Very well executed

Great Film overall

The film makes a home in your brain and the only cure is to see it again.

The film may be flawed, but its message is not.

"Inside Man" is a routine bank heist movie that's been made more interesting by the inclusion of a succession of entertaining twists, a collection of colourful characters and a surprising motive for the crime. Predictably, for a Spike Lee "joint", it also makes some political points about racial profiling, disrespecting religious beliefs and the damaging influences that violent video games can have on impressionable children. These issues are all touched on with great clarity but also without ever getting heavy-handed, disrupting the pace of the action or jarring with the regular moments of humour that add greatly to the enjoyment of watching this fine film.After a gang of four masked men wearing shades and dressed in painters' overalls invade a Wall Street bank and take its customers and staff as hostages, NYPD Detective Keith Frazier (Denzel Washington) is given responsibility for dealing with the crisis. The highly experienced hostage negotiator immediately bases himself in a Mobile Command Vehicle outside the Manhattan Trust and takes charge of communicating with gang-leader, Dalton Russell (Clive Owen) and listening to his demands.The bank's founder, Arthur Case (Christopher Plummer) is soon informed about the on-going heist and calls in a power broker called Madeleine White (Jodie Foster) because he's anxious to avoid the contents of his safe deposit box being stolen or becoming known to anybody else. White, who's well-recognised for her efficiency and discretion, uses her considerable power to go over Frazier's head and arrange a meeting with Russell in what turns out to be just one of a number of instances that wrong-foot the increasingly frustrated negotiator.When a point is reached where it appears that the only option left is to storm the bank, Russell, who'd listened-in to the planning of the action by courtesy of some strategically-placed listening devices, arranges for all the hostages to be released. However, as he'd compelled them all to wear overalls, shades and masks that were identical to those worn by the robbers, Frazier and his colleagues are left with the huge and difficult job of interviewing more than fifty people to try to determine which of them were genuine and which were not. The events that follow, then illustrate Russell's considerable skill as a criminal mastermind and Frazier's determination to pursue his investigations to their conclusion despite being ordered not to by his superiors.The high quality cast does a great job of making "Inside Man" a riveting thriller with Denzel Washington and Clive Owen both outstanding in their roles. Interestingly, the actions of the main characters (played by Washington, Owen, Plummer and Foster) all involve dark secrets and dubious actions which play neatly into the movie's theme about the ubiquity of corruption and its key role in the acquisition of wealth and power.

There really isn't any incentive for watching these movies, because of the poor directing that is set as a standard for modern movies, and because of the lack of inspiration caused by establishment writers stealing ideas from the better writers, as this movie so obviously shows us.It isn't a bad movie, but it has the flaws of modern movie making.It's a "bank heist with hostage" movie, but it's clear from the start that something else is happening. When the robbers separate the many hostages, and make everyone change garb over and over, including the garb of the robbers, we know they are intending to blend in with the crowd at the end in some way.In effect, it's much like the 1960 war movie, THEN THERE WERE THREE, in which a German is disguised as an American during a big battle involving many units that get split apart. The war movie is a hidden classic because of low budget and few big names, but it is written and directed skillfully.The first problem is the inane modern day use of "mixing time frames" which not only doesn't fit here, but is stupid, because it is contrived. It's a device meant to confuse whereas it doesn't work in real life. It only serves to hide the flaws of the plot. If you see the movie, you'll understand.Second problem is that every one of the hostages and robbers looks exactly alike. I believe there are about 4 that don't fit the pattern. All the men look alike, and most of the women look alike. And yet we're supposed to understand who is saying what at any time? Added to the "time frame mix".Third, no detective is as astute as Denzel's character. Of course, this is spoken of in the movie. Detectives are unimaginative and have no sense of reality compared to the cop on the beat. They're upwardly mobile machines who are incorrect about everyone most of the time, because they adhere to these dark ages of Psychiatry and Sociology meant to give the squeaky wheel the grease and avoid being hurt themselves.Fourth, the flood of information. That means all the useless crap we get that is purely in the movie to showcase or advertise someone's dialect, product, etc.. Because of the nature of this movie, that works as long as it doesn't interfere with the reality of the viewer piecing together the puzzle. It sets the viewer back from what the actual detective is piecing together.This fourth flaw is important, because it a simulation of modern culture, including Academia. Colleges and businesses pretend to give tests to grade students, but for the past 30 years, at the very least, have instead cheated. For example, a professor will ask a question in an oral test to a student, and then after the student answers, the professor will change the question, and will be backed up by the students who are part of the establishment. This happens in all U.S. universities I have attended. Businesses do this, too. It's the modern norm to keep control in the hands of the mob.Herein lies also the strength of the movie. The fact that no one really knows anything, and everyone is lying. However, the script is not very good at showing that.The fifth flaw is characters that no one can relate to. Again, this is because of modern culture, and because the control freaks are in control. They actually think we enjoy them bragging about their hatefulness, but only the geeks enjoy that. There is absolutely no explanation or credibility in some of the characters, particularly the blond woman who acts as a go between for police, bank president, and robber. She would never have been let into the situation by any of them. But then, this also serves as a strength of the movie, because Tarantino is telling us that the control freaks in charge are too moronic and self righteous to realize this woman is nothing. She has no assets. She's normal looking, not pretty by any means. She says nothing, offers nothing, and yet the ones in authority kowtow to her. That actually works. However, when Denzel's character gives in to her, we lose respect for him, too.The characters are mostly poorly written and done. The usual Hollywood preaching of "bank robbers are cool" fools the naïve, but not the rest of us, and it irks sane people.There are other modern movie flaws, but the production team was wise enough not to show that this "modern movie making" was indeed a flaw. It's a self depreciating bit that does make a point.Hits and misses. The worst part is the "mixed time frame" element. Get rid of that, and the movie will be a lot better.

