The Last Stand (2012)
Upon release The Last Stands opening weekend box office returns were not as much as Lionsgate pictures had anticipated. The long-term worldwide gross was only $48 million, for a movie that had cost over $40 million. There was talk in the mainstream movie press of Arnie's comeback stalling and that the sky was falling for R rated action movies. Theatres at the time were thriving on “Jason Bourne” style thrillers and the ubiquitous Marvel Cinematic Universe. Critics were also mixed in their opinions regarding the film. Some were quite dismissive, citing the very things that an ageing Arnold Schwarzenegger brings to the table in The Last Stand, as faults. Exactly what were they expecting? It's like criticising a dog for barking.
Upon release The Last Stands opening weekend box office returns were not as much as Lionsgate pictures had anticipated. The long-term worldwide gross was only $48 million, for a movie that had cost over $40 million. There was talk in the mainstream movie press of Arnie's comeback stalling and that the sky was falling for R rated action movies. Theatres at the time were thriving on “Jason Bourne” style thrillers and the ubiquitous Marvel Cinematic Universe. Critics were also mixed in their opinions regarding the film. Some were quite dismissive, citing the very things that an ageing Arnold Schwarzenegger brings to the table in The Last Stand, as faults. Exactly what were they expecting? It's like criticising a dog for barking.
When I saw The Last Stand upon its UK release, it was well received by the audience. There was laughter at the one liners and at some of the death scenes. There was even a smattering of applause at the end. As we left the screening, knowing looks and nods were exchanged. By and large the consensus was one of a job well done, because The Last Stand provided everything that we expected. A modern action movie, with an ageing star, making copious amounts of references to his age and the incongruity of the situation in a humorous way. The set pieces were competent and hard edged, and the overall film was relatively low key compared to the excesses of the star’s former works, such as Total Recall. A recent second viewing has re-iterated my opinion that it was the right sort of comeback vehicle for such a star.
The story is a very traditional set up, that lends itself perfectly to delivering the sort of content that fans of this genre (and in particular this star) actually want. The head of a Mexican drug cartel (Eduardo Noriega) escapes FBI custody, leaving a senior agent (Forest Whitaker) pondering how he will get across the border. The trail points to the sleepy town of Sommerton Junction. As an army of hired mercenaries descend upon the town to facilitate their bosses return to Mexico, it falls to local Sheriff (Schwarzenegger) and his deputies, Jamie Alexander, Luis Guzman and Zach Gilford to thwart their plans. Assisted by eccentric local gun collector Lewis Dinkum (Johnny Knoxville) they barricade the main street and make their proverbial last stand.
The Last Stand is surprisingly a little more than just the sum of its parts. Director Kim Ji-woon brings a subtly different look and feel to the proceedings, taking what is essentially a western and tempering it with an Asiatic aesthetic and better than average script (as far as action movies go). The movie benefits from interesting characters who you can relate to and who are quite endearing. There are elements of emotional drama here, that you don't often get in this genre. Arnold Schwarzenegger is actually a better actor than a lot of people think, and his portrayal of world-weary sheriff Ray Owens is pretty good. When a particular cast member dies in the second act, it is handled well by all the cast and it is a surprisingly sad scene. It's not Shakespeare but is light years beyond a lot of movies these days, who are populated by disposable characters you are totally indifferent to.
The less is more (by Arnie standards) approach of The Last Stand works well. It is nice to see physical car stunts and action set pieces when they’re used in these sorts of productions. Yes, there are elements of CGI but not to the extent of other genre movies. It is also a pleasant change to see a production of this kind receiving a higher rating and nailing its colours firmly to the mast. Also, an action movie of this scope with a body count in the dozens rather than hundreds, seems to be far more appropriate for a man of Mr. Schwarzenegger age. The Last Stand is not a perfect movie, but it is certainly not the pedestrian misfire some would have you believe. However, Arnold Schwarzenegger appeal is a generational thing. Upon mature reflection, if this movie had been released on Netflix then it may well have found a wider audience among fans who grew up with his work.
The Expendables Extended Director's Cut (2010)
If you are expecting more violence, explosions and sundry mayhem in the extended director's cut of The Expendables, then you'll find none. What you will discover is an additional ten minutes of character development and back story, which greatly improves the overall film. The theatrical cut was certainly not lacking in the action department but was a bit thin on narrative and back story. This extended version of the movie with over two hundred changes to the original cut, bolsters the dramatic elements of the plot. We get to know more about the team and as a result care a little more for them. You can find a comprehensive comparison over at moviecensorship.com of both versions of the movie.
If you are expecting more violence, explosions and sundry mayhem in the extended director's cut of The Expendables, then you'll find none. What you will discover is an additional ten minutes of character development and back story, which greatly improves the overall film. The theatrical cut was certainly not lacking in the action department but was a bit thin on narrative and back story. This extended version of the movie with over two hundred changes to the original cut, bolsters the dramatic elements of the plot. We get to know more about the team and as a result care a little more for them. You can find a comprehensive comparison over at moviecensorship.com of both versions of the movie.
A further improvement that has been made in the extended director's cut is that several of the action scenes have been re-edited. Not for any censorship reasons but mainly to improve the flow of the content. The water-boarding sequence now seems more relevant and clinical, rather than just brutal. The infamous knife twisting in the throat scene which was dropped from the UK theatrical print has been shortened in the extended cut. The hand amputation and decapitation that proceeded it, have had a few frames added and the entire sequence now seems to be structured better, allowing the viewer to follow what is happening on screen a lot more easily. I am not a fan of the modern style of lightning editing and felt that some sequences where quite jarring when I first saw The Expendables in the cinema. These revisions and others have addressed this issue. The style is still very fast but what is depicted can be visually assimilated a lot more easily.
Although there is much to enjoy about this film, one of its biggest shortcomings is its reliance on CGI FX over traditional physical effects. A lot of the bullet hits, knife wounds and blood splatter have been added in post-production. I'm sure time constraints and budgetary restrictions where deciding factors as to why the production chose this approach, but the reality is that these FX sequences often don't work. Take for the example the scene where the Somalia pirate gets blown in half by Dolph Lundgren. The sequence does not look at all credible and all the surrounding extras are conspicuously free from blood splatter. A simple physical effect using a prosthetic body would have been infinitely superior. Eric Roberts demise is similarly poorly realised, which is a shame because it diminishes the impact of the scene.
I don't expect to be schooled in military geo-politics by a movie such as The Expendables. Nor do I expect it to afford me any insight into the human condition, the horrors of war or the nature of the soul (although the scene where Mickey Rourke talks about how he failed to stop a suicide attempt was extremely well acted and somewhat out of place). What I do expect is hard edged action, quirky characters, witty banter and genuine love of the genre in question. The Expendables achieves all of these and does so with aplomb. Too often, equivalent movies fail to do this because they’re fundamentally dishonest. The soulless manner in which they’re contrived to retrofit a money-making formula shows nothing but contempt for their target audience. Whatever your view on the merits of The Expendables its heart is clearly in the right place, which is a rare quality these days.
Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows (2011)
Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows, is very much a film of two halves. The initial hour is filled with gunfights, explosions, and bullet time fist fights. Sherlock Holmes (Robert Downey, Jr.) and Dr. Watson (Jude Law) unravel the sinister plans of Professor Moriarty (Jared Harris) and proceed to deal with it in the idiom of Frank Martin, as director Guy Ritchie's pulls every visual trick he knows out of the bag. The pace is fast yet a fairly strong script and superb chemistry between central characters, makes this a cut above the usual PG-13 rated action fodder served to the masses at present. It is beneficial that the bulk of the original cast and crew returned for this sequel as it maintains a strong sense of continuity with it predecessor.
Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows, is very much a film of two halves. The initial hour is filled with gunfights, explosions, and bullet time fist fights. Sherlock Holmes (Robert Downey, Jr.) and Dr. Watson (Jude Law) unravel the sinister plans of Professor Moriarty (Jared Harris) and proceed to deal with it in the idiom of Frank Martin, as director Guy Ritchie's pulls every visual trick he knows out of the bag. The pace is fast yet a fairly strong script and superb chemistry between central characters, makes this a cut above the usual PG-13 rated action fodder served to the masses at present. It is beneficial that the bulk of the original cast and crew returned for this sequel as it maintains a strong sense of continuity with it predecessor.
Inspector Lastrade (Eddie Marsan) is sidelined in this story and Holmes's love, Irene Adler (Rachel McAdams) is dispensed with quite early in the proceedings, leaving us with much more interaction between Holmes and Watson. A dynamic that is skewed by Watson's marriage, leading to an unconventional love triangle. Sadly, there are a few weaknesses in the finished film. Gypsy leader Madam Simza Heron (Noomi Rapace) has a great introduction then is left somewhat under developed. Also, the disgraced Colonel and crack shot, Sebastian Moran is similarly vague. He also drops out of the film towards the end, providing a suitable antagonist for a third instalment.
