"Trance" 2 stars out of 4 (C)

The more films I see by him, Danny Boyle comes off like the art-house equivalent of Michael Bay. Everything he films looks fantastic and usually has some equally hypnotic music pumping over it. Whereas Michael Bay just specializes in "'SPLOSIONS!" (that is spelled correctly) and not a lot of substance, Boyle's substance is often its own 'splosion. It might look really good but you don't want to think about it too much lest you see the wires. "Trance" is one of these movies. It looks great and seems to go somewhere but by the end we are just left with hurt eyes and the feeling like we've been had.

If there is anything to say about Boyle's films is that they are often difficult to explain. "Trance" is no different. It is also quite difficult to explain without getting into some sort of spoilers. If you have any interest in going to this movie, it is probably best to go in responsibly blind. Simon (James McAvoy), an art auctioneer, is having a rough time. Robbers lead by a guy named Franck (Vincent Cassel) have burst into his art auction in hopes of stealing a priceless Goya painting.. During the procedures he is supposed to follow in the event of a robbery attempt, Simon hands Franck the painting only to attempt to be a hero. What does he get for his heroism? A hard hit to the head. So large, in fact, that he forgets a large span of time immediately after the cold-cocking. When Franck gets back to his lair (hideout?), he discovers the painting is not there. Only one person knows where it is, Simon. The problem is that Franck's blow to the head has seemed to dislodge that information. Franck decides to take Simon to see a hypnotist named Elizabeth (Rosario Dawson), in order to hopefully reconnect Simon with the missing information. Twists and turns follow.

It can't be said that Danny Boyle makes bad looking films. "Trance" is no exception. It is quickly edited but never difficult to watch. Everything looks great (insert squeezy Rosario Dawson comment) and keeps the viewer interested. The problem with Boyle's films is that they aren't always easy to comprehend. I don't mean this in the sense that something like Terrance Malick's films are hard to understand. I mean that at times the plot can get so convoluted that you could swear it were littered with plot holes. Unfortunately, you aren't sure if it is in fact littered because you gave up trying. While the first half is entertaining and relatively easy to follow, the second half of "Trance" has scene after scene of eyebrow-raising plot developments that you will either want to dissect for the rest of the night or never think of again. I, unfortunately chose the later. The more I thought about the plot developments, the less they made sense and the more they appeared to just be an experiment. "What can I do next? Where can I take this story next?" As Ian Malcolm said in the recently re-released "Jurassic Park" "They were so preoccupied with whether or not they could that they didn't stop to think if they should."

There is very little reason to discuss the performances of the main actors as Boyle's films are more substance than content. Everyone is serviceable although I keep expecting Dawson to deliver a performance that impresses me and it doesn't seem like it will ever happen.

If Boyle can be commended for anything, it could be that "Trance" is a somewhat unexpected release after his last film, the much-loved but vastly overrated "Slumdog Millionaire". He could have played it safe and just made another feel-good movie. Instead he made a movie that hops between genres faster than you can follow. Too bad it isn't attached to a more competent film. Much of "Trance" feels like a first-time feature by a director that will no doubt produce something interesting in the future. There isn't really an excuse for the very experienced Boyle.