Review of The Thomas Crown Affair (1999) by Chris M — 06 Aug 2013

I should probably start my review for the 1999 version of The Thomas Crown Affair by confessing that I did not see the original 1968 version of the film starring Steve McQueen and Faye Dunaway. I mention this for the sake of informing my readers that no comparisons between the remake and the original will be made here even though I do know that another version exists. With that being said, I honestly think that while the 1999 version of The Thomas Crown Affair, starring Pierce Brosnan and Rene Russo, mostly succeeds at offering two hours of escapism to the audience, it suffers significantly from the fact that it is straight up forgettable.

In The Thomas Crown Affair, we follow a wealthy businessman by the name of Thomas Crown (Pierce Brosnan) who feels bored and is looking for a little challenge in his life whether it would be betting on a golf putt or racing on a catamaran. One day, he constructs a heist to steal a highly valuable painting from the Metropolitan Museum of Art. Enter investigator Catherine Banning (Rene Russo) and Detective Michael McCann (Denis Leary) to try and solve his crime. When Catherine catches on quickly that Mr. Crown committed the crime, a game of cat-and-mouse ensues between the two as they fall in love with each other. Now, she must decide whether to turn him in or become his wife.

As you can tell, this is the kind of fluffy plot that a great director like Alfred Hitchcock would have had the pleasure of helming. Among the positive aspects of this picture, I liked the heist at the beginning of the film in terms of its execution and the way it unraveled itself. I thought Rene Russo in general is physically attractive in this picture, and the performances from Pierce Brosnan and Denis Leary are alright.

Aside from those elements, there really is not much to talk about with a film like this. The film just basically does what it was created to do and that is pretty much it. Because this film is so fluffy and mechanical, it offers very little that would be memorable a week from when it was last watched. Basically, about 90% of this picture has been erased from my memory it leaves so little an impact.

Do not get me wrong, I like fluffy entertainment as much as the next person. To Catch a Thief (1955) is a classic example of fluffy entertainment done to perfection. All I am saying is that if you are going to make quality Saturday matinée entertainment in the tradition of such films, do your best at making it a memorable enough experience. Give me quality storytelling that is focused and always engrossing, give me an interesting romance that feels real, and make sure the characters in the film actually contribute to the main plot.

Instead, this film provides us with a story that has decent potential at the beginning, but then slowly goes downhill as it progresses. I did not think the chemistry between Brosnan and Russo was that great to me since I thought that relationship felt too routine and too familiar. Additionally, I felt like I did not really get to know about any of the characters save for Denis Leary's, who does have a good bit at the end about what he really thinks of his current occupation.

That's Faye Dunaway as Thomas Crown's psychiatrist, and you could say it is interesting to note that she decided to star in both versions of the same film. Having said that, I thought there was no reason why the scenes with the psychiatrist were needed because those scenes did not contribute to the plot in any way, shape, or form. There are a few other scenes like this in which I did not know what was supposed to be accomplished from them. Between that and the lackluster chemistry, this film could have benefited greatly from better story editing.

In the end, I think The Thomas Crown Affair, for all the complaints I've just made about it, is an ideal example of a film that is perfect for rental. It's one of those films that are basically a mixed bag that contains both things to like and dislike. It's good for rental since you can skip over the parts you don't really care about and fast forward to whatever it is you like from it, but just don't consider this film a must-see.