Inside Man (2006)

Absolutely the worst movie.

A movie that not only functions as a solid scarefest but a razor-sharp satire.

what a terribly boring film. I'm sorry but this is absolutely not deserving of best picture and will be forgotten quickly. Entertaining and engaging cinema? No. Nothing performances with flat faces and mistaking silence for subtlety.

An old-fashioned movie made with new-fashioned finesse.

Just discovered this movie and I was amused that the start of the movie is the same plot as casa de papel (money heist) ! Plus other similarities. Apart from that the movie is entertaining and well played

Inside ManThe sense of urgency is kept alive throughout the course of the feature that helps the audience reach to the climax swiftly which may come off as a bit poignant, hoax and unsatisfactory too (for some viewers) but it surely is undeniably entertaining. Spike Lee's execution skills is what holds this tale with multiple characters that even though has "seen-this-seen-that" screenplay by Russell Gewirtz and predictable twists, still delivers. Denzel Washington and Clive Owen are convincing in their parellel roles that portrays two sides of the coin and is supported with a great cast like Christopher Plummer, Jodie Foster and Willem Dafoe. Inside Man hits hard and fast in its first act where the writing doesn't flinch on taking bold risks which keeps the viewers on the edge of the seat and even though the last act is a bit slow, one can always root for Denzel and his amusing conversations that is smartly written with other characters.

While I am not a sophisticated movie reviewer, I do watch a lot of movies. I cannot recommend this one. The biggest reason is because we don't know the robbers motive and backstory - this really harms the movie. It was so disappointing for me. I didn't root for anyone and I'm left without knowing the point of the movie. Additionally, unless I dozed off, I didn't understand why they were digging a hole into the concrete floor - what was the objective of this and why didn't the police find the hole in the floor? I personally didn't like the mood of the movie, nor did I feel that it was well casted - William Defoe and Denzel Washington just didn't sell for me. Finally, I feel a little obtuse here, but I didn't understand Jodie Fosters character in this movie at all.On the upside, I did enjoy the plot twists. It had potential.

There really isn't any incentive for watching these movies, because of the poor directing that is set as a standard for modern movies, and because of the lack of inspiration caused by establishment writers stealing ideas from the better writers, as this movie so obviously shows us.It isn't a bad movie, but it has the flaws of modern movie making.It's a "bank heist with hostage" movie, but it's clear from the start that something else is happening. When the robbers separate the many hostages, and make everyone change garb over and over, including the garb of the robbers, we know they are intending to blend in with the crowd at the end in some way.In effect, it's much like the 1960 war movie, THEN THERE WERE THREE, in which a German is disguised as an American during a big battle involving many units that get split apart. The war movie is a hidden classic because of low budget and few big names, but it is written and directed skillfully.The first problem is the inane modern day use of "mixing time frames" which not only doesn't fit here, but is stupid, because it is contrived. It's a device meant to confuse whereas it doesn't work in real life. It only serves to hide the flaws of the plot. If you see the movie, you'll understand.Second problem is that every one of the hostages and robbers looks exactly alike. I believe there are about 4 that don't fit the pattern. All the men look alike, and most of the women look alike. And yet we're supposed to understand who is saying what at any time? Added to the "time frame mix".Third, no detective is as astute as Denzel's character. Of course, this is spoken of in the movie. Detectives are unimaginative and have no sense of reality compared to the cop on the beat. They're upwardly mobile machines who are incorrect about everyone most of the time, because they adhere to these dark ages of Psychiatry and Sociology meant to give the squeaky wheel the grease and avoid being hurt themselves.Fourth, the flood of information. That means all the useless crap we get that is purely in the movie to showcase or advertise someone's dialect, product, etc.. Because of the nature of this movie, that works as long as it doesn't interfere with the reality of the viewer piecing together the puzzle. It sets the viewer back from what the actual detective is piecing together.This fourth flaw is important, because it a simulation of modern culture, including Academia. Colleges and businesses pretend to give tests to grade students, but for the past 30 years, at the very least, have instead cheated. For example, a professor will ask a question in an oral test to a student, and then after the student answers, the professor will change the question, and will be backed up by the students who are part of the establishment. This happens in all U.S. universities I have attended. Businesses do this, too. It's the modern norm to keep control in the hands of the mob.Herein lies also the strength of the movie. The fact that no one really knows anything, and everyone is lying. However, the script is not very good at showing that.The fifth flaw is characters that no one can relate to. Again, this is because of modern culture, and because the control freaks are in control. They actually think we enjoy them bragging about their hatefulness, but only the geeks enjoy that. There is absolutely no explanation or credibility in some of the characters, particularly the blond woman who acts as a go between for police, bank president, and robber. She would never have been let into the situation by any of them. But then, this also serves as a strength of the movie, because Tarantino is telling us that the control freaks in charge are too moronic and self righteous to realize this woman is nothing. She has no assets. She's normal looking, not pretty by any means. She says nothing, offers nothing, and yet the ones in authority kowtow to her. That actually works. However, when Denzel's character gives in to her, we lose respect for him, too.The characters are mostly poorly written and done. The usual Hollywood preaching of "bank robbers are cool" fools the naïve, but not the rest of us, and it irks sane people.There are other modern movie flaws, but the production team was wise enough not to show that this "modern movie making" was indeed a flaw. It's a self depreciating bit that does make a point.Hits and misses. The worst part is the "mixed time frame" element. Get rid of that, and the movie will be a lot better.