Summary:

It is 1963 and Frank Abagnale, Jr. (Leonardo DiCaprio) is devastated when his parents separate and divorce.  Rather than endure a custody battle, the sixteen-year-old runs away from home and begins living by his considerable wits and bravado.  He tries passing a few bad checks but lacks any credibility, until he hits upon the idea of wearing the uniform of a Pan Am pilot.  Suddenly, doors open for him and he becomes a paragon of trust.  This launches the teenager on a life as a consummate con boy, while he is doggedly pursued by a persistent FBI agent, Carl Hanratty (Tom Hanks).

Steve says:

In 1961, Tony Curtis starred in THE GREAT IMPOSTER, the screen version of a book by the same name and detailing the true story of Ferdinand Waldo Demara, Jr., a sly con artist who, at various times, passed himself off as a marine, a Franciscan monk, a Canadian naval surgeon, and the warden of a prison.  Perhaps Demara was the spiritual mentor of young Frank Abagnale, Jr., who followed a very similar life path.  The major difference was that Abagnale’s amazing feats were all performed before he had even reached the age of nineteen.  So astonishing were his accomplishments that they would be difficult to swallow in a fictitious context.

It’s easy to see why Abagnale’s story attracted the attention of Steven Spielberg, who was hungry to tackle something a bit more whimsical in the wake of such heady material as MINORITY REPORT, A.I. ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE, SAVING PRIVATE RYAN and AMISTAD.  CATCH ME IF YOU CAN is Spielberg Light, but it is still the assured work of a master filmmaker.

Leonardo DiCaprio is perfect casting as Abagnale, the man-child who, while he looks like an adolescent, is able to cross back and forth between the worlds of child and adult by the sheer force of his gargantuan self-confidence or, as some might call it, “cajones” the size of bowling balls.  It is a testimonial to both DiCaprio’s skill and Jeff Nathanson’s script that we find ourselves rooting for a thief and a liar. Coupled with the almost simultaneous release of GANGS OF NEW YORK, DiCaprio has a double shot at the Oscar next year.  But, oddly, he has a better chance with CATCH ME owing to the fact that, as Frank Abagnale, he displays a far greater range of emotions than he does as the stoic Amsterdam in Martin Scorsese’s period epic

DiCaprio might just find himself in the nominee’s circle with castmate Christopher Walken, who portrays Frank Abagnale, Sr.  Walken manages to shed his trademark creepy persona and deliver a fully realized and layered performance as the tragic father who, while he may possess the soul of a con man, lacks the luck, the smarts or the resources of his son. 

Tom Hanks is fine as Abagnale’s own personal Javert, Carl Hanratty.  Hanks employs a flawless “pahk yuh cah in the Hah-vud yahd” Boston accent as the obsessed FBI Agent who always seems to find himself one or two steps behind the wily teenager.

As airy as the material is, CATCH ME isn’t strictly a comedy.  There are a few laughs, of course, but given the unbelievable nature of many of Anagnale’s stunts, Spielberg wisely opts to ground the story in reality.  To do so mandates keeping the comedy at a minimalist level and steering the actors away from any tendency to play for the laughs.  

CATCH ME IF YOU CAN isn’t perfect.  Indeed, several of its scenes go on longer than they need to and with a running time of two hours and twenty minutes, trims seem even more obvious and necessary.  But it’s solid entertainment that will appeal to adolescents and adults alike.  Catch it, if you can.

* * * *

Patty says:

Cajones indeed.  Not only was this kid smart, he was cool.  He had been encouraged, of course, by his con artist father, after whom he modeled his behavior.  The psychological dynamics create the cornerstone of the movie.  It appears to be a film about a con artist, but it’s really a visual treatise on how one can ruin his or her life while allowing some idealized notion about one’s parents dictate that person’s future.  The script should have had somebody shake the kid during his many felonious adventures and say, “Okay, they divorced.  Get over it.”  But, of course, that would have rendered most of the second act unnecessary.

DiCaprio is back in “cute” mode.  He’s a good actor, but he plays, “cute,” better than anyone on the big screen.  Typecast or not, he’s really good at it.  He’s good at “smart” as well.  Oh and he’s also got the kiss down.  Not one of those, “I’m going to scrape the back of your eyelids with my tongue,” kind of kisses that contemporary filmmakers think is sexy.   I’m talking about languid, lingering, passionate kisses that last so long, they make you a little squirmy in your seat.  But, I digress.  DiCaprio is a versatile actor and I thought he pulled off a difficult role with finesse.  Maybe he just makes the cool, smart character look a little too easy.

Watching Christopher Walken flesh out a character is like the second helping of turkey on Christmas.  You are satisfied with less, but you always want more.  He steals every scene from DiCaprio without seeming to put any effort into the process. 

Tom Hanks, it seems, can play any role.  Hanratty was a departure from Hanks' usual character repetroir.  He was flatter than he was in THE GREEN MILE while showing enough humor and compassion to be simultaneously engaging.

The story dragged in places and I have some nagging irritation about the idealization of sociopathic behavior.  But I did find this film engaging.  The acting is great, the story is in the “too strange to be true” category, but somehow they pull it off and the script keeps us interested in the characters.  Spielberg has some cajones of his own to take on the project.  I think I have to lower my expectations.

* * * *
December 28, 2002