But these issues notwithstanding, the second half, quickly shifts from action to the traditional game of intellectual cat and mouse between our hero and his arch nemesis. It is during these verbal confrontations that the more traditional elements of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's work come through. The final battle via a game of chess on a balcony overlooking the Reichenbach falls, is ingenious and enthralling. Guy Ritchie's has certainly found the right mix between old school cerebral sleuthing and contemporary action styles. He also understands that the linchpin of these films is the relationship between leads and he handles this dynamic skilfully. Hans Zimmer's soundtrack once gain embellishes the film and avoids the usual musical clichés associated with this unique sub-genre.
Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows is very entertaining holiday fare and is certainly not an inferior sequel. Twice now director Guy Ritchie has exceeded expectations and made amends for previous sins (need we list them?). Plus, it is always a pleasure to see genre stalwart, rent-a-German and purveyor of Ferrero Roche, Wolf Kahler back on the screen. On a parting note, Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows is quite surprisingly strong in content. It is interesting to see how Mr. Ritchie has carefully shot and choreographed the violence so as to secure a PG-13 rating/12 Certificate. I was quite surprised about one scene in which Sherlock Holmes is rather brutally interrogated. Although the unpleasantness is justified, viewers should be aware of this hard edge to the movie.
Sherlock Holmes (2009)
For me the inherent appeal of Conan Doyle’s great detective is the way in which it lends itself to continuous reinvention and interpretation. And so, I was greatly surprised by how well director Guy Ritchie handled the 2009 reboot. He in fact did so well, that you could argue it put his career back on track. You won’t find a deerstalker on the head of Robert Downey Jr’s Holmes. This is very much a Holmes for the current times, with bar knuckle boxing, explosions and frenetic chases around a stylised CGI London, but despite how it sounds it works extremely well. The pacing, tone and humour are just right and so the movie avoid becoming a caricature. Under all the modern trappings the screenplay retains the essential elements of source text, such as a densely plotted narrative, cunning mental gymnastics and of course the complex dynamics of the Holmes, Watson relationship.
For me the inherent appeal of Conan Doyle’s great detective is the way in which it lends itself to continuous reinvention and interpretation. And so, I was greatly surprised by how well director Guy Ritchie handled the 2009 reboot. He in fact did so well, that you could argue it put his career back on track. You won’t find a deerstalker on the head of Robert Downey Jr’s Holmes. This is very much a Holmes for the current times, with bar knuckle boxing, explosions and frenetic chases around a stylised CGI London, but despite how it sounds it works extremely well. The pacing, tone and humour are just right and so the movie avoid becoming a caricature. Under all the modern trappings the screenplay retains the essential elements of source text, such as a densely plotted narrative, cunning mental gymnastics and of course the complex dynamics of the Holmes, Watson relationship.
Robert Downey Jr is a far cry from Peter Cushing’s Holmes. He introduces a slovenly element to the character who’s continuously intellectually absorbed at the expense of others and worldly social niceties. Opium addiction is not mentioned this time round. He excels at the things that engage his intellect, including pugilism, so we have some solid set pieces, driven by Holmes pre-fight analysis. Jude Law’s Doctor Watson is an amiable and long-suffering foil, very much in the Danny Glover mould from Lethal Weapon. He offsets Holmes’s intellect perfectly with his common sense and sarcasm. As for the plot, it centres upon an aristocratic serial killer called Lord Blackwood (Mark Strong), who is caught and tried, sent to the gallows and placed in his family tomb. However, he subsequently appears to rise from the dead, and returns to his killing spree.
It’s all very fast paced and at times you can see how certain characters are introduced to simply expedite the plot and allow Holmes to do his quota of “sleuthing” before the next action sequence. Sarah Greenwood’s production design is a definite high point with here stylised, even borderline steampunk “Victoriana”. Ritchie attends to the proceeding well and balances the films elements, ensuring that just as things start to get a bit silly, he moves them on to another diversion. There is also a great score by Hans Zimmer which is radically different from the usual Violin driven motifs one associates with Holmes. Rachel McAdams, as American femme fatale Irene Adler, is more than the usual window-dressing female characters have in such movies and as ever Eddie Marsan is extremely watchable as the hang dog Inspector Lestrade.
Considering that Sherlock Holmes was released as the MCU was beginning to get traction with cinema audiences, it does well not to just repackage the great detective as yet another superhero. Yes, there are some very flashy visual affectations and contemporary editing techniques but there is still room for film to focus on the dynamics of Holmes and Watson relationship. There is a definite chemistry between both leads and it is the ongoing examination of relationship that once again underpins the story and makes it worth watching. This coupled with the right tone and visual embellishments meant that Sherlock Holmes found an audience and did well at the box office, with the cast and director returning for a sequel.
Megiddo: The Omega Code 2 (2001)
If at first you don’t succeed, try the exact same thing over again with more money. Megiddo: The Omega Code 2 is the follow up to the 1999 film The Omega Code. Technically, the film is a quasi-prequel (plot wise) which covers Politician, Industrialist and Antichrist Alexander Stone’s (Michael York) rise to power and his subsequent feud with his younger brother. It then deviates from the sequence of events in the first movie by ending in a large-scale battle at Megiddo between the forces or good and evil, both of whom favour the use of tanks and helicopter gunships. Megiddo: The Omega Code 2 benefits from a substantially larger budget and from superior direction by veteran film maker Brian Trenchard-Smith. It’s hardly a genre milestone but it’s a step in the right direction compared to its predecessor.
If at first you don’t succeed, try the exact same thing over again with more money. Megiddo: The Omega Code 2 is the follow up to the 1999 film The Omega Code. Technically, the film is a quasi-prequel (plot wise) which covers Politician, Industrialist and Antichrist Alexander Stone’s (Michael York) rise to power and his subsequent feud with his younger brother. It then deviates from the sequence of events in the first movie by ending in a large-scale battle at Megiddo between the forces or good and evil, both of whom favour the use of tanks and helicopter gunships. Megiddo: The Omega Code 2 benefits from a substantially larger budget and from superior direction by veteran film maker Brian Trenchard-Smith. It’s hardly a genre milestone but it’s a step in the right direction compared to its predecessor.
Sadly, the script is still weak and therefore the biggest flaw in the production and not even the tinkering of script doctor John Fasano cures it of its failings. Despite the overtly religious framing of the narrative there seems to be little insight into the forces of good. God and Jesus are seldom mentioned, and the plot still focuses on the rise of the beast. The production values are higher than its predecessor and some of the action scenes are okay. However, the use of CGI is variable ranging from adequate to poor. The destruction of the Coliseum in Rome is noticeably inept. In between the action we have a notable cast of international character actors such as Michael Biehn, David Hedison, Udo Kier and Franco Nero. In a fit of inspired casting, R Lee Ermey plays the president of the United States! They all spend their time looking earnest and moving the clumsy story line forward.
Considering the nature of the story, you would expect some flamboyant dialogue and clever theological cut and thrust. But such an approach is distinctly lacking. There are also several plot holes that must surely spring to mind to even the most casual viewer. For example, what is the Pope doing during these proceedings? Is he not Gods representative on earth? Surely the Catholic Church has a few thoughts on the rise of the Antichrist? Also, how does Islam react to these events? The screenplay chooses to omit these lines of enquiry. There is also no mention of the number of the beast, which tends to be a key point in the Book of Revelations. You do not have to be a major religious scholar to realise that Megiddo: The Omega Code 2 is simply cherry picking various religious texts to justify its own narrative. But then again this is a movie funded by evangelical Christians.
However, despite these shortcomings, this is by and large a more enjoyable film than the first instalment. The reliable cast do their best to tackle the screenplay and plot with stoic professionalism. Director Brian Trenchard-Smith stated that he treated the movie as a “a fun romp, not usually what happens with a religious film”. I still got the feeling that I was watching a sanitised version of a The Final Conflict but that is the price you have to pay to reach the widest audience with the ubiquitous PG-13 rating. Oh, and there's no reference to the code of the title in this particular movie. So, if you endured the first movie and feel the need for a second round, then Megiddo: The Omega Code 2 is a more rewarding experience. It still isn’t anywhere near as good as it could’ve been but it’s an improvement. Perhaps if there had been a third instalment, they may have got it right. However, poor box office returns brought this distinctly niche franchise to an end.
The Omega Code (1999)
Action-based faith movies are a curious and somewhat niche genre (“no shit” I hear you say). Apart from this movie and its sequel, the only other I can think of is Left Behind from 2014. There have been others, but they’ve tended to be very low budget affairs, made for Christian TV networks. The Omega Code, directed by Robert Marcarelli, was different, in so far it had a larger budget and managed to get a secure a theatrical release. The premillennialist plot revolves around a plan by industrialist politician and Antichrist Stone Alexander (Michael York) to take over the world using information hidden in the Bible via a hidden code. Casper Van Dien also stars as lifestyle guru Dr. Gillen Lane who unwittingly joins Stone to handle his public relations. The film is based on a novel written by televangelist Paul Crouch, head of the Trinity Broadcasting Network. The plot presents an Evangelical Christian view about the end of days and the rise of the Antichrist. Believe it or not, the box office returns for The Omega Code where greater than Fight Club on its opening weekend in 1999.
