The Rip
Wait long enough, and apparently even Matt and Ben will make an average movie...
One could argue that holding them to the standard they’ve set - individually and together - for decades is unfair. That person won't be me, though. I'm immediately reminded of the thoughts shared by my Dad in his "A perspective on movies."
Beyond that kind of thinking, rating art is a multi-functional act. That is, you can rate movies based on how much of your time or money they're worth for a Wednesday afternoon matinee or on how much they'll make you want to think about lighting and direction in a heavy Saturday night analysis. Neither one of those approaches, nor any of the hundreds in between, makes you a smarter or more reliable source. They just refer to different applications.
I could evaluate the movie on its merits, identifying where in the hundreds of approaches it fits best, but that would be dishonest. You would never sit down to watch Fast Five, for example, without the explicit acknowledgment of the place from which you are viewing it. For some movies, the lens is dictated to you; you don't choose it. Whether fair or not, the same goes for these guys. Pretending that you could watch the film without the expectation of clever, approachable writing, relatable commentary on human nature, and a gripping storyline would be purely performative.
To me, this movie only did the last of those things particularly well. Suspense builds gradually, frequently asking you to question obviously-placed crumbs, but always placing those crumbs after directing you away from where they ultimately lead. Matt Damon's character revealing a different amount for The Rip to each of his deputies seems obvious in retrospect, but it comes immediately after a revealing text message that makes you question his role in the stash house robberies. And when they make it explicit once more - in the call to the stash house - they bury it with internal strife.
Better yet, the redirects are extremely well-supported by the character choices and development. Mike Ro's buildup and archetype perfectly disguise his "snitching" as cooperation with authorities rather than collaboration with the enemy. And some are further used as narrative tools in a way that genuinely works on the audience. I am not the type of viewer that spends the entirety of a movie trying to "solve" the unanswered questions. I choose mostly to "read and react," and this format works wonderfully from that vantage point.
Sadly, though, all of this is mixed amongst elementary writing and plot points that are shoved down your throat. There are few - if any - memorable lines, exchanges, or even deliveries, and the heavily-dialogued moments are almost startlingly hard to believe. The first scene featuring Damon and Affleck together has the opportunity to deliver a clever back-and-forth, enhance relevant relationship cues to legitimize upcoming plot points, and generally remind you why these two are so good together. Instead, it presents as mostly just boring, informal chatter and it watches as if they - two people who we know to have a wonderful rapport - are just two actors reading the lines they have been given.
The less egregious but equally as disappointing writing comes in the form of forced communication of the themes they seem to think the viewer mustn't miss. Detective Lolo asking what all these cartel rips are about so they can remind you the basis of the entire film, as if we are meant to believe this is the first time a bunch of cops who sit around shooting the shit have discussed this as a group before? C'mon. In the midst of having millions ripped from her home and a potential cartel attack on them all while she is there, Desiree feels a burning desire to ask Matt Damon about his tattoos? Too unbelievable to be saved by even the beautiful and heartfelt tie-back in the end. There is just too much talent in the movie to resort to this sort of stuff. Find a better way.
On that point, and as a bit of an aside, I do wonder if there is a disconnect with how people consume streaming content. These two did their whole PR blitz recently for the film, and of the many talking points, they both spoke at length about how streaming encourages more plot point reminders because viewers can be preoccupied by factors in their home that they wouldn't otherwise have been in a movie theater. I don't disagree with the notion, but I fairly strongly disagree with the solution they've adopted. I, for one, wouldn't prefer they dampen the movie quality in hopes that they deliver the most relevant plot points to people who might inconveniently miss it the first time but must be certain to catch it the second or third. Far be it from me to know how, but I have to think - over the course of a two-hour film - there are better ways. And these two are so fucking good you expect that they'd find them.
The movie is entertaining, but it mostly comes off as something that they wanted to cross off the bucket list, rather than an intense yet believable action film with memorable performances. I'll probably watch it again when the "feels like" temperature is 27 degrees below zero again or it is snowing another foot, but I don't expect much to change.