MovieChat Forums > The Contract (2007) Discussion > Calm down...not so bad.

Calm down...not so bad.


Wow, this movie evoked a lot of scathing hatred from a lot of people on this board, so I thought I'd add a little different perspective for others who might read this before deciding what to add to their netflix list.

First of all, there have been lots of movies I've seen that have angered me with their stupidity and plot twists you could see coming for miles. This was not one of them. I agree that this is not Oscar material, and it's below Cusack's usual standards, but I thought it was an altogether entertaining film, and doesn't deserve to be hated on by so many people who I guess just approach action movies with a whole different set of expectations than I do.

Okay, I too was wondering why Freeman didn't just sit down and refuse to go any further and force Cusack's hand. But then again I wonder that every time someone approaches someone else in a crowded area with a hidden gun and insists that they leave quietly and they do. It doesn't make sense, but we've seen it in a million movies, so I just chalked this one up as well to a necessary "suspension of disbelief" in order to get the plot moving.

As far as all the outrage at the movie's basic premise--that Cusack would actually try to bring this man to justice--it's misplaced. Clearly the man is desperate to overcome his own sense of powerlessness and restore his own faith in his sense of justice in the world. (Clearly hinted at with his reaction to his wife's death; there probably was more backstory that was edited out, but you have to be able to infer a little bit!) And he's just as desperate to redeem himself in the eyes of his son. And finally: once a cop always a cop...overconfidence in one's own abilities is not altogether rare in policemen. I had no problem with his initial and subsequent attempts to bring Carden to justice. And his rationality was further strengthened by his changing his mind and uncuffing the man once it became clear that it was no longer a feasible possibility.

Yes, the conspiracies were unsurprising, the repeated botched attempts at Carden's life a little too far-fetched, and Frank's whole crew was laughably underwritten and underacted. The movie is not without its flaws, but what exactly were people expecting from a straight to video release?? In all, if you're not focusing on the negatives, it's an enjoyable movie. The acting by the three main leads is superb, the pacing allows the tension to build rather nicely, and the ending is actually very good--Cusack's face says it all when he thinks he has accomplished nothing and that evil is still marching on unimpeded. But actually he has accomplished something--he has made an impression on what he had considered to be an unredeemable man, whose actions at the end suggest that maybe a change is beginning to stir within him.

I'm sure I'll get lambasted by all the psuedo intellectuals that get on here and feel it's their place to question the intelligence and character of people they've never met, but I don't care. I'm not "connected" to the movie in any way personally or financially, I just wanted other prospective viewers to get a different take on it. After watching it on netflix.com I rated it "really liked it" and even after reading several monumentally-negative reviews on this site, I stand by that rating.

reply

Viewable,
that's my rating. Sorry, but there is no suspense between the characters. It seems to me like a rehearsal (including the so-called production design). Didn't You wonder why so many producers and writers are involved?
What mean of transport is this kind of vehicle?

reply

You're right - it's certainly not the worst movie ever made.

But...you're at the video store and see Morgan Freeman & John Cusack on the box cover, then you see it's directed by the guy who also directed Tender Mercies and Driving Miss Daisy, and expectations shoot up quite a bit. And on paper the plot sounds intriguing.

If this was something you stumbled on late at night on HBO with Tom Wopat and Lou Gossett Jr. as leads, you'd probably not be so filled with disappointment.

reply

I share in your sentiments. I enjoyed this film quite a bit. It moved at a decent pace, had some funny dialogue, a surprise ending and enjoyed the acting.

Sat through many other more hyped films with better ratings and thought "What the heck!"

reply

What was the surprise ending? That question is more surprising and intriguing than anything in this movie.

I really hope YammyD comes back to this board to answer my question.

reply

Yeah This film entertained me for it's entirety. I've seen a hell of a lot worse and can't quite understand why people want to slate this film. Overall it's a good film, and not to be taken too seriously.

Here is an example of a really bad film "The Sound Of Thunder".

reply

Why should it not be taken seriously? That is what people always say about really bad films. Obviously, no one is watching it thinking 'Oh my god, Morgan Freeman is actually an assassin? So the acting was just a cover." The movie was not a spoof and it was not a thriller/comedy. It was a straight up action/thriller and it was terrible. It was terribly written and terribly directed. And like I've said before, it shocked me that two A-list actors did this movie.

reply

[deleted]


Count me as an I liked it.

It is a similar story to "3:10 to Yuma" and probably several other films. I'm not sure why it is not as good.