Action-based faith movies are a curious and somewhat niche genre (“no shit” I hear you say). Apart from this movie and its sequel, the only other I can think of is Left Behind from 2014. There have been others, but they’ve tended to be very low budget affairs, made for Christian TV networks. The Omega Code, directed by Robert Marcarelli, was different, in so far it had a larger budget and managed to get a secure a theatrical release. The premillennialist plot revolves around a plan by industrialist politician and Antichrist Stone Alexander (Michael York) to take over the world using information hidden in the Bible via a hidden code. Casper Van Dien also stars as lifestyle guru Dr. Gillen Lane who unwittingly joins Stone to handle his public relations. The film is based on a novel written by televangelist Paul Crouch, head of the Trinity Broadcasting Network. The plot presents an Evangelical Christian view about the end of days and the rise of the Antichrist. Believe it or not, the box office returns for The Omega Code where greater than Fight Club on its opening weekend in 1999.
So where to start? The Omega Code is a mess yet a fascinating one at that. The budget although small, is sufficient to portray the proceedings, although the effects work, computer graphics and action scenes are somewhat lacklustre. The direction is poor, the script clichéd and the plot very predictable. Yet a lot of research appear to have been done regarding the religious prophecies depicted. It’s a shame this aspect wasn’t explored more. There are some interesting performances, especially from York, who has a great time chewing the scenery. Genre favourite, Michael Ironside appears as a defrocked priest turned assassin which is as novel as is bizarre. In some respects, the movie come across as The Omen lite, but it struggles to hold the viewers interest. It raises many theological questions and yet for a faith driven movie there's a lot about Satan but precious little about Jesus. The PG-13 rating is not really justified and those looking for action will be disappointed.
A better director, tighter script and larger budget would have greatly improved The Omega Code. On mature reflection many of the films failing can be clearly attributed to the fact that many involved on the production side were not sufficiently experienced. In the right hands this could have been a engaging cult movie or cheesy genre film. Yet despite these factors the film still performed well in the US market. No doubt due to heavy promotion at a parish level. It spawned a prequel which attempted to address some of the criticisms of the first instalment. Overall The Omega Code has very limited appeal to both Christians and non-Christians. For those who like theological horror dealt with in a more traditional fashion, I'd recommend Holocaust 2000 from 1977 staring Kirk Douglas. It’s an interesting Italian cash in on The Omen, filled with visions of the apocalypse, lurid death scenes and yet another British actor (Simon York) playing the Antichrist.
Skyscraper (2018)
I often find the arbitrary distillations of movies into a glib sentence to be a rather tedious trend. However, The Towering Inferno meets Die Hard is a fairly accurate assessment of Skyscraper. Sadly, the film has none of the drama or suspense of either of those two “classics”. Overall Skyscraper is a rather lacklustre affair, despite having two very personable leads (Dwayne Johnson and Neve Campbell). It suffers from a very superficial story and insubstantial characters, leaving only a handful of action set pieces to drive the narrative forward. It also makes the mistake of simply asking too much of its audience with regard to their suspension of disbelief and plays fast and loose with the laws of physics. In a nutshell this is a movie that aims for the “big, dumb and fun” market, but sadly only delivers on “big and dumb”. Not even the presence of Dwayne Johnson can elevate the proceedings.
I often find the arbitrary distillations of movies into a glib sentence to be a rather tedious trend. However, The Towering Inferno meets Die Hard is a fairly accurate assessment of Skyscraper. Sadly, the film has none of the drama or suspense of either of those two “classics”. Overall Skyscraper is a rather lacklustre affair, despite having two very personable leads (Dwayne Johnson and Neve Campbell). It suffers from a very superficial story and insubstantial characters, leaving only a handful of action set pieces to drive the narrative forward. It also makes the mistake of simply asking too much of its audience with regard to their suspension of disbelief and plays fast and loose with the laws of physics. In a nutshell this is a movie that aims for the “big, dumb and fun” market, but sadly only delivers on “big and dumb”. Not even the presence of Dwayne Johnson can elevate the proceedings.
After being invalided out of the services, former FBI Hostage Rescue Team leader Will Sawyer (Dwayne Johnson) now runs a private security company which specialises in skyscrapers and luxury buildings. After the world’s tallest building, “The Pearl” in Hong Kong, is set on fire by a team of international terrorists, Sawyer finds himself framed for arson and wanted by the police. Matters get worse when he learns that his wife Sarah (Neve Campbell) and children Georgia and Henry returned early from a day trip and are now trapped in the building above the fire. Scaling a crane next to the skyscraper and gaining access to the burning building, Sawyer has to play a game of cat and mouse with the terrorist leader Kores Botha (Roland Møller). Can he rescue his family, discover why Botha has targeted the building’s owner, Zhao Long Ji (Chin Han) and clear his name?
Usually these sorts of big budget summer action movies are lengthy undertakings, with self-indulgent running times of two hours plus. Skyscraper comes in at a lean 102 minutes. If you exclude the end credits, the film is about an hour and a half and therein lies one of its problems. The overall pacing is a little too quick, especially after the first act has established the plot and characters. The editing is somewhat “off” and you really get the impression that the film has been re-cut multiple times to try and stress certain aspects of the production and to meet the lucrative PG-13 rating it so obviously desired. Hence many of the support characters, such as Inspector Wu, Fire Chief Shen and Ajani Okeke, Zhao's head-of-security are left somewhat vague. Villains Kores Botha and Xia (Hannah Quinlivan) are similarly two dimensional and have no real impact or feel like a genuine threat.
But perhaps the biggest problem with Skyscraper is the actual conflagration itself. In Irwin Allen’s The Towering Inferno, the fire was in many respects a character that grew as a threat throughout the proceedings. Here it is merely a plot device that comes and goes, depending on when writer and director, Rawson Marshall Thurber, needs it. It never really has the dramatic impact it should have, as does the entire sub-plot about “The Pearl” being the worlds tallest building. This concept is just glossed over. And as ever with action movies of this nature, the technical accuracy of the what is presented is woefully inept, even for a genre that usually only flirts with reality. Quite early on in the film, when Will Sawyer decides to scale a huge crane, a line is crossed with regard to our suspension of disbelief. The following leap from crane to building with the obligatory “peddling in air” trope, simply jumps the shark.
Whereas Mr Johnson’s previous disaster movie, San Andreas, managed to stay on the right side of stupidity, Skyscraper sadly crosses the line. It is superficial, lacking in excitement and tonally inconsistent. Perhaps a longer edit with a greater focus on story may have improved matters. As it stands, not even Dwayne Johnson’s buoyant personality and easy-going charisma can really sustain this indifferent blockbuster. For a movie with such a large budget, international setting and cast, it really is a missed opportunity. The current trend in Hollywood of catering specifically to the Chinese film market, should afford film makers with a lot of new creative opportunities. Sadly, rather than weaving region character into the finished products, such productions frequently end up somewhat homogenous and devoid of any identity or charm. Beyond filling time on a flight, Skyscraper really doesn’t have much to offer, which is a shame because given its star and the underlying premise, it should have been far more entertaining.
San Andreas (2015)
San Andreas makes the same mistake that most modern disaster movies tend to; namely the human story is simply drowned out by the size of the unfolding disaster. There seems to be some sort of curious inverse scale in this particular genre, in which the greater the magnitude of destruction, the less the audience gives a crap about those experiencing it on-screen. San Andreas is essentially a CGI FX showreel with some bland and indifferent narrative bolted on to it. It taps into societies morbid fascination with our own mortality and the fragile nature of our modern life style. It is odd how we seem to relish visions of our own destruction. I’m sure psychologists have a lot to say on this matter. However, beyond providing a spectacle San Andreas has precious little else to offer. Once again, the only redeeming aspect of the film is the presence of Dwayne Johnson.
San Andreas makes the same mistake that most modern disaster movies tend to; namely the human story is simply drowned out by the size of the unfolding disaster. There seems to be some sort of curious inverse scale in this particular genre, in which the greater the magnitude of destruction, the less the audience gives a crap about those experiencing it on-screen. San Andreas is essentially a CGI FX showreel with some bland and indifferent narrative bolted on to it. It taps into societies morbid fascination with our own mortality and the fragile nature of our modern life style. It is odd how we seem to relish visions of our own destruction. I’m sure psychologists have a lot to say on this matter. However, beyond providing a spectacle San Andreas has precious little else to offer. Once again, the only redeeming aspect of the film is the presence of Dwayne Johnson.
