Review of The Informant! (2009) by Chads. — 23 Sep 2009

Those voiceovers, those digressive voiceovers: What is the moviegoer to make of them? Understanding the functionality of Mark Whitacre's non-sequitirs is what makes "The Informant" such a beguilling film to watch.

Are Whitacre's ramblings triggered by his manic-depressive condition; are his interior monologues an involuntary occurence, a voice made intrinsic by psychosis which he has no control over? Does the film side, or disagree with Whitacre supporters, who contend that their man, this convicted felon, got an unfair sentence? Did he put the ly-(lie) in lysine? Corn and its prevalence in our lives almost has a literal effect on this husband and father of three(or is that one?), an executive-turned-whistleblower who can rattle off a CORN-ucopia of facts at will, as perhaps, a quasi-semblant means of self-preservation.

But what if his palaverous fact-based discourses are actually calculated flights of fancy; what if the voiceovers are a symptom of fallible narration, coded talk about money-laundering and embezzelment schemes masquerading as wide-eyed gibberish? At Whitacre's sentencing, the presiding judge can't help but roll his eyes at the ADM executive's mentioning of his own bipolar disorder, because the robed man deems this whistleblower's actions as nothing more than a case of "garden-variety greed".

The judge doesn't go so far as to call Whitacre's manic depression an outright fabrication, which for him is being tactful, since he irrevocably disreputes the defense's theory of cause and effect, a viewpoint that may prove to be the same as the filmmaker's.

An early scene between the bamboozled FBI agent(Scott Bakula) and Whitacre has the distinction of containing a voiceover that's incongruously appurtenant to the situation, in which the whistleblower comments on Brian's overall affability and nice guy-ness, instead of going off at a tangent on, say, high-end sushi and matadors, after his second interview.

For once, he sounds introspectively thoughtful, and not like some kind of kook. Such cognizance backs up the judge's assertion that there was no crossover between Whitacre's bipolarity and his nefarious acts of capitalistic creativity.