Remakes are hard. The filmmakers almost always face backlash from ardent fans of the original. Unless they just want to show off some technical chops with the rare shot-for-shot copy, they have to decide where and how they’ll add extra oomph to weather the eventual comparisons. And they’ll face the big, inevitable question: why?
The original 1981 version of The Amateur made enough of an impression on me to remain memorable four decades after I first caught it on cable. On a recent second viewing, I see more of the plot and character flaws. Though it is unfair to judge older films by current tastes, well, current viewers are the ones that matter for current reviews. I can recommend the original only for movie nerds who enjoy, as I do, comparing old and new.
The original gets off to a thrilling and dynamic start, with terrorists storming into the U.S. embassy in Munich, taking hostages, and executing one (the hero’s fiancé) on live TV. This new version fails this first comparison, with a more deliberate opening to establish the main characters. We spend more time tracking the obsessive morning routine of our hero, CIA cryptographer and computer wonk Charlie Heller (Rami Malek), brewing espresso just so, packing his briefcase just so, making sure parts for his airplane project in the garage are laid out just so. Saying goodbye to his wife, who is heading to London for a work assignment. Following him to work where he’s trying to unmask an anonymous source and decoding evidence of a top secret report that was altered to hide nefarious doings by his CIA boss.
Heller’s world doesn’t fall apart until next morning, when CIA Director Samantha O’Brien (Julianne Nicholson) informs him his wife was killed when an arms deal in a London hotel went south and the perpetrators gathered up some innocent bystanders as hostages. When his wife tries to intervene on behalf of another women, she’s chosen to be the shield as the bad guys escape a standoff with police. When things get dicey, the leader, Horst Schiller, shoots her.
Heller takes it on himself to investigate, using his computer chops to identify all the perps and present his evidence to his boss. As in the original, the boss says they’re not pursuing the crew just now but are keeping tabs to gather up their entire network. Incensed at the disinterest in capturing the thugs immediately, Heller explains he has evidence of the boss’s wrong-doing. Heller’s proposition, as in the original: train him as an assassin and send him on a mission to track down and eliminate them all.
See It
The ensuing action resembles the original only in broad strokes. Instead of the action all taking place in a single, frigid Eastern European setting, the new Heller pursues the bad guys across Europe: France, Turkey, Spain, Romania, and finally the Baltic Sea. Whereas the 1981 Heller is hesitant and more lucky than he is smart, the 2025 Heller starts to shed his hesitancy, anticipating and staying one step ahead of his CIA pursuers, and by the end he seems almost as ruthless as the crew he’s pursuing.
Are the multiple locales, the slicker computer nerd stuff, and the CGI enough oomph to lift it above the 1981 original? Well, it’s enough to make it a more exciting movie, but not really any better a story of retribution. In 1981, Heller is energized by the father of his slain girlfriend, a Nazi concentration camp survivor who shares how he sought revenge. A key difference: The 1981 conclusion has a satisfying stamp of finality and retribution. The 2025 version, not so much.
There are some decent supporting performances. Laurence Fishburne brings plenty of gravitas to the role of Heller’s CIA trainer and handler, who lectures him on how hard it actually is to take a human life. Julianne Nicholson likewise shines as the CIA director who, for once, isn’t in on the bad stuff. Caitríona Balfe is just OK as the secretive contact who helped Charlie with that top secret info and then supports him on his mission across Europe. And then there’s Jon Bernthal … why is he even here? He’s got a few minutes at the start to be chummy with Heller, then a few minutes at the end where he ties to provide advice Heller hardly needs. If you’re going to cut down a role that much, why not jettison it altogether?
Alas, though, there’s no one so delightful to watch as 1981’s Christopher Plummer, who as a local head of security is literally the smartest guy in the room.
And Rami Malek? The Oscar-winner can’t be faulted. He performs all his lines and his stunts with professional polish, though in scenes where he’s supposed to be grieving his dead wife, those clinched-jaw expressions looked more like he had a toothache than heartache. Still, he’s enjoyable to watch, easy to commiserate with, and we wind up rooting for him to succeed.
And so that big, inevitable question: why? The idea of a remake was nearly two decades in the making. Malek is listed as a producer, and that seems as plausible a reason as any why the film was finally greenlit and funded. The original is quite memorable for that dramatic opening, the terrorist marching Heller’s fiancé out before the cameras, pointing a gun at her head, and pulling the trigger. The original failed to deliver anything nearly as memorable from that moment on.
The not-quite-fatal flaw of the 2025 version is that it doesn’t even try to deliver that memorable opening. It’s just a spy thriller. A passable and entertaining-enough spy thriller that delivers a couple of hours of mindless entertainment. Which will be forgotten by next year. So why recommend it? To suggest that the real treat here is not the movies themselves, but the way the differences reveal what 2025 filmmakers feel they need to to do to entertain 2025 audiences. More flash, less substance.