“Safe House,” which premiered last weekend after a massive helping of hype and high expectations, is essentially the rebellious stepchild of “The Bourne Identity,” with more grit, less classy brilliance and an odd mash-up of Denzel Washington and Ryan Reynolds in place of Matt Damon. Driven almost entirely by a relentless onslaught of action sequences, “Safe House” leaves little room for reflection, character development or breathing — resorting instead to a pulse-pounding barrage of bullets, shattered glass and bloody noses.

Character roles, motives indistinguishable

Director Daniel Espinosa’s newest thriller centers around two entirely antithetical CIA agents. Matt Weston (Reynolds) is a low-level operative who has reached the end of a yearlong post as a safe house housekeeper in Cape Town, South Africa­­ — and the end of his wits. Weston, fed up with staring at four walls all day, is desperately lobbying for his chance at being a field agent. Meanwhile, Tobin Frost (Washington) is a legendary rogue agent, once considered the greatest interrogator in the agency. He has been off the grid for the past 10 years, allegedly selling out CIA secrets.

The two are thrown together when Frost, pursued by a violent troop of mercenaries, is forced to surrender himself to the U.S. consulate in South Africa, and is immediately transported to Weston’s safe house. From here on, the movie becomes a wild, jarring roller coaster of ups, downs, banks, loops and drops as Weston, Frost, the CIA and the mercenaries all fight to get their way.

It’s hard to tell which side anyone is on, what anyone’s motives are and whether Frost is a protagonist, antagonist or simply a helpless commodity caught in the crossfire. Lacking the rich, detailed character development of the “Bournes,” or even the shocking plot twists of the “Mission Impossible” series, “Safe House” relies solely on action and acting to captivate its audience.

Action holds audience interest

Fortunately, it does succeed in both endeavors. The constant, edge-of-your seat action leaves little to want — from frantic car chases and deafening firefights, to precarious rooftop pursuits and bone-crunching hand-to-hand combat. Sprinkle in an exploding car and several gunshot wounds and you’ve got about as wild a ride as 120 minutes can be. Still, “Safe House” isn’t nearly as gory as many R-rated movies, like “Black Hawk Down,” tend to be, and hits with more of a Bourne-esque, relatively bloodless punch.

As for the acting, Washington delivers a flawlessly convincing performance, as can only be expected from the two-time Oscar-winning veteran. Reynolds, however, is the one true surprise of the film. Audiences used to seeing the pretty boy in lighthearted films like “The Proposal” or “Just Friends” will be impressed and possibly shocked at the actor’s raw, emotional, violent performance. The supporting work of Brendan Gleeson and Vera Farmiga as CIA brass — pitted in a side-battle of authority and credibility — also lends to the overall acting excellence in “Safe House.”

Die-hard addicts of serious, blood-boiling action movies will absolutely enjoy “Safe House” — they’d be hard-pressed to find a film more jam-packed with violent conflict. Serious fans of suspenseful spy flicks, on the other hand, might find much to criticize. Due in large part to writer David Guggenheim’s unoriginal inclusion of almost every spy movie cliché in the book, there is little creativity in the plot and few unexpected developments.

Most of Guggenheim’s “twists” are utterly predictable long before he gets around to revealing them. The similarly shallow attempts at character revelation, which are few and far between, are also vague and ultimately unhelpful. Without a doubt “Safe House” is an entertaining production, chock full of thrills and excitement, but with little imagination and a lot of reliance on gore and guns, it plays it far too “safe” to be a truly impressive spy film.