Josh Reviews Operation Fortune: Ruse de Guerre

In the latest Guy Ritchie film, Operation Fortune: Ruse de Guerre, Jason Statham stars as super-spy Orson Fortune, who works with a team of contractors/spies hired by the British government to track a device called “the handle” that was stolen by mercenaries.  Orson and his team, which consists of their posh leader Nathan (Cary Elwes), hacker Sarah (Aubrey Plaza), and sharp-shooter J.J. (Bugzy Malone) track “the handle” to wealthy arms-dealer Greg Simmonds (Hugh Grant).  Looking to find out what terrorists Greg plans on selling the weapon to, the team sets out to infiltrate Greg’s operation.  Their in: movie-star Danny Francesco (Josh Hartnett), with whom Greg is obsessed.

I’m always interested in a new Guy Ritchie film.  I still consider his first two films, Lock, Stock, and Two Smoking Barrels and Snatch, to be among my favorite films.  Nothing Mr. Ritchie has made in the subsequent years has matched those two films in my mind, though I really loved his first Sherlock Holmes film with Robert Downey Jr., and I quite enjoyed The Gentlemen, his 2020 film which was the last movie I saw in theaters before the pandemic.  On the other hand, I thought Mr. Ritchie’s 2021 film Wrath of Man was a dud.

Curiously, Mr. Ritchie had two films released already in 2023, but both seem to have come and gone with little attention.  I didn’t get to either of them during their brief theatrical releases.  But Operation Fortune is now available on disc and streaming, so I was eager to check it out.

The film is solid but not spectacular.  I was hoping to be able to report that this was a buried treasure, but that’s not quite the case.  The film is a well-executed spy thriller.  The cast is great, there are some entertaining twists-and-turns in the spy-movie plot, and there are a number of moments of fun, witty Guy Ritchie dialogue.  The film looks terrific.  This isn’t a film with a huge budget ($50 million, which is a pittance compared to most action movies these days), but it looks great, and it’s packed with some exciting action sequences.  Mr. Ritchie is a talented director, and he’s very skilled at stretching his budget to create a film that feels like it has a more epic scale than one might expect of one made for this mid-range budget.  I enjoyed the film’s glove-trotting feel; the different locations are beautifully photographed.

And yet, at the same time, there’s something about this film that didn’t quite click for me.  It’s good but not great.  Let’s start with that mouthful of a title.  Is the idea here that they want to create a series of Operation Fortune movies?  Whatever, neither that title nor the Ruse de Guerre subtitle are particularly catchy in my opinion, and together they make the film sound almost like a farce (like Jean Dujardin’s O.S.S. 117: Cairo, Nest of Spies).

Operation Fortune is not a farce, but neither is it a straight spy/adventure film.  The movie is aiming somewhere in between, which seems like a great idea on paper, but as executed I thought the film exists in a strange and somewhat unsatisfying middle ground.  As a spy/adventure movie it’s just OK.  I wish the complicated plot fit together better.  I felt there were were too many scenes where I didn’t quite understand what was happening or how our characters had connected certain dots.  (For example, after the film’s terrific extended opening sequence, in which Orson and his team try to intercept an elderly courier at an airport but are waylaid by a rival undercover team led by Mike, it looks like they’re left at a loss.  They had to give up the captured hard drive to Mike, and although Sarah managed to capture the drive’s contents, she says she can’t access them.  But then suddenly our team somehow knows where the drive is being sold, which puts them on the trail of Greg Simmonds.  But how did they know when/where that meet was happening?  Or, later in the film, it looks like the team might be on the wrong trail, because when Sarah accesses Greg’s computer, it looks like he’s just involved in selling guns and not trading in super-weapons.  But then, just minutes later, we’re told in voice-over that, no, that’s not really the case.  It feels like a whole sequence might have been missing in there that was replaced by expository voice-over.  It’s not awful or incomprehensible, but there are a number of places where the narrative feels rougher than I’d ideally like.  The film’s pieces don’t fit together in as perfect a manner as they do in a great heist film like, say, The Spanish Prisoner.)  At the same time, the film isn’t quite as funny as I’d hoped it might be.  There are some funny bits, but it’s not the laugh-riot that Lock, Stock or Snatch were.

