New at BOP: Review: Matrix Resurrections Movie Review: Moonfall Movie Reviews: Scream The #1 Movie in America November Forecast The Many Saints of Newark October Forecast New Trivia Question All site updates Share & Save   Tweet Print this column

Watching the trailers for the film, I never felt like the unique tone was properly conveyed. Instead, it makes the movie seem like a Frankenstein’s monster of genres. They also strangely emphasized Soderbergh’s name. While he was known for his ’89 debut sex, lies and videotape, he quietly drifted away from the public. Even today, Soderbergh’s name sadly doesn’t seem to hold much significance for the greater movie going public.

For his first mainstream film, even though it has the twisty-genre touchstones of independent filmmaking, Out of Sight goes without a hitch. Proving his skills in both worlds of filmmaking, I am happy to see that Soderbergh still dabbles into both the big-budget and low-budget arenas. While the success of the Ocean’s franchise and Contagion pay the bills in a way that is not embarrassing, he is allowed a few million to go off and make interesting projects like the under seen four and a half hour epic biopic Che and the barely-feature-length-77 minute experimental romp The Girlfriend Experience (both of which I’d recommend).

Released June 26, 1998, the R-rated flick (more suited for a fall or winter release, I feel) debuted at #4 with a so-so $12 million against a near-$50 million budget. While it earned raves from the critics (it is 93% Fresh at Rotten Tomatoes) and was rightfully nominated for two Oscars (one for best adapted screenplay), Out of Sight went the way of its title. Surprisingly the film had no legs, wrapping up at $37.5 million ($63.8 million today).

The low gross took me aback at first, but then I realized this was 1998. Genre hopping was not the mainstream norm; George Clooney was still on ER and had no real hits on his resume outside of the disastrously received Batman & Robin. Jennifer Lopez was still considered “a serious actress.” While today the concept might have been a hit, it is easy to see why audiences didn’t exactly flock to theaters to see it.

Clooney excels as Jack Foley, taking the con cad above a two-dimensional level. Lopez also holds her own, although she is a tad too glamorous at times to be believable. However, their chemistry is undeniable. Even with barely any nudity, the two get ranked on many lists for the steam they produce together. In November 2008, Entertainment Weekly ranked Out of Sight #1 on their list of sexiest movies ever. You can argue with my opinion, but you can’t argue with the facts that this movie is definitely with us.

Clever, sexy, thrilling, and with a bullet-shooting climax, Out of Sight is a film that seemingly has everything you could possibly want. Ignore the DVD cover with the stars' giant, floating heads, the awkwardly big photoshopped gun, and the typically lame pull quote. What is inside the case is a super stylish and slick flick that audiences got wrong the first time around.

Deceptively average looking, “average” isn’t a word in Steven Soderbergh’s filmography. A case of not judging a book by its cover (sorry Magic Mike and Liberace), Out of Sight will be hard to get out of your mind.

Verdict: With us

8 out of 10

Continued:       1       2