Good scenes, but does it work?
A ridiculously absurd collection of scenes that play like solid screenwriting exercises trapped inside a plot that makes absolutely no sense. I imagine David Koepp came up with the general premise—a female CIA operative manipulates everyone around her, and her husband, also an agent, is willing to do anything to protect her—and then spent hours using AI to research technical details. The result? A screenplay that feels overly economical, rushed, and oddly truncated.
The film is packed with strange scene ideas, clichés galore, and absurd character dynamics. Why do these agents work together, see each other as psychological patients, and also party together like college roommates? Michael Fassbender’s character gets everyone to take polygraph tests just because he’s the main character, apparently.
Everything feels too written. The entire movie takes place over a week, with title cards announcing each day—“Monday,” “Tuesday,” “Wednesday,” etc.—in a way that distracts more than it adds. Koepp knows how to write a great scene, but this script is proof that writing great scenes isn’t the same as writing a great screenplay.
I understand why Cate Blanchett took the role: it gives her mystery, intelligence, presence—she is the film’s center. And I get why Fassbender signed on too—it’s probably the best role he could land post-scandal. But it’s also telling that no other A-listers are in this. Everyone else feels like filler, characters written to fill a scene rather than a world.
Not a worthless movie. But definitely a frustrating one. A weak premise that could’ve been done much, much better.
Rating: 5.5/10
Avidavr: Media Reviews 