Movie Mini-Review: Match Point

Do you like suspense movies? Okay. Do you like movies about amoral people? If so, you might find “Match Point” to your liking. Woody Allen directed this movie, but except for one fleeting bit of dialog about a couple with overlapping neuroses, you would never know it. Well, that amoral thing comes to mind, but that hardly distinguishes Mr. Allen from many his colleagues.

Set in London, “Match Point” is one part Hitchcock and one part “Talented Mr. Ripley,” with a dash of “Fatal Attraction” thrown in. The lead character is played by Jonathan Rhys Meyers, who is apparently an honors student at Joaquin Phoenix’s school of blank slate acting. He is a social climber with a sketchy, undefined past and no prospects for the future other than whatever may be most beneficial to himself. He, as does the film, meditates on the nature of luck as the driving force in the universe, as barren a worldview as one could imagine. He finds himself in the company of a very well-to-do family that carries on a baronial 18th-century lifestyle in the modern day. They are kind, and slightly silly in the way that comes from existing in a completely different class than the rest of society. They are also utterly ignorant (whether willful or not, the film does not explore) of the struggles, temptations and venality of life lived by ordinary people, two of which have entered their circle.

A convention of western literature is that the narrator of a story, whether an omniscient voice or that of a character, will be reliable. Skilled writers that manipulate this convention can create stirring, memorable works, such as Faulkner in “The Sound and the Fury,” or Chris Nolan with his film “Memento.” Another less firm convention is that lead characters will ultimately be liked or admired by the audience. Opposition to this model has long been a staple of writers and moviemakers, so much so that the “antihero” is a modern convention in and of itself. The legends of James Dean and Marlon Brando were built upon the antihero motif, and even many of Humphrey Bogart’s roles could be considered early examples of the type.

Match Point chooses to go a postmodern route by modifying the antihero archetype. The lead character exhibit the dangerousness and whiff of scandal required of the model, but he lacks the positive qualities and experiences that would ordinarily redeem the “-hero” from the “anti-” aspect of his nature. What the moviegoer is left with is a man who does bad things for bad reasons, without a glimmer of goodness in his soul. That his actions affect a vain, daft family on hand, and a selfish, unsuccessful fellow climber on the other fail to bathe him in redemptive waters. Ultimately, this is a film about a person who is revealed to be increasingly unlikable as the story unfolds.

That being said, the film delivers on the suspense, with the requisite number of twists and turns. The moral dilemma posed by the lead character, as unpleasant as it may be, is a defining feature of the movie. The performances are uniformly skilled (except perhaps for Mr. Rhys Myers; his face betrays little in the way of nuance outside of the obvious emotional scenes). Scarlett Johansson, with her jarring American sensuality all of smolder and smoke, provides a compelling counterpoint to the bored-stiff upper lip of the other characters. Woody Allen keeps his tics to a minimum (except for the maddeningly invasive mother character, who plays to every stereotype of a Jewish mother in spite of her Range-Rover-and-tea raiments). In all, this is an intriguing film, if ultimately deeply frustrating.

It is said the rich are not like you and me. If “Match Point” is any guide, be very glad of that.