I like Dwayne Johnson; he's an amiable on-screen presence who sticks to what he does best. Yet San Andreas manages to tax an already forgiving audiences sense of disbelief by casting him as a search and rescue pilot. It’s not the first role you associate with him is it? The “stupidity meter” reading quickly increases once a series of earthquakes the West Coast destroying the Hoover Dam and spreading to Los Angeles. People start behaving illogically and according to the movie cliché hand book. The faux science espoused at this point is ludicrous. The rating then goes off the chart when Chief Raymond 'Ray' Gaines (Johnson) just happens to chance upon his ex-wife Emma (Carla Gugino), despite Los Angeles having a population of four million and rescues her in the ensuing mayhem.
If you like to play arbitrary plot device bingo, you're score card will be full by the time San Andreas finishes. These include such clichés as the serious actor playing an academic (Paul Giamatti), whose sole purpose is to facilitate narrative exposition and explain what’s happening next to the intellectually challenged. Then there's the news reporter who's always in the right place at the right time to “get the story”. Oh, and we even get the evil new boyfriend who works in real estate (to be honest it’s a good indicator). As the credits finally roll, you’ll more than likely be partially deaf and have a headache brought about by the hyperactive cinematography. However, despite being immensely stupid there are a few crumbs of entertainment to be had due to Mr Johnson. He is disarmingly watchable. If you need to keep the kids quiet and kill two hours, then San Andreas will fit the bill. Expect nothing more.
Executive Decision Re-Edited Blu-ray Version (1996)
Stuart Baird’s Executive Decision was one of the better action films of the late nineties, with a stronger narrative and emphasis on characters, rather than just pure mayhem. Sporting a robust cast including Kurt Russell, David Suchet (Quelle surprise, a British actor playing a villain) and a willingness to break with convention (Steven Seagal dies in the first 45 minutes), Executive Decision is still an entertaining genre piece. Therefore, its arrival on Blu-ray in 2011 was keenly anticipated. However, placed on the back of the packaging of the US region-free release was a short and initially somewhat innocuous statement. “This R-rated version contains material different from the original R-rated version”. Exactly what does this mean?
Stuart Baird’s Executive Decision was one of the better action films of the late nineties, with a stronger narrative and emphasis on characters, rather than just pure mayhem. Sporting a robust cast including Kurt Russell, David Suchet (Quelle surprise, a British actor playing a villain) and a willingness to break with convention (Steven Seagal dies in the first 45 minutes), Executive Decision is still an entertaining genre piece. Therefore, its arrival on Blu-ray in 2011 was keenly anticipated. However, placed on the back of the packaging of the US region-free release was a short and initially somewhat innocuous statement. “This R-rated version contains material different from the original R-rated version”. Exactly what does this mean?
Well it has subsequently become apparent that Warner Bros have sourced a re-edited version of the film for its US Blu-ray release (and in all other territories). Specifically, cuts have been made to scenes where various characters are shown holding and reading the Quran. Please note that these alterations should not be confused with cuts that were made to the UK DVD release in 1997, in which Steven Seagal’s knife work at the start of the movie was truncated to obtain a lower rating. These new edits for Blu-ray have been made to address (and remove) the presence of a religious text that is used within the movie as a prop. If one compares the original 1997 US DVD copy of the film which is uncut, with the Blu-ray release, you’ll find that the following changes have been made to the film.
At 10:38, the scene in which the suicide bomber enters the London restaurant has shots of him holding the Quran aloft removed.
Then at 1:04:50 when David Suchet is talking to Halle Berry, similar material has been deleted. This includes him holding and leafing through the holy book.
Finally, between 1:37:04 to 1:37:11, shots of David Suchet praying are missing. This includes a scene in which a copy of the Quran can be seen on top of some radio equipment, next to him.
From a narrative point of view, these alterations do not have any tangible impact upon the story, or the characters and their motivation. However, many will argue that this is not the point. This rather arbitrary approach by Warner Bros doesn’t really achieve anything of significance, especially in light of the fact that the uncut version of the film has been in circulation globally on DVD for 13 years. It also seems paradoxical to remove one element of a film that can be perceived as offensive, when the very premise of the entire story can also be viewed in a similar fashion? Exactly who are these cuts supposed to appease? I was not aware of any major campaign against Executive Decision during its theatrical release or subsequent lifecycle on DVD. Is this more a case of the distributors having a guilty conscience or simply covering themselves legally?
Warner Bros have subsequently replaced the uncut 1997 DVD version of the movie with a new release that features the same re-edited version of the movie as the Blu-ray disc. However, the uncut version of the film still remains in circulation and can still be bought from retailers who still hold residual stock. For more specific details as to what versions are available in which regions please visit the Rewind: DVD Compare website, which provides a comprehensive breakdown and analysis. It remains to be seen as to what version of the film is currently in use on video on demand platforms and TV networks around the world.
The world has changed quite radically since 1996 and certainly post 9/11 and Iraq War sensibilities have had an impact upon such arbitrary tropes as the depiction of Islamic Fundamentalist Terrorists in cinema. Simplistic action movies like Executive Decision have given way to more nuanced films like Green Zone or Eye in the Sky. However, this retro-active editing of Executive Decision remains a curious anomaly because I am not aware of any other action of this kind being taken against similar movies from the same period. But then again, I cannot easily recall a comparable movie that featured the Quran as a visible prop. As to the moral rectitude and reasoning behind making these cuts to Executive Decision, that is a sperate debate altogether.
The Boondock Saints Unrated Director's Cut (1999)
Writer and director Troy Duffy obviously set out to make The Boondock Saints a "cult" movie and to find a niche market audience that would champion it. Every thematic and cinematic attribute you associate with contemporary, "hip", independent film making is duly trotted out and used in an arbitrary fashion. The Boondock Saints is violent (in that very stylised Tarantino sense of the word), slick, contrived and deliberately controversial. It also perpetuates every possible cliché about the Irish as a race and the Roman Catholic church that you can think of. Yet despite these facts, there is still the germ of a good film at its core. Vigilanteism has always been an intriguing and emotive subject that can make for challenging cinema. Populist content such as this can also be the key to box office success.
Writer and director Troy Duffy obviously set out to make The Boondock Saints a "cult" movie and to find a niche market audience that would champion it. Every thematic and cinematic attribute you associate with contemporary, "hip", independent film making is duly trotted out and used in an arbitrary fashion. The Boondock Saints is violent (in that very stylised Tarantino sense of the word), slick, contrived and deliberately controversial. It also perpetuates every possible cliché about the Irish as a race and the Roman Catholic church that you can think of. Yet despite these facts, there is still the germ of a good film at its core. Vigilanteism has always been an intriguing and emotive subject that can make for challenging cinema. Populist content such as this can also be the key to box office success.
Two Irish Boston brothers, Connor and Murphy MacManus (Sean Patrick Flanery and Norman Reedus) fall foul of the Russian Mafia. After a questionable act of self-defence is "overlooked" by the local Police, the brothers conclude that they’re doing God's work and decide to clean up the town. Aided by a minor foot soldier of the local Mafia (David Della Rocco), who sees their crusade as a way to settle personal scores, the body count starts to increase. Enter FBI profiler Paul Smecker (Willem Dafoe), who after a time starts questioning his profession and sympathising with the murderous trio. The various conflicts of interest and upsetting of the criminal status quo, eventually leads to a standoff that seems to have an inevitable conclusion.
The Boondock Saints lurches from scene to scene with a lumbering sense of momentum, leaving occasional interesting ideas only partially explored. The opening half of the film is the most satisfactory as the story provides sufficient motive for the two brothers to pursue their killing spree. The proceeding become somewhat derailed once Rocco joins the team, as this contrived plot devices finally put pay to any originality. The introduction of an openly gay FBI agent embodies invokes possible stereotype and really does beggars belief. Profanities fly at unprecedented levels and the comic relief, such as the accidental shooting of a household pet, is unsubtle and crass. The gun battles are lovingly shot in slow motion and edited to a quasi-Irish folk, post-modern soundtrack. Mr. Duffy really wanted this film to be remembered by those enamoured with "cult" cinema and does everything he possibly can to achieve this.
Much has been made of the films violent content. The Director’s Cut of The Boondock Saints replaces all the death scenes from the theatrical version with alternative takes. One bullet hit becomes three and there is noticeably more blood splatter and injury detail. Even so, this is not anything ground breaking. We have all been here before and seen far more graphic material framed against far better narratives. There is also an attempt to imbue the action scenes with an artistic sense of style, of the "Peckinpah" idiom. There’s copious use of slow motion and cross cutting of subjects matters. However, as the overall film lacks the intellectual and emotional content The Wild Bunch or Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Garcia, then most of this visual posturing fall upon stony ground.
But despite all these faults, this chaotic mess still manages to entertain at some level. The ending is left conspicuously open and the credits roll over bogus news reports, conducting a vox pop relating to "the saints" activities. Regardless of the respective merits of this film, it garnered a big enough following via word of mouth and the internet for the director to make a sequel a decade later. Therefore, only watch The Boondock Saints if you are in a particularly forgiving mood and tolerant of fan boyish enthusiasm masquerading as genuine film making skill. Scholars of cinema may be curious just to see all the possible school boy mistakes that can be made during the course of one single action film.
