There’s a theory that says if you want your audience to like a character, make them good at their job. You can have a lot of character flaws but hey, if you’re the world’s best bank robber, people have to admit you know what you’re doing. We may not want to hang out with that person, but we’re usually interested in watching them work. There’s a thing called “Competence Porn” for a reason.
“In the Grey” takes the fun out of that porn. Guy Ritchie has been pushing the “good at their job” theory to the limit for so long that now it’s hacking and wheezing. His latest film is an exercise in baseline competence and generic coolness. It’s steely in every conceivable way and it’s a one way ticket to Dullsville. Population: this poor, poor cast.
“In the Grey” stars Eiza González as Rachel Wild, because everyone has cool names. She’s basically the world’s most expensive loan shark, because her whole mission is to make a very bad man return a billion dollars he borrowed from a fancy bank. She has two badass minions. Jake Gyllenhaal plays Bronco, because everyone has cool names. Henry Cavill plays Sid, who sometimes gets fun nicknames, because everyone has cool names.
Rachel’s plan is to put a stranglehold on the bad guy’s fortunes until he finally agrees to pay up, and she uses Bronco and Sid to do her dirty work, like bugging corrupt accountants and shooting countless people in the streets. The first two thirds of “In the Grey” is bland supercool antiheroes planning to do cool things, occasionally doing them, and the last third is a protracted chase scene writer/director Ritchie set up early in the movie, with carefully placed booby traps and secret tunnels. That chase scene takes place three months after the rest of the action, so I guess all those traps still worked and nobody accidentally set them off that whole time because… I dunno, miracles?
“In the Grey” is about nothing except its own slickness. And it’s slick. It’s efficiently photographed and everyone looks attractive in their billowy shirts standing in front of tropical skylines. And sure enough they’re amazing at their jobs. Too amazing. It turns out the whole “audiences like anyone good at their job” rule doesn’t apply if they’re so good at their jobs that nothing challenges them, or if their jobs are so meaningless to the audience, to the world, and even to them, that there’s no reason to give a damn. And “In the Grey” has both problems.
You can see Eiza González trying, as much as anyone could, to add something to her character, but only when the film gives her a chance, and that’s only two or three times and 0nly for a couple seconds. She’s in life and death situations and it’s clear that, unlike her henchmen, she’s not used to this level of violence. Odd that she’s so unflappable about planning it, but okay, it’s easier said than done. Yet those momentary shakes she gets go away immediately, and nothing comes of them. They’re just a reminder that someone, theoretically, in the world as we know it, might emerge from a bloody firefight at least a little perturbed. A little. For a few seconds.
Gyllenhaal and Cavill are, of course, charming leads under normal circumstances. But these circumstances are way too normal. There’s nothing to challenge them and nothing that brings them to life. They’re casually flirtatious with each other but it sounds like stuff tough guys say because it’s funny, not actual love. That’s a pity because that would have been worth exploring. These two hunky, unstoppable badasses have real feelings for each other? That would add chemistry and depth to even this diet, caffeine-free action movie junk. These two hunky, unstoppable badasses say quippy, meaningless things? That doesn’t even count as a character trait. It’s just padding a screenplay with ironic detachment.
Everyone once in a while it’s useful to take note of a film that’s technically competent but utterly uninvolving. It’s not that “In the Grey” is a disaster. A lot of skill went into making something this disastrously gormless. But there’s no “A” for effort here, because no effort went into making this timewaster worthwhile.
At least the title is accurate: “In the Grey” is very, very, very grey.
“In the Grey” is now playing only in theaters.