I am an aspiring screen writer so I wonder about what separates films from one an other. What good films seem to have is what I can only refer to as "something special". By that I mean something that is not essential to the plot but gives it something it wouldn't normally have. I think a prime example would be the Great Danes in "The Patriot". I would have been the same story with out it but it made the movie better.

The Contract didn't have that. It was a simple honest story that was well acted.

There was something about the look of the film that I didn't like. It looked and felt to me to be like a movie from the 70's, but I like 70's films so it's okay.

reply

I liked it too. And your comparison to "3:10 to Yuma" is apt because that's the redeeming feature of this movie. Morgan Freeman, our bad guy, is a monster but he's also articulate. He's not a sociopath; John Cusack and his son are not objects for him to walk over.

reply

So many plot holes that this is the worst movie I've ever seen. I wonder how many of the people voting this so high actually watched the movie.

It deserves a 2 at most in my opinion.

reply

Well saw this on dvd last year i think or this,anyway i liked it,and morgan freeman i liked the most.Though a bad guy in this,he was good in some ways at the end.

Christopher

reply

I also enjoyed this film. It reminded me a bit of "Cliffhanger" with Stallone. This didn't have the set-up of that film, or the huge action sequences, but I enjoyed it nonetheless. I could watch Morgan Freeman read the phone book, so that helps.

I don't understand why people expect every film to be the next "Merchant of Venice". These people spoke like normal human beings. We expect some cathartic moment like "Life is like a box of chocolates", but that is not a normal saying. You have to take movies at face value. I knew going in to "The COntract" that something wasn't Kosher. Two A-List actors in a straight-to-video film directed by Beresford. It seems like funding fell short to complete all production. The film was obviously trying to make a statement about stem-cell research. That fact just seemed to be thrown in to tie Freeman and Cusack together.

My final point is that one shouldn't go into "Saw IV" with the same expectations as "Michael Clayton" or "Atonement".

reply

I saw this movie a couple of days ago. I had no expectations about it. Some friends grabbed a couple of DVDs and this happened to be one of them. Not having heard of it, I figured it was a straight to DVD release. Then I saw it
had Freeman and Cusack in it so I thought it shouldn't be too bad.

These things taken into consideration I want to say on the whole it wasn't terrible, in fact it exceeded my expectations. I felt it remained consistent throughout, although at times I didn't like the night-time scens with that dark purple colorization. It felt at times like a "TV movie", but at the same time it had a plot that would have suited a mainstream release. I think I wanted a little more from it, I thought they were going to talk more about the stem cell research, so maybe a bit more controversy or something to make it more than just a chase movie with a father/son relationship to be resolved. Something to put it in the broader context of the world.

On the upside, I enjoyed the pair of local police - they had some funny lines - and they were consistently funny and did their job well. The helicopter crash
sequence was quite well done, as were the other action sequences throughout. They didn't try to overdo these unlike some recent action movies. I also enjoyed the resolution, that it didn't slide into Cusack-trying-to-kill-Freeman-and-suddenly-the-world-is-free-of-evil-and-everyone-lives-happily-ever-after. It had a nice tension at the end. I also loved Cardin's line: "this may come across as insensitive but I don't think you two were well suited for each other." Hilarious. Everyone in our group laughed.

The only thing that worried me on that note was that the girl didn't seem concerned or sad enough that her hubby(?) just died. Not enough tears considering the intensity of the ordeal. As others have said, Frank's crew were a bit underwritten, and a tad overacted but I'm wondering if they were going for a comic relief rather than seriousness. Also some of my group had issues with using the wireless internet in the woods.

All in all, a better movie than I expected, several funny moments, some good action scenes, beautiful scenery, story needed just a little more for my book, but good performances by the leads and the boy. A cut above the usual straight to DVD releases. Not terrible but thankfully it didn't revert to outright silliness. Worth seeing for the Freeman fans out there.

reply

OK, there were great holes in the plot and highly improbable actions took place. So.....

I enjoyed the film all the way through. I enjoyed the silly one-liners and country bumpkin police. I loved the continued incompetence of all those supposed professional assassins and FBI agents. I was even amused with the loss of the pathetic stockbroker who was worried about losing his license for destruction of public property. The scenery was pretty decent, too. One thing I could never figure out was Morgan Freeman's character was only a loud yell away from escaping and he never uttered a peep. He could have even faked a twisted ankle or heart attack and the gym teacher wouldn't have been able to do a thing about it.

All that didn't matter one bit to me. I thought it was just good fun and a hike through the woods. I would have given myself up as soon as I got to that ledge, because there was no way I'd be going down that vertical cliff in the pouring rain.

reply

[deleted]