The Thomas Crown Affair (1999)

I watched the remake and the original back to back for the first time, so this review is more about whether you should watch the original or the remake.Both movies involve a heist, a love connection and a police investigation. However most of the details are quite different in the two movies, and they almost stand alone.The heist:The heist in the remake is much more interesting, detailed, and keeps you on the edge of your seat. The original's heist is straightforward and there are no surprises. It is just a plot device in the original, whereas in the remake it is very well done. The item being stolen makes more sense and really helps the story in the remake.The love connection:The remake does not just rely on the two main characters to create intrigue. The original spends most of it's time on this. To me it is quantity over quality. If you prefer the classic 1960s actors gazing at each other communicating via body language instead of dialogue, you may prefer the original. I prefer the remake.The police investigation:The remake has additional side plots which make it much more interesting. The original is very straightforward, there is an edge of your seat moment or two, but they are not as well done. The way the driver is caught is just wrong and unbelievable, not clever. The remake is far more interesting and well done.ConclusionThe remake is more interesting and contains much more action. The original is more of a drama about two people.

To talk about how great soundtracks can make a huge effect on the audiences, I'd love to choose The Thomas Crown Affair (1999) as an example. I loved loved this movie ever since the first time I saw it . To be honest, the story was old ( it's a remake and not as good as the original one) , the acting was so-so, good but not great, even some stiff moments. But still it entertains me every time I watch. The reason why? That's because the soundtracks brilliantly tuned in and even enhanced the storyline, the acting. The movie will always be one great cat-and-mouse chase, very sexy (yes, for 2 middle aged actors, not a popular choice at all, eh? ), sophisticated, modern and high-end movie. And it was also the beginning of my passion in Modern Jazz. Score : ( I love it so don't blame me for being too generous) 4/5 Stars. And to explain why you can't help but loving the soundtrack , I present to you Sinnerman by Nina Simmonehttps://www.youtube.com/watch? v=Rr2IVaSLjvM&feature=youtube_gdata_p layer

Rene Russo and Pierce Brosnan play the Faye Dunaway and Steve McQueen characters in the original. Whilst this version is obviously more modern, slicker, more colourful and less implausible, it lacks some of the gentle class of the original. Russo plays the insurance investigator as a hard-nosed woman, who will do anything. She seems more of a loose cannon and less together that her 60s counterpart. However, that perhaps makes her more believable, and her investigation has certainly fewer plot holes and more actual procedural parts. Pierce Brosnan is good in this role; but plays Crown rather smarmy and cheesy, rather than cool like Steve McQueen. I'll admit I don't much like him as an actor, particularly, but this has him as role I think he seems to suit. The film production is excellent, it's an attractive, slick looking film and it plays out less like "rich people montages" as the original does but there is an element of that. The characters have some depth both explicit and suggested and I like the excitement from the few twists so there is a little suspense. I've had trouble reviewing both these films so suggest viewers watch both and compare and contrast but both stand alone as entertaining examples of the heist genre.

I should probably start my review for the 1999 version of "The Thomas Crown Affair" by confessing that I didn't see the original 1968 version starring Steve McQueen and Faye Dunaway. I mention this for the sake of informing my readers that no comparisons between the remake and the original will be made here, even though I do know that another version exists. With that being said, I honestly think that while the 1999 version of "The Thomas Crown Affair", starring Pierce Brosnan and Rene Russo, does offer two hours of pure escapism to the audience, it suffers significantly from the fact that it is straight up forgettable. In "The Thomas Crown Affair", we follow a wealthy businessman by the name of Thomas Crown (Pierce Brosnan) who feels bored and is looking for a little challenge in his life whether it would be betting on a golf putt or racing on a catamaran. One day, he constructs a heist to steal a highly valuable painting from the Metropolitan Museum of Art. Enter investigator Catherine Banning (Rene Russo) and Detective Michael McCann (Denis Leary) to try and solve his crime. When Catherine catches on quickly that Mr. Crown committed the crime, a game of cat-and-mouse ensues between the two as they fall in love with each other. Now, she must decide whether to turn him in or become his wife. As you can tell, this is the kind of fluffy plot that a great director like Alfred Hitchcock would have had the pleasure of handling. Amongst the positive aspects of this picture, I liked the heist at the beginning of the film in terms of its execution and the way it unraveled itself. I thought Rene Russo in general was physically attractive in this picture, and the performances from Pierce Brosnan and Denis Leary are alright. Aside from that, there really isn't much to talk about with a film like this. It just basically does what it was created to do and that's pretty much it. Because this film is so fluffy and mechanical, it offers very little that would be memorable a week from when it was last watched. Basically, about 90% of this picture has been erased from my memory it leaves so little an impact. Don't get me wrong, I enjoy fluffy entertainment as much as the next fellow. All I'm saying is that if you're going to make quality Saturday matinée entertainment, don't be afraid to do your best at making it a memorable enough experience. Give me quality storytelling that's focused and always engrossing, give me an interesting romance that feels real, and make sure the characters actually contribute to the main plot. Instead, this film provides us with a story that has decent potential at the beginning, but then slowly goes downhill as it progresses. I didn't think the chemistry between Brosnan and Russo was that great since I thought they felt too routine and familiar. Additionally, I felt that I didn't really get to know about any of the characters save for Denis Leary's, who does have a good bit at the end about what he really thinks of his current occupation. That's Faye Dunaway as Thomas Crown's psychiatrist, and you could say it's interesting to note that she decided to star in both versions of the same film. Having said that, I thought there was no reason why the scenes with the psychiatrist were needed because those scenes didn't contribute to the plot in any way. There are a few other scenes like this in which I didn't know what was supposed to be accomplished from them. Between that and the lackluster chemistry, this film could have benefited greatly from better story editing. In the end, I think "The Thomas Crown Affair", for all the complaints I've just made about it, is an ideal example of a film that's perfect for rental. It's one of those films that are basically a mixed bag that contains both things to like and dislike. It's good for rental since you can skip over the parts you don't really care about and fast forward to whatever it is you like from it, but just don't consider this film a must-see.