Escape Plan 2: Hades (2018)
Direct-to-streaming is in some respects the direct-to-video market of the current decade. However, that comes with a few caveats, as sometimes if a studio gets cold feet about a movie they’ll ditch it to streaming, even if it’s a quality product. Alex Garland’s Annihilation being an example of this. However, that isn’t the case of Escape Plan 2: Hades which clearly falls into the category of a cheaper and inferior sequel. Both Sylvester Stallone and Curtis Jackson return respectively to their previous roles, but Arnold Schwarzenegger is conspicuously absent this time round. In other cast changes, Jamie King replaces Amy Ryan as Abigail Ross. Sadly, the marketing for the movie is deliberately misleading and despite featuring prominently in the advertising, Dave Bautista only has a support role, appearing in the final third of the movie. The director for this instalment is Steven C. Miller, whose body of work is predominantly direct-to-streaming action movies and low budget thrillers.
Direct-to-streaming is in some respects the direct-to-video market of the current decade. However, that comes with a few caveats, as sometimes if a studio gets cold feet about a movie they’ll ditch it to streaming, even if it’s a quality product. Alex Garland’s Annihilation being an example of this. However, that isn’t the case of Escape Plan 2: Hades which clearly falls into the category of a cheaper and inferior sequel. Both Sylvester Stallone and Curtis Jackson return respectively to their previous roles, but Arnold Schwarzenegger is conspicuously absent this time round. In other cast changes, Jamie King replaces Amy Ryan as Abigail Ross. Sadly, the marketing for the movie is deliberately misleading and despite featuring prominently in the advertising, Dave Bautista only has a support role, appearing in the final third of the movie. The director for this instalment is Steven C. Miller, whose body of work is predominantly direct-to-streaming action movies and low budget thrillers.
It quickly become apparent when watching Escape Plan 2: Hades that the movie is primarily a vehicle for Chinese star Xiaoming Huang (Ip Man 2) and not Sylvester Stallone. His character, Shu Ren, is a protege of professional escapologist Ray Breslin, who finds himself trapped in the titular high-tech prison Hades. Meanwhile, the rest of Breslin’s team sit around their Atlanta based office pondering why their friend has “vanished from the grid”. It soon becomes clear that Shu Ren’s brother-in-law Yusheng Ma (Chen Ta) is the reason for their incarceration. Yusheng Ma is a tech genius who owns several patents for next-generation satellites. Hades is actually a front for the Ruscho Corporation who want to control this new technology for their own nefarious reason. It’s all somewhat perfunctory and one can’t help but get the impression that the screenplay written by Miles Chapman, who co-wrote the original Escape Plan, has been retrofitted to accommodate the change of focus from a US leading man to a Chinese box office star.
I like many other viewers was not expecting a sequel to Escape Plan, let alone a franchise (there’s a clear indication that a third movie is on the way at the end of this one). Initially, the prospect of more was not inherently unappealing; I’ve seen far worse material get multiple instalments. However, the change of direction and star focus is a surprise. Escape Plan did well internationally, and a sizeable percentage of that box office was the Chinese market, so it’s hardly rocket science that this Chinese backed production has dovetailed a star from the home market into the proceedings. However, the budget for Escape Plan 2: Hades is demonstrably lower than the first movie and the production has that distinct direct-to-streaming look. The cinematography is vivid with a blue, red and green colour palette, but it cannot cover for the inherent cheap feel that permeates the movie. There is a pulsing synth score from The Newton Brothers helps up the ante, but it often drowns out the expositionary dialogue. The fight scenes are also poorly shot and edited, which is a damn shame because Xiaoming Huang clearly has talent. There’s also a plethora of digital blood spray and it’s stand out like a sore thumb.
Sadly, even the presence of Stallone and Bautista cannot save Escape Plan 2: Hades. Their joint input seems very contrived and workmanlike. Perhaps the producers should have eliminated all links to the previous movie and just made this a straight forward original vehicle for Xiaoming Huang. As it stands, the existing franchise baggage (and there’s a surprising lot) and US based scenes gets in the way of the prison-based action. So, all things considered, unless you like the lacklustre ambience of lower end of the action movie market, there isn’t really a lot to recommend Escape Plan 2: Hades. Although, I can’t help but smile at the hubris of the producers, in thinking they could make such radical changes to an established movie vehicle and think they could get away with it. It makes me just a little bit curious to see how contrived the threatened third instalment in the franchise is and whether Mr. Stallone decides to grace it with his presence.
Escape Plan (2013)
If you are over a certain age, there will be certain actors, TV shows and bands that you’ve grown up with and always enjoyed. Let us consider for a moment the latter. The Stranglers will be playing at the Looe Music Festival in Cornwall on the 23rd September. They’ve been touring and producing albums for nearly forty-five years. The majority of the audience who attend their gigs will be long term fans and they’ll not be there in the hope of hearing a bunch of new material from the latest album. No, they want a concert filled with familiar tunes and greatest hits. I'm pretty sure that is what they will get as well. Escape Plan is the cinematic equivalent of this. A movie that is driven by its two leads and tailor made so they can give their fans exactly what they want.
If you are over a certain age, there will be certain actors, TV shows and bands that you’ve grown up with and always enjoyed. Let us consider for a moment the latter. The Stranglers will be playing at the Looe Music Festival in Cornwall on the 23rd September. They’ve been touring and producing albums for nearly forty-five years. The majority of the audience who attend their gigs will be long term fans and they’ll not be there in the hope of hearing a bunch of new material from the latest album. No, they want a concert filled with familiar tunes and greatest hits. I'm pretty sure that is what they will get as well. Escape Plan is the cinematic equivalent of this. A movie that is driven by its two leads and tailor made so they can give their fans exactly what they want.
On paper Escape Plan is the sort of movie that may have gone straight to video, if it had been made in the eighties. It has a very black and white plot scenario, with a clear three act story structure. The set pieces drive the narrative forward and there’s plenty of boxes ticked. What elevates this formulaic piece of genre cinema is the presence of its two stars, Stallone and Schwarzenegger. I cannot stress how much this is a piece of entertainment whose success hinges upon your personal connection both actors. For some this movie will be like putting on a comfortable pair of old shoes or having that special meal that you always have, when you go to your favourite restaurant.
Security specialist Ray Breslin (Stallone) breaks out of prisons for a living. He is offered a job by the CIA to test a new top-secret facility but soon finds that he has been set up and trapped. Forced to team up with fellow prisoner Emil Rottmayer (Schwarzenegger), Breslin treads a fine line as he attempts to learn more about his surroundings, whilst having to contend with vicious guard Drake (Vinnie Jones) and prison warden William Hobbs (Jim Caviezel). During the two-hour running time there is much fist fighting, improvised "A" Team style device manufacture and hard-boiled dialogue. The prison production design is visually impressive and adds an innovative element to the traditional plot. There's a nice cameo from Sam Neil as the prison's Doctor. We also get to hear Arnie talking in his native tongue which is most discombobulating.
Director Mikael Hafstrom manages to strike the right balance between the light banter of his two stars and the dramatic intensity of the third act. The interaction between Stallone and Schwarzenegger is very organic and they carry the movie through their personal chemistry. There are a few clever nods to the eighties and homages to both stars earlier works. Overall it doesn't seem too forced. This is where the movies strength lies. If you look beyond its high concept foundation, then it is a rather well made but ultimately standard action movie. Returning to my band analogy, the same can be said about many famous songs by high profile artists. When analysed out of context they’re often far from exceptional. But when performed with enthusiasm by those who wrote them, they become something far more sublime. Escape Plan does pretty much the same.
Dredd (2012)
Dredd is clearly a movie that has been made by people who fully understand and respect the source material. This is by far the films strongest asset and helps carry the production through some of its short comings. It should also be noted that this is one of the most gritty and violent comic adaptation you're likely to see. It was rated R in the US went so far as to achieve an 18 certificate in the UK. The 3D process that accompanied the theatrical release and which is also available on the Blu-ray disc does add a rather sensationalist element to the proceedings with bullets passing through people’s faces in slow motion and blood spattering across the screen. Yet it works quite well and is reminiscent of Judge Dredd's origin on the luridly coloured pages of 2000 AD.
Dredd is clearly a movie that has been made by people who fully understand and respect the source material. This is by far the films strongest asset and helps carry the production through some of its short comings. It should also be noted that this is one of the most gritty and violent comic adaptation you're likely to see. It was rated R in the US went so far as to achieve an 18 certificate in the UK. The 3D process that accompanied the theatrical release and which is also available on the Blu-ray disc does add a rather sensationalist element to the proceedings with bullets passing through people’s faces in slow motion and blood spattering across the screen. Yet it works quite well and is reminiscent of Judge Dredd's origin on the luridly coloured pages of 2000 AD.
