out of sight director steven sorderbergh <NEG> baffles the hell out of us </NEG> all in the limey , <NEG> a cold , uninvolving , confusing </NEG> new thriller . though the plot description may at first seem like it came from the pen of elmore leonard ( author of out of sight , as well as jackie brown , get shorty and pulp fiction ) , after you watch it , you realize that <NEG> it's not nearly good enough </NEG> . in an aggressively non-linear fashion , the limey ( li * mey , noun : an english gentleman ) tells the story of wilson ( terrence stamp ) , a british ex-con just released from a 9 year stint in prison for armed robbery . he has come to the us to seek vengeance for the death of his daughter jenny . he doesn't know much about the circumstances of her demise , all he has is a name : terry valentine . valentine was jenny's former boyfriend , a wealthy and corrupt record executive . he's played by peter fonda , in his first major role since the terrific ulee's gold in 1997 . seeking valentine's reclusive place of residence turns out to be no easy task for wilson . he finally finds the impressive abode high in the mountains and sneaks in just as valentine is having a big party . he winds up breaking his cover eventually , setting off valentine's head of security and valentine himself , who decides to run for it . <NEG> what a mess </NEG> . i have no problem when films refuse to be constricted by the linearity of time -- pulp fiction , which twisted time every which way , was a masterpiece -- but i do take exception to movies that decide to play around with it for no reason other than to confuse the viewer . the limey does exactly that . the plot is <NEG> permeated with flashbacks </NEG> , flash-forwards and what can only be described as <NEG> random time-travel </NEG> , <NEG> without any evident purpose </NEG> . <NEG> there is no method to this movie's madness </NEG> . it uses a fancy way to tell a story that would be better off told more conventionally and more comprehendably . <NEG> the plot isn't particularly interesting </NEG> in the first place : traditional , <NEG> mildly hackneyed </NEG> and <NEG> not very involving </NEG> . this is a sort of brooding film -- our protagonist doesn't speak much and the action sequences are done with an <NEG> annoyingly perfunctory attitude </NEG> . i felt like the director wasn't very interested in the proceedings himself , almost like he made this film for a paycheck . ditto for the editing , which seems to be <NEG> deliberately sloppy and unpleasant </NEG> . sixties icon terrence stamp manages to at least be menacing as the aging criminal . he's not much in the way of stature but he has a surprisingly imposing physical presence that works to his advantage here . peter fonda is an unbelievably underrated actor : he's shy , quiet but always effective . he's adept at conveying emotions through speech rather than expression : his feelings don't always show on his face by you can always tell what they are . this is basically a conventional thriller told in a pretentiously bizarre fashion . why soderbergh couldn't just parrot down and tell a story , i don't know , but what he does do <NEG> certainly doesn't work </NEG> . the result is <NEG> a wild cornucopia of images </NEG> that amount to precisely <NEG> nil </NEG> -- <NEG> even the action scenes don't work </NEG> . 1999 may have signified the death of the traditional act one - act two - act three storyline , but obviously some movies have not yet transcended it . shall we go back to basics ?