The film also can’t quite seem to decide how seriously we’re supposed to take Jason Statham’s character, Orson Fortune.  That name is silly, but for the most part, Mr. Statham plays the character deadly serious; like he’s a grittier James Bond.  But then there are moments of light-hearted comedy, like when Orson runs into trouble because he can’t find the front door of the estate he’s snuck into.  I liked that moment!  But it felt a little out of tone with the rest of the film.

The cast is strong.  My favorite was Hugh Grant (who was also terrifically utilized by Mr. Ritchie in The Gentlemen), who is delightful as the wealthy Greg Simmonds.  I’m a little fuzzy on what the film wants us to think about this character (who is introduced as the villain but who is weirdly lovable by the end), but I can forgive that because Mr. Grant is so much fun to watch on-screen.  It’s interesting to see Mr. Grant play a villainous role, and he’s clearly having a lot of fun.  I was also delighted by how well-used Cary Elwes was in the film, as team-leader Nathan.  The Princess Bride made Mr. Elwes a star, and he’s certainly done good work since, but I’ve often felt that his subsequent film roles haven’t used him as well as they ought to have.  But this role really allows Mr. Elwes to shine; he’s able to deliver the dramatic heft and seriousness that is needed to set the stakes for the mission, and at the same time he’s able to create a memorably weird and funny character who clearly loves all the finer things in life.  (There are several scenes in which we see that both Nathan and Orson are obsessed with super-expensive wine, which reminded me pleasantly of James Bond’s on-screen alcoholic excesses.)

Jason Statham is… well, Jason Statham.  This is his fifth collaboration with Guy Ritchie, and I think that Mr. Ritchie knows how to play to Mr. Statham’s strengths.  Still, I wonder if this would have been a stronger film with an actor with a little more depth and humor in the lead role.  Mr. Statham is absolutely convincing as a tough-as-nails spy — frankly, far more convincing than most actors who play super-spies on film — but at the same time, I didn’t find him to be all that much fun to watch.

Aubrey Plaza is a delight as Sarah.  She has a powerful on-screen presence.  In contrast to Mr. Statham, she’s a lot of fun to watch on-screen, and she brings a welcome humor and lightness to the role.  Though I’ll admit that it was a little weird watching her as a suave spy after years of watching her play-act as that as Janet Snakehole on Parks and Rec…

Josh Hartnett (also reuniting with Mr. Ritchie after Wrath of Man) is fun as the actor Danny; Bugzy Malone is a strong supporting presence as J.J.; and frequent Guy Ritchie collaborator Eddie Marsan makes the most of his scenes as Kingston, Nathan’s contact within the British government.

I wish the film had given these supporting characters a little more depth.  Characters like Sarah and J.J. and Danny have a LOT to do in terms of their involvement in the plot, but we don’t really get to know their characters all that well.  Why did Sarah leave Mike’s team?  (The film weirdly ignores that Sarah used to work for Mike, after telling us that in her introduction.  Seeing as Mike becomes a major problem for our team as the story unfolds, it seems to me like that would be relevant!!)  Does Sarah have any nervousness when she’s tasked with going into the field in the film’s second half?  Speaking of that, when Sarah and Danny get roped into spending a weekend at Greg’s Turkish villa, I was surprised the film didn’t spend more time exploring how Danny — who is an actor, not a spy — would react to suddenly being placed in this long-term, dangerous undercover operation.  I thought the film would make more of a meal out of that, but it’s pretty quickly glossed over.  The absence of these sorts of character beats is part of what keeps the film as OK but not great in my mind.

I’m happy to have seen this; I had fun watching it, and I’d happily watch more in this series if they do try to expand this into a Mission: Impossible-type franchise…

Please support my website by clicking through one of my Amazon links the next time you need to shop!  As an Amazon Associate, I earn from qualifying purchases.  That means I’ll receive a small percentage from any product you purchase from Amazon within 24 hours after clicking through.  Thank you!