Good concept, poorly executed.

Excellent, a Must See

The film's masterful storytelling did its job. The message was clear. No need to overdo.

A great movie, one of the best of this year. There was a bit of confusion at one point in the plot, but nothing serious.

WARNING: may contain spoilers!I wanted to like this movie, and it had potential. I have no problem with a complicated plot, as long as it all hangs together and is believable. But this movie has too many unbelievable points, e.g., the Joe Ross character would never have brought the secret to the meeting and agreed to give it to the Jimmy Dell character. He had previously shown that he was both aware and serious about keeping it secret. And despite his beef with his company about getting his compensation in writing (deservedly), it never shows him being willing or interested in betraying the secret, only that he was exploring talking to a lawyer about getting his share of the money.And like most plots, when too many people are involved in a conspiracy, it starts to get ridiculous. In this movie, there must have been a dozen at least!One final point. When Jimmy Dell gave the guy the book and asked him to take it personally to his sister, what did he think would happen when he found out, as he later does, that it was an old woman? Wouldn't that have completely ruined their chances to get at him?Since most of the reviews are glowing, I wanted to put out another viewpoint.

Sometimes actors get type casted. One of those actors is Steve Martin. Known for his starring roles in comedies, in this movie he plays a completely different kind of part and plays it well, which is surprising as the movie is a crime drama. The movie itself is great. It has a clever plot, interesting characters, an engaging style, and strong finale. The bad guys are wonderful and their hapless victim, worthy of empathy. The movie is about greed, and false appearances. The bad guys seem good and the good guy is, well, we don't know; the audience is kept guessing. The entire cast is excellent. After watching this movie, one can leave feeling that they have been entertained and also shown what can happen when you let your guard down and trust others just because of the way they look. Yes, appearances can be deceiving and this movie shows how.

David Mamet can write. There's no two ways about it. He can write with such a beautiful and graceful cadence that any conversation, no matter how dreary or dull, can sound like a poetic work of art. In The Spanish Prisoner he shows off quite a bit, but hey, doesn't he have the right to do so? The Spanish Prisoner is about a naive inventor named Joseph Ross who has come up with a formula called "The Process" that is the key to global success for the company that employs him. But holding a secret this significant and this important has its drawbacks, and Ross quickly discovers that as an elaborate scheme unfolds before him in order to get ahold of "The Process." This scheme is full of twists, turns, and countless surprises, making for a film that is a lot of fun to watch play out, but be prepared to follow the many trails as the film spins out of control towards the end.Now, I said David Mamet is a great writer, and The Spanish Prisoner is an excellently written film, it's just... different. The writing style has a more poetic cadence to it rather than the raw and realistic style of some of his other scripts like Glenngary Glen Ross, or House of Games. The style of the dialouge and its delivery takes some getting used to and there always seem to be those moments where I thought to myself, I bet that line looked a lot better on paper. Regardless, the script is full of sharp wit and crisp cadence, and the depth of the story as a whole is very impressive.In many ways I do feel like this would have been a lot better as a book or even a stage play, as some of the film aspects didn't translate perfectly. There's nothing truly bad about this film and it really is a great film that is a joy to watch, there are just those odd moments. Those moments, for the most part, just come and go and you forget about them after a while, as you become more enticed by the bigger picture unfolding masterfully before your eyes. One thing I consistently couldn't forgive, though, was Rebecca Pidgeon. I feel like she's most of the reason I felt the delivery of certain lines that otherwise would have been ingenious, were delivered a little rocky. She is simply just not good in this film, which is unfortunate considering her character is very important to the film. In fact, every character is important in this film because it is all such an elaborate maze constructed so well by Mamet.The rest of the cast does a great job. Campbell Scott plays the protagonist and does a decent job overall. He has a lot of those so-so lines that don't quite make me cringe, but instead force me to just shrug them off and move on. The most notable performance would have to be Steve Martin playing a straight man role. To see the white haired buffoon who I loved so much in The Jerk go an entire film without delivering anything close to a joke or visual gag was very odd, but also impressive. Martin does an excellent job as the elusive con man, Jimmy Dell, and he has some of the best conversations of the whole film.The Spanish Prisoner really is a great film. It's a poetic work of art from Mr. Mamet, albeit a little pretentious. But it's nothing that really gets in the way. The only thing that really does deter from this films excellence would have to be Rebecca Pidgeon in her bland and forced acting, making some of the lines in this film not as great as they were when Mamet wrote them out on paper. Solving the twisted mystery of this film is so much fun, and everything is pulled off very well. It is definitely one of Mamet's better films and it is an excellent display of the talent he has as a screenwriter.

This movie was made in 1997 and for its time it worked. I remember seeing it at the theater and being completely satisfied with the plot and various twists and turns.After seeing it for the second time today, I have to admit there are a number of quirky out-of-date elements that take away from the pace and validity of the plot. First, I did not remember the outcome or most of the plot. That's why I decided to watch it again. Second, I think the dialogue and the plot are outdated now. I have to believe this is a mystery/drama that has outlived our evolution as movie-goers. It is a good example of how our expectations and general knowledge/stimulus has evolved over time - this example being 12 years old. I found the dialogue to be slow and stilted at first and in fact thought the actors were uncomfortable with themselves; almost "reading" their lines in the first 2/3rds of the movie. The plot now has plenty of holes - why would a smart man fall for the way the "Spanish Prisoner" grift was performed? Clearly we have increased our sophistication with regard to plot and acting since 1997. The end is still well done and I believe the last 3rd of the movie is worth the time spent. I rate it a 6 out of ten for entertainment, but the entertainment also includes the awareness of how the movie doesn't work that well for 2009.