21 is loosely based on a true story about a group of students at MIT (A private American university, with an emphasis on Science and technology) who decide to cheat casino’s all over the world by winning at Blackjack by card counting. The controversy around the film was a surprise to me when I only stumbled onto it after trying to find out more about Jim Sturgess. The original students were all Asian-American, and in the film only two members are of Asian ethnicity - one is shown to be a petty thief and a slot gambler. This would probably bother me if the script wasn’t also changed dramatically from actual events. Remember how I said ‘loosely based on a true story’? The original MIT team did it for the money and just to see if they could do it as much as anything else, which is drastically different to the film. Because it is ‘based on’ actual events and not a documentary there can be certain allowances, obviously made to appeal predominantly (rightly or wrongly) to an American audience. This is an American film, so the fact that most of the cast are white American isn’t that big a deal. Enough, onto the film.
The script was changed from real events so that the main character Ben Campbell (based on Jeff Ma, who actually appears as a table dealer in one of the casino’s, a neat touch) decides go to go along with the scam to pay for himself to go to Harvard Medical School. Typically, he ditches his old friends and starts living the high life in Las Vegas buying expensive clothes, partying and going to strip clubs etc. The changes in Ben’s behaviour are predictable and not very subtle, even annoyingly blatant and over exaggerated. As the team wins more and more money, Ben becomes addicted to the winning and doesn’t stop even when he has enough to pay the Harvard fee’s.
The casting is very strong, and Jim Sturgess does a solid job as the lead geek-turned-cool role. In fact, he’s had a busy year having featured in four films in 2008 already. I haven’t seen him in a film before and I thought he was all right, but the main downfall was the script and the somewhat predictable turns in his character, as he becomes addicted to the thrill of counting cards his morales go out the window but then the next day he’s back to his old self feeling bad for deserting his friends.
Kevin Spacey plays Mickey, and is on typically superb form. He excels as the leader of the gang and is entertaining whenever he is on screen. His corrupt status of an MIT teacher is believable enough and even when not actually on screen, his presence and influence on the other characters stands out. One excellent scene shows the students arguing over whether to carry on by themselves, and it shows how afraid they are of him and the tension around the group is crystal clear.
Kate Bosworth on the other hand, while usually a positive point in any film, was pretty dire. I’m not sure whether it was the script, the character or just her acting but it was fairly woeful (I used to absolutely adore her in the Blue Crush days, but recently her appearances in films have been intermittent and generally disappointing). Her character Jill’s relationship with Ben has more ups and downs than a roller-coaster, and moments of closeness don’t make any sense and are purely random. She seems to flirt with him all the time but at other times she pushes him away as far as possible. I don’t think she even has the same sex appeal that she had a few years ago in Blue Crush (which is a great film for a chick-flick by the way). It was also way to obvious what was going to happen between them (as in most films) but in 21 they didn’t even try to create any suspense or drama - they just kind of switched the on/off switch to on when it seemed right, and back to off at serious moments.
Laurence Fishbourne should be insulted by his lack of action in the film. He plays a very bit-part character and even though he plays the part superbly well, there isn’t nearly enough of him in the film. There was so much potential for his character to be developed, and his relationship with Mickey to be explained further than the five minutes that it actually had. While part of the plot near the end was yet again far to obvious, his character Cole Williams still has a crucial role. If only the directors and producers could have put more effort into it, it would have easily made the film much, much better. Laurence Fishbourne is a great actor, and deserved much more screen time than he got.
It would also have been good to know a bit more about the other students. They are skimmed over so quickly its hard to remember anything about them. They are just introduced and then forgotten about in the next scene. They are in most scenes in one way, but always in the background saying and doing very little.
There is a positive feel good factor to the film of seeing the casino’s being screwed over by the little guy, and you come away thinking how cool it would be to actually go and do it. The special effects are minimal, and are mostly just fancy camera angles and switching effects. That said, it is directed and shot very well, making the most of the Las Vegas dazzling landscape of hotels, fountains and skyscrapers - the party atmosphere of Vegas is captured perfectly. A lot of scenes from Las Vegas will be ones you have seen a hundred times, but there are enough effects to make it stand out at least a little bit. The film does a good job of being intelligent where it needs to be (remember these guys are supposed geniuses), and is clever in the way it explains the rules and strategies of Blackjack in a simple format so those who have never played before can quickly get the jist of it - which is essential in this sort of film. I think whether people will find the film cool or not, really depends on the individual. Some will like it but others will find it boring.
Generally speaking, the acting is great (minus Kate Bosworth) has some cool settings and effects and the individual characters are very solid, but 21 is let down by lots of little things. I get the feeling it could have been fantastic, but that special something was missing. For one thing, there was not nearly enough explanations of characters’ background - especially Mickey and Cole. Without giving anything away, there are plenty of continuity and plot errors that anybody with common sense could have avoided. 21 is a good film, but could have been so much more. Think back to what Ocean’s 11 was like and why that was so good, and you realise that with a bit more fine tuning in places, 21 could (and perhaps should) have been so much more. 21 is a decent offering, nothing more.
Overall - 7/10
