the scene at the bar with the banker. I felt like I was right there at the table laughing at the jokes and being a part of a group. That's it right there. That's why I watch movies, to become involved so much into the film and forget about everthing that takes place outside the theatre.

Confidence is a valued see for any heist fan. Regardless of whether you think they stole scenes from other movies or not, just go watch it and make your own opinion out of it. I enjoyed it very much and look forward to watching the commentary on DVD.

Rating:
Summary: One of the better films most people will miss this year.
Review: The first thing you will notice when this movie starts is it's independent, low budget feel. The second thing you notice is Ed Burns voice is not suited for voice over narration. It quickly makes you wonder why you came to see this movie and if you just wasted your money.

Confidence can easily be summed up as a cross between Oceans Eleven and The Usual Suspects. Sounds great you say? Well, as good as the movie is, it doesn't quite do what the afore mentioned movies do so well. It's sort of gets caught in the middle. This isn't really a complaint as coming close to either of those two films is an acheivement on it's own.

The film stars Ed Burns as Jake, the leader of a crew of con men (sound familiar?). At some point in the story, he and his fellows con a victim from a sizable amount of money. As it turns out, that money wasn't his. He was transporting it for organized crime racketeer Mr. King (Dustin Hoffman) who has a reputation of doing not-to-nice things to people who upset him. King wants his money back, and instead of running and hiding (like he should have) Jake confronts him and tells him he'll square the deal by doing a con job for him; letting King take a cut equal to what Jake took from him. King insists that the the mark (victim) of the con be a rival of his (a much bigger rival) and that they take on one of King's men to their crew. Along their way, they pick up Rachel Weis and plan the biggest con of their career. Unfortunately, a long time nemesis Treasury Department agent (played by Andy Garcia) wants Jake in a bad way and has just picked up his trail.

What follows is the plot of the film that, like the two films I mentioned earlier, should not be given away. In this post-Usual Suspects/Memento world, the edge of the twists in this film seem a bit dulled. However, the way the film opens up at the end showing you how everything went wrong (reminding your of American Beauty), Confidence grabs you and never lets go inching you closer, compelling you to wonder, "what happened?" "Where did it all go wrong?"

You may not be caught totally off guard at the films end, but you will appreciate the way the film got there, and the intelligence of the script. The film has been called "a poor man's Ocean's Eleven", but that is a good thing in a sense, as this films plot and characters are a lot more grounded in reality making the plot much more believable.

I thoroughly enjoyed this film and plan to add it to my DVD collection when available (I don't buy many films). Lower production values and some directing inadequecies prevented this film from being better, but in all I still easily give this a four-star rating. If you enjoy smart con/heist/caper movies, I highly recommend you check Confidence out.

Rating:
Summary: Confidence
Review: I enjoyed the movie. If you ever liked "The Sting", you'll enjoy this one. It didn't have any gory violence which was good. It had a great twisting story line with interesting characters.

Rating:
Summary: When The Con Is On, It Scores!
Review: Any con-artist will tell you that in order for any con to work no matter how big or small you have to gain the victim or the mark's confidence. Otherwise your target will see right through you and know he's being lead on. James Foley's "Confidence" knows this key ingredient and the movie gets our confidence and manipulates us.

I love, absolutely love con movies. I think most people find it fascinating to see how these people work. To see the cons unfold right before our eyes. Con movies often possess the same qualities a con-artist should. They are sleek and sneaky. Some con movies rank among my favorites. Take "The Grifters", or the works of David Mamet and films like "House of Games", "The Spanish Prisoner", and "Heist". And speaking of Mamet, "Confidence" remind us of his work. Foley directed "Glengarry Glenn Ross". But, "Confidence" doesn't seem to come off as polished. I don't care what anyone tells me I think Mamet's dialogue is dead on. But, Doug Jung, the writter of this movie, doesn't seem to have the sparkle Mamet does.

"Confidence" had me going along with it the first 2\3 of the movie. The final acts "seems" to fall apart. We start to question the actions the characters make. And yet again this leads us back to Mamet again and a theme and in fact a line that always shows up in his work, "Can you ever really trust anyone"?

"Confidence" starts off nicely, it's told in flashback form. We see a con in progress. Jake Vig (Edward Burns) and his team, including Gordo (Paul Giamatti) and Miles (Brian Van Holt) are conning a guy out of a large amount of money. The con seems to go well, until, someone dies. That my friends, is never a good sign. It seems the guy they conned was carring money that didn't belong to him, but instead belonged to "King" (Dustin Hoffman, who is truly one of the highpoints of the movie). King, naturally wants his money back. And soon Jake makes a deal with King to get back his share. The plan is to con Morgan Price (Robert Forster from "Jackie Brown"). Price is a ... bussiness man who King has something against. Only problem is, it's just about impossible to con him. So Jake gets together a new team including Lily (Rachel Weisz) and Lupus (Franky G.) who works for King.

