By George Haerle
For The Daily World
How could a movie involving sex, violence, espionage and Jennifer Lawrence possibly be boring? Ask director Francis Lawrence, director of “Red Sparrow.” Based on the novel of the same name, the film somehow makes the tale of Dominika Egorova — a ballet dancer turned femme fatale spy for the Russian government — a chore to watch.
Performancewise, “Red Sparrow” is perfectly fine. Jennifer Lawrence does her best with what she’s given, but in some scenes she seems like signed on before she read the “meh” script and just rolled with it to the best of her abilities. Joel Edgerton plays Nate Nash, an American CIA agent who becomes both Dominika’s target and lover. He, too, is believable. The problem with both of the characters isn’t the people playing them, but how they are written. While their backstories are interesting, their dialogue is cliché and uninteresting, and their onscreen chemistry has about as much life as a dead battery.
The cast is rounded out by Jeremy Irons and a few other recognizable actors whose names you might not remember. The problem is almost every one of these characters aside from Irons is utterly forgettable. Once again, the writing fails the actors.
Even the cinematography and shooting locations, aside from a couple of swanky European hotel rooms, are completely uninteresting. I know it’s supposed to be cold, drab Mother Russia we’re talking about, but there are plenty of exotic Russian, London and Vienna locations that could have been used. The entire movie feels sterile, dull and urban, with barely a memorable color in sight except for an early ballet performance by Dominika. This is a spy movie! Where’s the excitement, exoticism and romanticism? Maybe it would have done disservice to the source material, but it wouldn’t have hurt to have taken one or two lessons from Bond movies into account.
On top of that, the film’s identity is all over the place. At its core, it’s a spy film, yes. But it practically hops genres from erotic sexy thriller to revenge tale to a very poor attempt at romance in the span of two hours and 20 minutes.
The best scenes, sad to say, are when the film indulges in its fleshiest or most brutal streaks. Several scenes that involve the dirtiest of spy work from seduction, a couple of chases, assassination, torture and hand-to-hand combat are the most entertaining things about the movie; if they did do anything right in terms of making a spy movie, this is it. You might think, “Isn’t that the case with a lot of films? Aren’t carnal knowledge and bloody carnage always the most engaging parts?” Engaging, yes, but it’s all just a nice paint job on a deflated balloon.
The meatiest parts of the movie make up maybe 30 or 40 minutes out of its run time. To say “Red Sparrow” is unenjoyable isn’t true, but it does make you work for its best parts by slogging through a swamp of plot progression scenes of dialogue and exposition that are — well, just that. Dialogue and exposition. For every chase or bloody encounter, there’s five to eight scenes of Russian diplomats talking or CIA officers planning their next move.
The movie does deserve a handful of bonus points for a good ending, which ties up Dominika’s central plot very satisfyingly.
If you’re a big Jennifer Lawrence fan or are itching to see a mature spy film, go see “Red Sparrow” to form your own opinion, as the reviews are mixed. But if you are on the fence at all, see “Annihilation” instead, or save your theater ticket money for something more worthwhile, as “Red Sparrow” is more worthy of Redbox.
* * *
“Red Sparrow” is currently playing at the Riverside Cinemas, 1017 S. Boone St. in Aberdeen.
George Haerle holds a bachelor’s degree in creative writing for media and lives in Cosmopolis.
