Michael Caine plays a working class stiff with more brains than money in the humiliating role of janitor amidst some of the most privileged upper class -- a diamond wholesaler similar to De Beers with a virtual monopoly on diamonds.
Movie buffs might want to compare this to "Gambit," one of Caine's earliest movies, which co-starred Shirley MacLaine. To tell you the precise connection would be to give away the endings of both movies. In Gambit, Caine uses Shirley MacLaine; in Flawless, Caine uses Demi Moore. I wonder if Edward Anderson, the writer on "Flawless," was familiar with "Gambit."
This sort of crime caper was hot in the early 1960s, with Charade being the best of the genre. They were an offshoot of Alfred Hitchcock's wry, thriller-mystery style, especially North by Northwest. However, Flawless is devoid of the light humor that made these movies so classy and cool. Instead, it is heavy and dark, like Double Indemnity. And it lacks precision in fitting the pieces together. Instead, the plot relies too much on luck and impulse, rather than logic.
This is a period piece, which it establishes with women's dress styles, and a few cars in the street. It would have been better to place it in 1965-1970; there are some jarring anachronisms for 1960.
This business of blood diamond protests is off by 30 years; black miners protesting in South Africa in 1960? You must be kidding! They'd be thrown in jail. And there simply weren't sign waving street protesters for any issue in 1960; that began in the second half of the 1960s. Even the press were polite in 1960, unlike the pack of jackals portrayed in the movie.
Basic anachronisms annoy me because it suggests kids at work who don't know or care about history -- much like the dippy newspaper editor in the movie. The LP was introduced in 1948 and runs at 33 rpm, singles were released on 45s; the record Demi Moore is listening to in her apartment is playing at 78 rpm. Couldn't she afford a new phonograph? I guess they didn't want viewers reading the Brenda Lee "I'm Sorry" label, which didn't match the cool jazz actually playing, also anachronistic by at least five or 10 years. However, Dave Brubeck's "Take Five" was first recorded in 1959, so it fits.
I'm skeptical they had television cameras as small as the ones used for surveillance in 1960. Professional studio TV cameras were huge back then and used tubes (valves), but compact transistor cameras would have begun showing up around 1965. They didn't have automatic timed switching between surveillance cameras till later.
In the press mob scene the photographer is waving a Speed Graphic that uses 4x5" sheet film and flash bulbs, which belongs in the 1930s. By the 1950s, press photographers had switched to 2 1/4" roll film, probably a Rolleiflex, if not a 35mm Leica or the Nikon rangefinder, which swept the press corps in the 1950s, or the Nikon F SLR (1959). Plus, they had electronic flash strobes by then, with the Honeywell Strobonar "potato masher" the most popular with the press.
The device used to record the interrogation was a Dictaphone Dictabelt, which recorded a groove with a needle, and which was still in use in 1960. But a real investigator might have used a Uher battery operated 5 inch reel to reel, or maybe a Nagra Kudelski.
Sure, this may be quibbling, but it all gets in the way of the viewer becoming immersed in the movie's reality. Plenty of movies get historical details right; Quantum Leap nailed it every week.
It would have been simpler to place this around 1965; there were still limits on women, but this was about the time they began to challenge the glass ceiling, like Demi.
I guess youngsters seem to think the "Sixties" began suddenly in 1960. You see the same in Chocolat, where long-haired hippies sail into town in 1959. Yet in reality, long hair on guys didn't happen until 1966 and on. If you are going to make period movies, get some old Look and Life magazines and thumb through the pictures and articles. Or use Google images.
Both Demi Moore and Michail Caine's performances were very good. I wouldn't have known it was Demi Moore without the credits, she so disappears into the role.
One other note: I'm a bit skeptical that the skimpy amount of diamonds in the safe could have been worth a $100 million ransom, especially in 1960, and would not keep such a large enterprise in business for long. De Beers has whole storerooms filled from floor to ceiling with diamonds. But I guess the reality would have been hard to believe, among other logistical problems.
Spoiler alert:
But the biggest deal breaker is the ending. Demi writing checks soon after the crime for millions of dollars all over the world? Interpol would have been on to her like flies to honey. And what happens to Hobbs? "I never heard from him again," Moore says. That's all? That's writing?
If Flawless had been released in the early 1960s, amid movies like North By Northwest, Charade, Mirage, Goldfinger, The Ipcress File and Gambit, it would have fallen flat.
A caper movie needs a kicker ending. Flawless gets trapped by its flashback format, which results in a dull, fade to black ending. It would have been better for Moore to tell the reporter: "Yes, it's been 40 years, and I've kept quiet. But now the statute of limitations is over." And then we see her writing checks to give the money away. And then we see the flower covered grave site.