This movie is one hell of a classy way to tell the story of a bank robbery. Spike Lee brings Gerwitz's story of an unusual bank robbery to life with a stylish noiristic flair. Though this isn't noir film there are definite overtones of the style throughout the film, which adds a greater depth and strength to the movie. Lee made a great choice here because I believe that without this element this could have easily been a boring film. There's not much action as most of the story is about trying to figure out what happened in the bank and just what were the robbers after. Luckily enough there's a plethora of acting talent to make this a very interesting movie, Even Clive Owen works well. I've always thought him to be very flat as an actor - verging on zero dimensional - though his woodenness works here as that persona is perfect for his character.The main letdown of the film is the story, which is also one of its greatest strengths. It's a letdown because it needed a tad more action and tension, there are a few cat and mouse scenes where these could have been expanded upon but were ignored. However, the strength comes from the whole concept, the twists, and the eventual climax of the story, which is brilliantly crafted and woven.The camera work is exemplary and on a couple of occasions beautiful. I particularly liked the pan shot from the rear of the police van as Frazier exits. The camera sweeps up and around, showing the crowd gathered at the cordon, then moves down in a slow arc to the person leaving the bank, surrounded police officers. The movement is so smooth. Then there's a great panning shot of the police officers as they search the bank after the hostages are released. This is, once again so steady and smooth. It was a pleasure to see as there's not a lot of this style of camera work around today.However, not all the camera shots work. The one where Frazier loses his temper and rushes out of the control vehicle is pretty risible and made me wince. Lee puts Washington on a wheeled stage and pulls him forward. at speed giving him a floating come flying movement. This was meant to represent his anger and haste at the situation. Unfortunately, the movement is juddering and the whole shot looks silly and feels wrong for the film; how it didn't end up on the cutting room floor. It would have been better to have Washington just run. Lee should check out the Nun scene from The Blues Brothers as this utilises the effect perfectly and makes the scene just perfect.Though this did detract from the film and breaks the link between the movie and its audience it doesn't do it to the point of hitting the off button.In fact, I would recommend this film to everybody who likes police procedures and stories with a mystery with plenty of twists. Back when this was made this would have been pretty original, though today, a lot of the issues in this film have been used quite a few times. A bank robbery that isn't a bank robbery. How do you get out of the building without being captured? Though, with Lee's involvement and the great cast, this is still worth a watch.

"Inside Man" is one of those movies that is hard to pin a ranking too. On one hand, it is an absolute blast to watch and let the mystery unravel. On the other hand, it pretty much does exactly that ("unravel") in the end.For a basic plot summary, this film sees Dalton Russell (Clive Owen) and a crew of henchmen stage a bank robbery. Detective Keith Frazier (Denzel Washington) is quickly called to the scene, only to slowly begin piecing together the notion that perhaps Russell has very different plans for the hostage scenario."Inside Man" grabs your interest right away and always keeps you guessing. Just when you think you might have a handle on what is going on, it throws you another curveball to keep you on the edge of your seat. As the mysteries continue to deepen, you'll become completely invested in just what the heck Dalton Russell is planning!This is also one of the best Denzel Washington performances ever put to film (and that is saying something). His chemistry with Owen produces some chilling scenes that only heighten the mystery/tension climate of the movie.Here's what keeps this movie from becoming a true classic, though (mild spoilers ahead): It truly is all about the build-up...the resolution really falls flat. "Inside Man" is squarely one of those films where the journey is far, far more fun than the actual destination.Though 4.5 stars would be ideal for this flick, I bump it up to five because it was just so darn fun to get hooked into the acting/mysteries of the overall experience. If you like fast-paced mysteries or are a big Denzel fan, this one is not to be missed.