As soon as the movie starts viewers are dragged into the decaying, overcrowded and squalid world of Mega-City One. Crime is rampant among the 800 million strong population and the Judges provide summary justice among the city's denizens. A new drug Slo-Mo is rife on the streets, with its reality slowing side effects. Judge Dredd (Karl Urban) along with rookie partner Judge Anderson (Olivia Thirby) investigate the source of the new narcotic. The trail leads to them to a two hundred storey tower block controlled by drug baron Ma-Ma (Lena Headey). After a violent confrontation begins, the judges face having to fight their way out through an army of criminals and killers.
The story is simple and totally in accord with its central character. It is a very targeted production which after opening with establishing shots of Cape Town doubling as Mega-City One, becomes confined mainly to the tower block and surrounding locations. The production design by Mark Digby is very creative and certainly does as much as it can with the movies modest budget. Cinematographer Anthony Dod Mantle creates an interesting visual style by contrasting the overall decay and squalor with the beauty of the slow-motion scenes when people partake of the drug Slo-Mo. The visual effects are stylised and better than I was expecting. CGI violence seldom can compete with physical effects, but it mainly works within this production, suiting the required style.
Alex Garland's script is minimalist and very much in the right idiom. As a result, we get a Judge Dredd who has little to say and remains somewhat of an enigma. The jury is still out as to whether he is an iconic old west style hero or an über fascist. Karl urban excels in the role and firmly keeps his helmet on, which will please the purists. For those looking for a greater character development, Olivia Thirby has somewhat more to do, but overall the narrative is lean on both plot and back story. One can argue that this is all that is required for such a movie, although I would point out that John Carpenter's Assault on Precinct 13 managed to explore similar themes with much more rounded protagonists.
Pete Travis directs with confidence an does not shy away from the nature of the central character. The main reason the 1995 adaptation of Judge Dredd failed, was because it stripped away all the harsher elements of the plot and replaced them with humour, pathos and optimism. It also made the star the focus of the movie and not the character. You'll find none of that here. However, despite all its good points, Dredd does have areas of weakness. Some of the location shots in Cape Town are populated with contemporary vehicles and props that break the immersion. The use of slow motion in some of the action scenes does become a little repetitive at times. The opening narration could have been better and perhaps a little more back story on some of the characters would have been beneficial for narrative reasons. Also, through no fault of its own, the storyline of Dredd bares a similarity to the action movie The Raid, which was released earlier the same year. Sadly this stole some of its thunder.
Ultimately, Dredd is a very solid action film and a rare example of a good comic adaptation. It sticks to its guns (no pun intended) and give the fan base what it wants. There was upon release and remains now, scope for a franchise, although to date this has not happened. As is stand Dredd is a commendable, honest and old school action movie that dares to buck the trend and go for a higher rating, rather than dilute its content in pursuit of wider commercial success. It once again proves that if you want to adapt a comic-based franchise successfully, you need to understand it fully and stay true to its core ethos. Hollywood take note. This is how it's done properly.
Skyfall (2012)
There's nothing better than being proved wrong and having your fears allayed. Sam Mendes was absolutely the right choice to direct the twenty third James Bond movie and delivered a film that embraces both the old and the new. Skyfall was an outstanding way to celebrate fiftieth anniversary of the franchise. This is one of the few occasions when the actual movie managed to live up to the respective hype and marketing. Skyfall is 143 minutes of pure Bond and much more. Seldom has series had this depth of story, characterisation and intelligence. It is a lot closer to Goldfinger than it is Moonraker and offers a fresh perspective on the iconic agent. This is not about defeating some villain in his volcano lair. Skyfall is about the very nature of espionage and the effects upon those who work in its twilight world.
There's nothing better than being proved wrong and having your fears allayed. Sam Mendes was absolutely the right choice to direct the twenty third James Bond movie and delivered a film that embraces both the old and the new. Skyfall was an outstanding way to celebrate fiftieth anniversary of the franchise. This is one of the few occasions when the actual movie managed to live up to the respective hype and marketing. Skyfall is 143 minutes of pure Bond and much more. Seldom has series had this depth of story, characterisation and intelligence. It is a lot closer to Goldfinger than it is Moonraker and offers a fresh perspective on the iconic agent. This is not about defeating some villain in his volcano lair. Skyfall is about the very nature of espionage and the effects upon those who work in its twilight world.
After an exhilarating chase scene set in Turkey, which is totally free from shaky cam and lightning editing that still plagues contemporary cinema, the iconic title credits roll. There are many familiar names that have long been associated with the series over the previous decades. Stunts co-ordinator Gary Powell, miniature and physical effects by Chris Corbould for example. Veteran editor Stuart Baird ensures that you get to see what is actually going on (thank you Mr. Baird). The stunning titles, once again created by Daniel Kleinman. There is also a lot of new talent. Production designer Dennis Gassner brings a fresh and exciting feel to the movie. Roger Deakins' photography is stunning with a vivid colour palette. London has seldom looked so good. The only aspect of the film that didn’t quite chime with me is Thomas Newman contemporary score. It does however touch upon the traditional bond themes and musical idioms.
The plot is simple yet provides a far greater degree of character development and exploration of wider themes. M (Judi Dench) is thrown to the wolves after losing a vital hard drive containing operational data, along with one of her best filed agents. Her replacement Gareth Mallory (Ralph Fiennes) is already waiting in the wings to reform the department. Matters get worse when M becomes the target of vengeful agent Silva (Javier Bardom). Enter 007 (Daniel Craig) returning to MI6 after being presumed dead. However, Bond is not at the top of his game, yet is the only operative that M can trust to resolve the situation. The trail takes Bond from Shanghai, to Macau and then on to London. It becomes clear that Bond must take charge of the fight and returns to his family home of Skyfall to await a final confrontation with Silva.
Sam Mendes crafts a Bond movie that includes all the best aspects of the franchise. The locations, set pieces and glamour are all present. He also manages to bring Bond into the twenty-first century and make MI6 relevant in the current political climate. Skyfall succeeds in being quite thought provoking and showcases exceptionally strong performances from Dame Judi Dench and Daniel Craig. The dynamic between these two characters comes full circle and is both touching and sad. The original gallows humour that Connery brought to the series and that Moore turned into high camp, is present and exceedingly dry. There are moments of self-reference but rather than being indulgences work very well. Adele's theme song is also a welcome throwback.
Javier Bardom is a charismatic villain. His charm and flamboyance are deceptive and when he descends into violence, it is all the more disturbing. Whilst on the subject of content, it should be noted that Skyfall is quite a hard PG-13 (12 certificate) movie. The fights are superbly choreographed and shot. Violence is not trivialised or mitigated with a crass quip. The new Q (Ben Wishaw) is engaging and the film is not smothered by an excess of gadgetry, although it clearly shows the role that technology plays in the world of espionage. It would be a crime for me not to mention the outstanding cameo made by Albert Finney. Let it suffice to say only an actor of his calibre could play such a part.
Considering the evolution of the action movie genre over the last four decades, Skyfall is a prime example of quality film making in an old school idiom. It works so well because all involved truly understand the material and the nature of the audience. Skyfall is in many ways Bond finally coming of age. Is it the best entry in the series? Very possibly. It has so much more to offer than just the superficial, featuring robust performances and a strong narrative arc. Furthermore, the movie's resolution offers a great deal of scope for further exploration of this new and revitalised James Bond. The franchise has been markedly changed by Skyfall successfully combining populist entertainment with quality acting and new found narrative depth.
A Good Day to Die Hard (2013)
Having passed at the chance to see A Good Day to Die Hard during its theatrical I finally caught up with the movie recently. The version I saw was the US theatrical version and not the extended edition that includes three and a half minutes of additional material. It's a curious thing that in an age when blockbuster movies become ever longer and more bloated, frequently running over two and a half hours, that the latest instalment of Die Hard is a brief ninety-nine minutes. That's about an hour and a half once you remove ten minutes or so of CGI credits. Is such brevity to the benefit of the movie? In a nutshell, no. A Good Day to Die Hard is light on plot, character development and viewer engagement. Frankly it’s a caricature of its former self. The notion of the likeable every-man, out of his depth and fighting against incredible odds has given way to a loud-mouth, bullet proof xenophobic who effortlessly moves from one improbable CGI action sequence to another.
Having passed at the chance to see A Good Day to Die Hard during its theatrical I finally caught up with the movie recently. The version I saw was the US theatrical version and not the extended edition that includes three and a half minutes of additional material. It's a curious thing that in an age when blockbuster movies become ever longer and more bloated, frequently running over two and a half hours, that the latest instalment of Die Hard is a brief ninety-nine minutes. That's about an hour and a half once you remove ten minutes or so of CGI credits. Is such brevity to the benefit of the movie? In a nutshell, no. A Good Day to Die Hard is light on plot, character development and viewer engagement. Frankly it’s a caricature of its former self. The notion of the likeable every-man, out of his depth and fighting against incredible odds has given way to a loud-mouth, bullet proof xenophobic who effortlessly moves from one improbable CGI action sequence to another.
