The way in which we live now is in a serious state of contradiction. We want to maintain all the privacy we once held dear and have serious concerns about surveillance like media phone hacking. On the other hand, we offer so much information to people we don’t know every day and rely on these surveillances to maintain our safety. This is the society that has bred the thriller Paranoia. Now, I haven’t read the book by Joseph Finder, but this is probably for the best. We don’t want to descend into any “that wasn’t like that in the book” arguments. They aren’t legitimate complaints for a FILM review and it’s pedantic.

Paranoia tells the story of Adam Cassidy (Liam Hemsworth), a hungry young man looking to works his way up the ranks of the technology business. After a pitch gone wrong, he is fired, but that doesn’t stop him having one last night out on the company credit card. His employer (Gary Oldman) uses this leverage to get Adam to infiltrate and spy on his old mentor (Harrison Ford). With an ill father (Richard Dreyfuss) to support, Adam has no choice but to accept, but how far is he willing to go?

I’m unsure of Hemsworth as a leading man. He certainly has a charisma about him, but it’s hard to believe anything he’s going through which, for a film that prioritises character over plot, is a problem. As for the supporting cast, Amber Heard and Dreyfuss are reliable and keep a good emotional core, but the real meat is from Ford and Oldman bringing t. When they stand alone they steal the scenes, but when they’re together, sparring off each other, they are electric, making for the greatest scenes.

It isn’t a particularly interesting film visually. The director Robert Luketic comes from a strong background in rom-coms (The Ugly Truth) and chick flicks (Legally Blonde). These are two genres not famous for their visual experimentation, which may account for the craftsman way the film is assembled. There are some glimmers of great cinematography, but what else would one expect with such a budget?

As far as pacing, it’s slow starting film, but about an hour in is when Paranoia hits its atmospheric stride, carrying the small amount of tension through to the end. However, this minor atmosphere is not rewarded with a satisfying ending. It’s as though all the set-up had been forgotten and we are reminded that we are firmly in McKee territory of a formulaic 3 act structure.

By the end I was reminded of the film Network. Network was a film that truly said something about the malicious and manipulative way that media organisations can be (and often are) run. So well was it said that it is still relevant today. I’m unsure whether Paranoia just lacked the conviction to say something about big business or was just always intended not to. Either way, it lacks the balls to fuck home some of the points being made, never fully realising the film that the title implies. Instead, Paranoia is a run-of-the mill, tensionless thriller of not much consequence with far more interesting ideas laying just beneath the surface.

However, this isn’t necessarily a bad thing. There is a reason films are made this way; because this is what people (at large) want to see. The majority of people, myself apparently excluded, want to see everything put right and be consoled by their entertainment. Paranoia is functioning as entertainment first, not as social commentary. While cliché heavy and with a readable rhythm, it’s not one for cinephiles, but it is a film that allows the 99% temporary satisfaction in a an unjust world.

---

We hope you're enjoying BRWC. You should check us out on our social channels, subscribe to our newsletter, and tell your friends. BRWC is short for battleroyalewithcheese.

---

Trending on BRWC:

---

Cool Posts From Around the Web:

---

---