"Confidence" is one of those movies where you should walk into it knowing nothing. Not to worry, I didn't give away any vital information. I've only told you what you've probably seen in the trailers.

Now, is this movie worth seeing? I don't think a large part of the audience will enjoy it. As I said the first 2\3 of the movie is entertaining and the third act has problems. But, everything is resolved, only, I wish the conclusion would of come about differently. I also didn't like the fact that the story was told in flashback. When the movie is just telling it's story that's when it's at it's best. When it's dealing with the flashback set-up, it doesn't seem "correct". Something about it seems phoney to me. I just felt it wouldn't really be handle that way. But, a big surprise is going to happen. If "Confidence" would of kept going on the track it started for itself, it could of been one of the year's best movies. But, "Confidence" is conning itself. It's payoff just felt like it's cheating us. Some may be extremely disappointed, others, may love it. But, I didn't really buy it.

So why does the movie work? Because it is directed with a lot of style. James Foley really tells the story in an interesting way. And the acting is quite good and at moments, great. Rachel Weisz and Burn may not have much chemistry onscreen together, but, they do have a lot of charm. They keep the movie going. And like I said Hoffman is a highlight. His role slows down as the movie goes along, but, when he is onscreen it's a pleasure. "Confidence" has good points to it which makes it hard for me to totally bash the movie. There is real craft here and it shows. I just wished they could of worked on that third act!

Bottom-line: Entertaining con movie that may not hit the level of films by Mamet, but still brings somethng to the table. Fine acting and impressive directing is the film's saving grace.

Rating:
Summary: Hardly a classic, BUT
Review: it's still an completely enjoyable film, with great dialogue, good acting (Hoffman and Garcia, even thought their roles are small, are tremendous, and the others are more than a notch or two above average, too), and while some of it may be predictable to caper-movie addicts, there are also a few neat little twists on the obvious. Definitely worth seeing. YOu may even find yourself wishing it were a little longer.
PS: And a BIG thanks to the reviewer who also pointed out that some people simply cannot comprehend what what "review" means and just give the whole film away. At least I'm not the only one who feels that way!!

Rating:
Summary: WHOS CONNIN WHO
Review: First off, a big thumbs down to the fellow reviewer who gives away the end of the movie---that's really mean. Anyway, CONFIDENCE is a slick and disarmingly charming con movie, buoyed by a cast of very talented performers. Edward Burns, he of the limited emotional range, nevertheless brings a cool self-confidence in his role as Jake, the narrator of the story; Rachel Weisz gets better with every movie and does a good job in her role as Lily, the pickpocket; Dustin Hoffman is incredible in a change of pace role as a sleazy, comic yet threatening crime boss; Andy Garcia wanders through his small role with his typical panache; Paul Giamatti (overlooked for this year's Sideways) adds a lot of colorful support, as do Brian van Holt and Franky G as fellow conspirators; Franky is effectively smarmy as the musclebound henchman of Hoffman's. Rounding out the cast are Donal Logue, Luis Guzman, Robert Forster, Morris Chestnut and Leland Orser. Director James Foley keeps the camera work sharp and quick, Stewart Copeland's score is great, and the ending fooled me, and should fool you too IF you don't read our fellow reviewer's spoiler.
A surprisingly enjoyable movie.

Rating:
Summary: Truly awful
Review: The plot is both illogical and incredibly formulaic. It's like they strung a bunch of overused gangster movie cliches together. In general, the characters are all "types" of one kind or another. Irritating cardboard cutouts yapping cliches at each other.

Dustin Hoffman has been in some great movies, but this is a low point. Although he is the only actor in the movie who at least attempts to be original. You can see that he's trying to bring something to his character, but he just seems to be trying too hard.

If you want to watch a movie about con artists, try the brilliant House of Games, or The Grifters, which is excellent.

Rating:
Summary: Another sting
Review: With more than a nod to the Sting from the 1970s, this is an entertaining litle film with a good cast showing how a sound script, good acting can add up well.

It has the femme fatale, the crooked cop, the evil baddy, and the conman and the thug henchman. It has a delightful bent script and it is a lot of fun.

Good film that is well done.