Movie buffs might want to compare this to "Gambit," one of Caine's earliest movies, which co-starred Shirley MacLaine. To tell you the precise connection would be to give away the endings of both movies. In Gambit, Caine uses Shirley MacLaine; in Flawless, Caine uses Demi Moore. I wonder if Edward Anderson, the writer on "Flawless," was familiar with "Gambit."
This sort of crime caper was hot in the early 1960s, with Charade being the best of the genre. They were an offshoot of Alfred Hitchcock's wry, thriller-mystery style, especially North by Northwest. However, Flawless is devoid of the light humor that made these movies so classy and cool. Instead, it is heavy and dark, like Double Indemnity. And it lacks precision in fitting the pieces together. Instead, the plot relies too much on luck and impulse, rather than logic.
This is a period piece, which it establishes with women's dress styles, and a few cars in the street. It would have been better to place it in 1965-1970; there are some jarring anachronisms for 1960.
This business of blood diamond protests is off by 30 years; black miners protesting in South Africa in 1960? You must be kidding! They'd be thrown in jail. And there simply weren't sign waving street protesters for any issue in 1960; that began in the second half of the 1960s. Even the press were polite in 1960, unlike the pack of jackals portrayed in the movie.
Basic anachronisms annoy me because it suggests kids at work who don't know or care about history -- much like the dippy newspaper editor in the movie. The LP was introduced in 1948 and runs at 33 rpm, singles were released on 45s; the record Demi Moore is listening to in her apartment is playing at 78 rpm. Couldn't she afford a new phonograph? I guess they didn't want viewers reading the Brenda Lee "I'm Sorry" label, which didn't match the cool jazz actually playing, also anachronistic by at least five or 10 years. However, Dave Brubeck's "Take Five" was first recorded in 1959, so it fits.
I'm skeptical they had television cameras as small as the ones used for surveillance in 1960. Professional studio TV cameras were huge back then and used tubes (valves), but compact transistor cameras would have begun showing up around 1965. They didn't have automatic timed switching between surveillance cameras till later.
In the press mob scene the photographer is waving a Speed Graphic that uses 4x5" sheet film and flash bulbs, which belongs in the 1930s. By the 1950s, press photographers had switched to 2 1/4" roll film, probably a Rolleiflex, if not a 35mm Leica or the Nikon rangefinder, which swept the press corps in the 1950s, or the Nikon F SLR (1959). Plus, they had electronic flash strobes by then, with the Honeywell Strobonar "potato masher" the most popular with the press.
The device used to record the interrogation was a Dictaphone Dictabelt, which recorded a groove with a needle, and which was still in use in 1960. But a real investigator might have used a Uher battery operated 5 inch reel to reel, or maybe a Nagra Kudelski.
Sure, this may be quibbling, but it all gets in the way of the viewer becoming immersed in the movie's reality. Plenty of movies get historical details right; Quantum Leap nailed it every week.
It would have been simpler to place this around 1965; there were still limits on women, but this was about the time they began to challenge the glass ceiling, like Demi.
I guess youngsters seem to think the "Sixties" began suddenly in 1960. You see the same in Chocolat, where long-haired hippies sail into town in 1959. Yet in reality, long hair on guys didn't happen until 1966 and on. If you are going to make period movies, get some old Look and Life magazines and thumb through the pictures and articles. Or use Google images.
Both Demi Moore and Michail Caine's performances were very good. I wouldn't have known it was Demi Moore without the credits, she so disappears into the role.
One other note: I'm a bit skeptical that the skimpy amount of diamonds in the safe could have been worth a $100 million ransom, especially in 1960, and would not keep such a large enterprise in business for long. De Beers has whole storerooms filled from floor to ceiling with diamonds. But I guess the reality would have been hard to believe, among other logistical problems.
Spoiler alert:
But the biggest deal breaker is the ending. Demi writing checks soon after the crime for millions of dollars all over the world? Interpol would have been on to her like flies to honey. And what happens to Hobbs? "I never heard from him again," Moore says. That's all? That's writing?
If Flawless had been released in the early 1960s, amid movies like North By Northwest, Charade, Mirage, Goldfinger, The Ipcress File and Gambit, it would have fallen flat.
A caper movie needs a kicker ending. Flawless gets trapped by its flashback format, which results in a dull, fade to black ending. It would have been better for Moore to tell the reporter: "Yes, it's been 40 years, and I've kept quiet. But now the statute of limitations is over." And then we see her writing checks to give the money away. And then we see the flower covered grave site.