‘Clayton’ fills need for clever dialogue

Filmgoers frequently complain about the need for smart dialogue in contemporary Hollywood productions, but that complaint cannot be made about “Michael Clayton.”

With a screenplay written by the film’s first-time director Tony Gilroy, who is well-known for writing the “Bourne” series, the movie serves as the perfect vehicle for George Clooney. From witty one-liners to intense speeches, the dialogue is varied enough to give Clooney, the title character, the chance to deliver as the capable-of-serious-acting star he proved himself to be in some of his other recent pictures, namely “Good Night, and Good Luck.”

Though the plot might seem trite — the corporation with a carcinogenic product versus small-town farmers — this film departs from similar “Erin Brockovich” or “A Civil Action” story lines. While those classic legal thrillers follow the prosecution as it prepares a winning case in a class action suit, “Clayton” deviates instead by telling of how the corporation’s legal counsel tries to contain the truth: In this case, that the corporation U-North’s weed killer is no less than poison.

The truth takes the physical form of a classified memorandum, which ends up in the hands of U-North’s attorney Arthur (Tom Wilkinson), leading him to doubt his role in the legal battle. Meanwhile, Wilkinson’s performance radiates brilliance. As the conscience-disturbed attorney who stops taking his medication, he delivers some of the film’s most powerful, excellently-written monologues.

The film’s sub-plots develop in parallel. While U-North’s legal battle takes a turn toward thug-coordinated murder, Clayton tries to sort out personal problems. Ranging from finances to family, Clayton’s worries all hinge on his own dissatisfaction with his job as a New York legal firm’s “fixer,” a position that keeps him out of the courtroom doing all the odd and not-very-noble tasks the firm’s head (Sydney Pollack) needs completed — contacting congressmen, managing cover-ups, etc.

The film intelligently weaves the plot’s strands together, such as Clayton’s son Henry’s (Austin Williams) fascination with a book titled “Realm and Conquest,” commenting on Arthur’s psychological situation. Arthur feels as if his qualms with his legal responsibilities do not reflect madness but rather his aversion to continuing to serve as U-North’s “janitor,” the term he uses to describe his corporate dirt clean-up role.

The screenplay’s strength also delivers in the way it permits its actors to subtly build their characters. The film’s viewers watch as the head of U-North’s legal department Karen (Tilda Swinton) practices for an interview while she dresses in the morning. In that scene, she comes across as the agitated, easily stressed type — yet also relentless in her pursuit of the perfect response to the interview questions. The viewers’ glimpse into her personality is repeated when they see her sweating and breathing heavily before a bathroom sink after approving her thugs’ murder plans. Swinton’s on-screen performance perfectly retains coherency.

Though the film explains almost all the plot details that otherwise would have seemed inconsistent, perhaps the writer left only a couple of story line gaps unexplained, such as not accounting for why Clayton got out of his car to admire three wild horses, a move that was lucky for Clayton as well as the screenwriter.

But, despite a few plot holes, the film’s excellently written screenplay has got theater audiences right where it wants them — laughing at the characters’ one-liners and yelping in surprise at the plot’s thriller moments.

Rating: Five out of five stars.