The movies first major action spectacle is a lengthy car chase through Moscow, involving an armoured car that destroys pretty much every vehicle that it encounters. The sequence quickly becomes tedious due to its excess and is further tainted by some rather unpleasant moral ambiguity. John McClane dodges an RPG which then destroys an innocent civilian’s vehicle. But of course, in Hollywood terms this doesn't matter at all, as it wasn't an US citizen. Once again, we see a sovereign nation treated with contempt as our hero simply swans around doing whatever he sees fit, irrespective of local law and authority. Well it's their own fault, they don't speak English.
For a movie that hinges on a father and son dynamic, there is no tangible chemistry between Jai Courtney and Bruce Willis. It's all rather perfunctory. I initially assumed that the theatrical version of the movie had been edited down to be low on dialogue high on action. When I heard that the Blu-ray release would include an extended edition I hoped that this would fill some of the narrative gaps. Unfortunately, the extra material is simply a few nominal dialogue scenes and an even longer version of the tiresome car chase. No further plot, or expositionary scenes. But I guess that's my fault for expecting anything more from director John Moore, who previously brought us the pointless remake of The Omen and the inextricable film adaptation of the video game Max Payne.
A Good Day to Die Hard has flashes of interest with villain Alik (Rasha Bukvic) who has a few curious quirks. Unfortunately, he is then effectively side-lined and removed from the narrative far too quickly. The denouement is both excessive and totally implausible, even by the standards of this particular genre. When will film makers learn that once you step over the line and the audience cease to suspend their sense of disbelief, then the battle to hold their attention is lost. We also happen to know by now that the most vulnerable part of a helicopter are both its rotors and that they are not the equivalent of industrial blenders. How dumb do you think we are? On mature reflection, perhaps it’s best not to answer that, as I was the one watching this movie through choice. Sometimes, brand loyalty is a double-edged sword.
There is little good to say about A Good Day to Die Hard. The only thing that made me sit up and take notice was the inclusion of some faux BBC new reports featuring real life news presenter Sophie Raworth. Remember in the nineties how it was always CNN or Sky News that were used in this way? However, overall the movie had nothing new to offer and even its R rating was disappointing. A few profanities and some minor bullet hits cannot recreate the hard edge and elegance of the original movie. Even Bruce Willis' signature kiss off line "Yippee-ki-yay, Motherfucker" is laboured. In all honesty Olympus Has Fallen is closer to the 1988 Die Hard than this shallow cinematic outing. I think it's time for this particular Cowboy to hang up his spurs and retire. Until the inevitable reboot.
Olympus Has Fallen (2013)
Where film makers of note will often take the bull by the horns and address difficult aspects of US history and culture, Hollywood tends to do the complete opposite. Events are simply re-imagined having a more popular, and box office friendly outcomes. Olympus Has Fallen fits squarely into this category, being a post 9/11 denial movie. In this case, the White House, that national symbol of American power and democracy is ruthlessly attacked by evil North Koreans (are there any other kind?), resulting in another sub Die Hard scenario. This movie holds no surprises and seeks to offer nothing more than what is on the poster. However, contrary to what you might think, that is not a bad thing at all.
Where film makers of note will often take the bull by the horns and address difficult aspects of US history and culture, Hollywood tends to do the complete opposite. Events are simply re-imagined having a more popular, and box office friendly outcomes. Olympus Has Fallen fits squarely into this category, being a post 9/11 denial movie. In this case, the White House, that national symbol of American power and democracy is ruthlessly attacked by evil North Koreans (are there any other kind?), resulting in another sub Die Hard scenario. This movie holds no surprises and seeks to offer nothing more than what is on the poster. However, contrary to what you might think, that is not a bad thing at all.
Gerard Butler scowls his way through the movies two hour running time as Secret Service Agent Mike Banning. He is bullet proof and blessed with the marksmanship of a minor deity, while everyone else can't shoot for shit. President Benjamin Asher (Aaron Eckhart) struggles to maintain the dignity of his office while chained to a metal railing. Quality character actors such as Morgan Freeman, Angela Bassett and the great Robert Forster sit around the war room conference table and look as serious as their fees and conscience allow. The only real weak link in the chain are some sub-standard digital effects which diminish the impact of the White House attack. It’s somewhat odd considering that Olympus Has Fallen had a production budget of $70 million.
One aspect of the movie that does leave a somewhat unpleasant taste in the mouth, is the generic nature of the villains. At present due to prevailing economic and political reasons it is the North Koreans. The days of lambasting the Russians and Chinese seem to be long gone, especially as they now constitute lucrative markets for the film studios. Rick Yune's depiction of the movies North Korean bad guy Kang, is arbitrary to say the least. Although the movie is now five years old and has already had a sequel, current diplomatic events in the Korean peninsula put a different spin on the proceedings. As a result, Olympus Has Fallen now appears to have a rather unwholesome warmongering undercurrent.
Unlike so many action movies these days, Olympus Has Fallen has an old school R rating with its bloody body count and liberal use of profanities. Despite being an extremely dumb movie, at least it is content in its own skin. Shamelessly nationalistic, filled with clichéd tropes and generic action movie conventions, Olympus Has Fallen is generic box office fodder. But it doesn't make the mistake of pretentious naval gazing or pontificating on geo-political issues it is ill equipped to debate. Director Antoine Fuqua delivers a bombastic movie with all the subtly of a Rhinoceros horn up the backside. Yet considering the premise, could we really expect anything else? Would we even want it?
The Equalizer (2014)
Denzel Washington is one of those rare actors who can elevate a movie by his screen presence. It is his star quality, along with a better than average story that makes The Equalizer a cut above your average action movie. There is a half decent attempt to transcend the usual alpha male, revenge bullshit that permeates the vigilante sub-genre and explore deeper themes. The film takes it's time to focus on Robert McCall's wider motivation, philosophy and personal morality. It ponders the nature of ethics and alludes to the notion of "knights" in a time when they're no longer required or desirable. However rather than wallow in the notion of an existential crisis, the central theme is self-determinism. On top of all this weighty pondering there's also some very hard-edged violence and death by power tools.
Denzel Washington is one of those rare actors who can elevate a movie by his screen presence. It is his star quality, along with a better than average story that makes The Equalizer a cut above your average action movie. There is a half decent attempt to transcend the usual alpha male, revenge bullshit that permeates the vigilante sub-genre and explore deeper themes. The film takes it's time to focus on Robert McCall's wider motivation, philosophy and personal morality. It ponders the nature of ethics and alludes to the notion of "knights" in a time when they're no longer required or desirable. However rather than wallow in the notion of an existential crisis, the central theme is self-determinism. On top of all this weighty pondering there's also some very hard-edged violence and death by power tools.
Director Antoine Fuqua, who previously worked with Washington on Training Day, crafts a rather languid but in-depth thriller, which takes time out to play to his leads great acting strength. McCall is not just a two-dimensional special forces cliché but a man with a soul and a strong personal philosophy. Whenever Steven Seagal strayed from action into personal musing and introspection, the audience quite justifiably told him to fuck right off. But in the case of The Equalizer, it greatly enhances the film. There is a real sense of purpose and meaning to Denzel Washington's actions which makes a welcome change, as this genre is not usually known for its depth. His character also sports some credible OCD foibles such as a tendency to time everything and a propensity to tidy.
Of course, in films such as these, there is a requirement for a suitable nemesis. On this occasion it is supplied with relish by Marton Csokas, who oozes malevolence as a Russian enforcer and once again utilises his wonderful metered diction to great effect. The film takes an unusual approach by setting the story in a distinctly blue-collar world. McCall works in a hardware and building supplies warehouse and champions the causes of his fellow workers as well as local prostitute Teri (Chloë Grace Moretz). Director Fuqua does not try and glamorise the criminal fraternity either, choosing to portray it as monolithic, perfunctory and soulless. He also wrong foots certain viewers when McCall visits his former governmental handlers. He is greeted by Bill Pullman and Melissa Leo and the person he seeks is not necessarily the one you automatically assume it to be.
One of the strongest aspects of The Equalizer are the action sequences which are extremely hard hitting and brutal. Because of the above average calibre of acting and film making, the violence is quite disturbing and may have more than a few viewers squirming in their seats (especially the shot glass in the eye). When McCall initially kills a group of Russian gangsters I was surprised at the way the carnage was dwelt on both before and after. The film also has a very strong contemporary soundtrack by Harry Gregson Williams, as well as utilising several songs to great effect. I was also impressed by Denzel Washington's succinct distillation of Ernest Hemmingway's The Old Man and the Sea. You don't expect to find literary criticism in a movie that also sports IEDs and stabbings with corkscrews.
