Beirut (Review)
They Don’t Make Thrillers Like Beirut Anymore.
The problem with Beirut is that it comes off as an honest CIA thriller. In other words, the hero isn’t a gun-toting super soldier trying to save the world from a scar-faced villain. Instead, this plays much more like a contract negotiation. That being said, I really liked how thoughtful Beirut was when it came to its execution. It’s a poker game between power players in the middle east and everyone is playing their cards close to their vests. It might not have a lot of gunfights, but Beirut manages to keep audiences invested and on the edge of their seats.
Beirut is very much a movie about redemption but doesn’t really tackle it in the cheesy way you might expect. Jon Hamm is the shadow of what was once a great man. A diplomat in Beirut that had everything taken from him in one fateful night. He’s got a drinking problem that would kill a lesser man but finds himself given a chance to make up for all his mistakes when the CIA comes to him to help broker a deal to save his former friend.
The premise seems like any other films, but Jon Hamm brings the charm necessary to his character to make him likable despite how much a prick he can be. He’s a man who doesn’t have the patience for the tiptoeing that his old job required and instead plays bad cop as he pushes people to stop playing politics. Of course, given that he’s working for the CIA everyone’s motives are questionable it makes sense that he prefers to be a lone wolf. However, he doesn’t give a damn about anything but negotiating the deal for his friend’s life and that gives him plenty of opportunities to rustle some feathers with the spooks who think they can play the game better than him.
In a lot of ways, Beirut reminds me of good old-fashioned spy thrillers from the 60’s and 70’s. Movies, where brains were more valuable than bullets and the hero wasn’t exactly Captain America. Most of Beirut takes place in a shadowy area between right and wrong. Of course, it’s pretty clear who the bad guys are in the movie, but they’re on both sides of the deal leaving Hamm to balance on the tightrope between them. Throughout the movie, the audiences are asked the question if the ends justify the means as Hamm goes behind backs and brokers deals that are sure to create plenty of problems in the future. It’s hard to stay mad at him though as his methods always seem to get results. Soon he’s managed to make plenty of enemies with his short-sighted laser focus. Of course, this only makes the movie all the more thrilling.
As good as the script and the cast is in Beirut, I was awestruck by the setting of the film. The city is a war-torn mess with blown out and bullet-riddled buildings that speak to the suffering the people have had to endear. It’s filled with militia checkpoints, smoking rubble and plenty of gunfire to fill the quiet nights. The city is a powder keg ready to explode at any moment and Hamm is forced to run a gauntlet through it. By the end, he’s sweat soaked and frantic. Something that speaks to the intensity of the landscape he has to navigate.
Beirut is a smart film with plenty of substance to it. There are plenty of moments of excitement, but it’s so much more than that. Tony Gilroy does a beautiful job creating a thriller that sucks in the audience and forces them to pay attention to all the little details. The only problem is that it’s a little too heavy-handed when it comes to the past of its central character. Hamm is wallowing in self-pity constantly throughout the film and it starts to get a little overdone by the end of it. Plus, director Brad Anderson really likes to show Hamm drinking. Despite this though, Beirut manages to be a movie that doesn’t have to tell you how smart it is, rather it shows you. Gilroy creates a web of intrigue that leaves the audience guessing until the very end and Anderson manages to bring it perfectly to life.