The Equalizer ends with a rather positive message and leaves scope for a further outing for Robert McCall. Overall, the film does run a little too long and could have easily lost twenty minutes or so with tighter editing, but this seems to be a common problem with contemporary cinema. However, running time notwithstanding, The Equalizer remains an above average thriller which has additional appeal to wider audiences due to the popularity of its star and the slightly more cerebral subtext to the proceedings. At present, a second instalment is in production featuring many of the original cast and crew. The Equalizer 2 is scheduled for a release on July 20th 2018.
Ironclad (2011)
Upon its release in 2011, reviews of Ironclad were mixed. Criticism mainly focused on a lack of historical accuracy, an excess of violence and some questionable casting decisions. Hasn’t this always been standard operational procedure for countless Hollywood historical epic? For example, El Cid, Cleopatra and more recently Alexander. It seems somewhat counter intuitive to berate a film over the very elements that define its particular sub-genre. Ironclad is an action drama inspired by historical events. It certainly does to claim to be a Starkeyesque depiction of the period. You only have to watch the trailer to see exactly how the film was marketed and the demographic the producers were trying to woo. If you’re looking for quality acting, period detail and a dissection of the geo-politics of the era, then you may want to watch something else like A Man for All Seasons or The Lion in Winter. Ironclad is more hitting people with big swords and chewing the scenery.
Upon its release in 2011, reviews of Ironclad were mixed. Criticism mainly focused on a lack of historical accuracy, an excess of violence and some questionable casting decisions. Hasn’t this always been standard operational procedure for countless Hollywood historical epic? For example, El Cid, Cleopatra and more recently Alexander. It seems somewhat counter intuitive to berate a film over the very elements that define its particular sub-genre. Ironclad is an action drama inspired by historical events. It certainly does to claim to be a Starkeyesque depiction of the period. You only have to watch the trailer to see exactly how the film was marketed and the demographic the producers were trying to woo. If you’re looking for quality acting, period detail and a dissection of the geo-politics of the era, then you may want to watch something else like A Man for All Seasons or The Lion in Winter. Ironclad is more hitting people with big swords and chewing the scenery.
Plot wise, Ironclad explores the events of the siege of Rochester Castle in 1215. The story begins after a three-year war between the barons of England (aided by the Knights Templar), and the tyrannical King John (Paul Giamatti). Having been defeated the King is forced to sign the Magna Carta, a document granting rights to all English freemen. However, King John resents succumbing to the pressure of the barons and being politically outmanoeuvred. He subsequently hires an army of pagan Danish mercenaries, to restore his absolute authority over the kingdom. The author of the Magna Carta, and Baron William d'Aubigny (Brian Cox), along with Archbishop Langton (Charles Dance) and Templar knight Thomas Marshall (James Purefoy) decide that King John must be stopped.The best place to do so is Rochester Castle, the seat of Baron Cornhill (Derek Jacobi) and a strategic stronghold that controls southern England and allows access to London and the rest of the country.
The main shortcoming of Ironclad is the script, which lacks any historical depth or accuracy. Its primary function is to expedite the plot between action scenes. Hence, we have several notable character actors who appear from time to time to provide expositionary dialogue and keep the viewer appraised of events. The screenplay certainly doesn’t give the likes of Brian Cox, Charles Dance or Derek Jacobi, anything more to do, so sadly their presence is somewhat wasted. I suspect that the somewhat incongruous casting of Paul Giamatti, was simply a ploy to improve US exposure and ensure a release. His performance is somewhat formulaic but again this really comes down to the arbitrary nature of the script. The subtleties of the period politics are not explored in any depth; thus, we are left with a King who is evil purely because he does bad things and sneers a lot. It should also be noted that Ironclad has a rather overt digital look and feel, due to the way it was filmed. This rather contemporary style at times seems at odds with the period setting and historical idiom of the story.
Despite being only adequate narratively, Ironclad does spend a lot more time and effort on its set pieces. There are frequent battle scenes which feature bloody injury, as people are killed by blows from swords and axes. The matter of fact manner in which violence and brutality are met out as standard practise, are starkly shown. This is not a film for the faint hearted. Considering the budgetary restrictions, the fight scenes are quite well staged and have a gritty feel to them. Furthermore, Ironclad depicts castle life well and does not take any major historical liberties in this respect. For practical reasons the filming was not done on location, as Rochester Castle is now a major tourist attraction all year round. Wales doubled for the Medway in South East England and CGI is used judiciously to recreate the 13th century garrison town and port. Overall Ironclad is the sum of its parts and provides two hours of action-based drama set to historic event. It is traditional cinematic high adventure and should not to be confused with a history lesson. If you bear this in mind it will entertain.
Punisher: War Zone (2008)
During the seventies, due to the soaring crime rate, failure of national politics and social backlash against the establishment, vigilante films and novels were very popular with the public. Michael Winner's Death Wish captured this sentiment perfectly. Although an exploitation film, it managed to maintain an intelligent and thoughtful edge, which certainly reflected the mood of the New York public of the times. Sadly, these issues where subsequently written out of most future screenplays due to the rise of the Hollywood action blockbuster. Moral subtexts and ethical conundrums were replaced by the sledge hammer ideology of might is right. Heroes were given badges and the official sanction of the establishment and destroyed two dimensional enemies, without any need for ethical reflection or inner introspection.
During the seventies, due to the soaring crime rate, failure of national politics and social backlash against the establishment, vigilante films and novels were very popular with the public. Michael Winner's Death Wish captured this sentiment perfectly. Although an exploitation film, it managed to maintain an intelligent and thoughtful edge, which certainly reflected the mood of the New York public of the times. Sadly, these issues where subsequently written out of most future screenplays due to the rise of the Hollywood action blockbuster. Moral subtexts and ethical conundrums were replaced by the sledge hammer ideology of might is right. Heroes were given badges and the official sanction of the establishment and destroyed two dimensional enemies, without any need for ethical reflection or inner introspection.
The Punisher started life in 1974, as minor character in The Amazing Spiderman comic. He was unique in the fact that he was not a traditional super hero with special powers. He was simply an ex-marine turned vigilante after his family were executed by the Mafia. Due to the mood of the times, he struck a chord with the readers and quickly became a franchise in his own right. Naturally, such a character was deemed to have box office potential and was subsequently adapted for the screen three times. Dolph Lundgren took the lead in Mark Goldblatt's competent 1989 production and Thomas Jane explored the character again in 2004 directed Jonathan Hensleigh's. However, these films strayed somewhat from the central character and tended to focus upon his emotional turmoil. Both make for interesting genre viewing but essentially miss the simplicity and enigma of the central theme.
In Punisher: War Zone, directed by Lexi Alexander, Ray Stevenson takes on the role of Frank Castle. Finally, the character gets the treatment they deserves, in a vehicle that truly captures the original spirit of the comics and graphic novels. Punisher: War Zone is a bleak, extremely violent action film which shows us a man who has lost his soul and functions only to punish the guilty. His work brings him no pleasure, redemption or salvation. It simply provides him with a reason to exist. The religious and philosophical aspects of this are touched on but not explored excessively. This is a film that does not delude itself or the public about what it is about. All the classic protagonists are present. There is a scarred crime boss called Jigsaw (Dominic West) who fills the role of nemesis. Then there is the collaborator and armourer Micro (Wayne Knight) who articulates the justification for our anti-hero. The voice of the establishment and public morality is represented in FBI Agent Paul Budiansky (Colin Salmon).
Despite having a very troubled production (which I won't go in to here), Punisher: War Zone is a professionally made genre picture with some strong action scenes. The cast and script are exactly right for this sort of film. Stevenson is given more to do with the role than you may expect and sells his performance perfectly. West does not attempt to go beyond what is required as Jigsaw. Unlike Heath Ledger's Joker he is not out to score psychological points but simply wants revenge. For the purist action movie fan this is as good as it gets. Shame the US critics didn't see it this way. They made the mistake of looking for more within the material, when more was not required. Perhaps political correct sensibilities demanded some sort of moral sub-text or epiphany. Sorry but you won't find them here. To have pandered to such themes would have totally mitigated the source material and have been an artistic insult.
Punisher: War Zone received a very limited release in the UK due to its poor US box office returns, back in 2008. The emotive nature of the entire subject, is something that often resonates with a good many members of the public. We live in a civilised society that has laws and courts and a process for dealing with crime. We ponder the motives of the guilty and we endeavour to treat them with more humanity than they did their victims. Yet, despite what our heads and moral compass tells us, somewhere in our hearts many off us crave for this kind of hard justice. We know that in reality it would not work, yet the concept of the righter of wrongs who deals in lead, is a potent one that does not go away easily. We live in times where our confidence in the system is sorely tested.
Punisher: War Zone is not for everyone and cannot be considered a mainstream film. It is however, honest enough to be exactly as it should. Why the executives over at Lions Gate picture decided to release this during the Christmas season of 2008 is beyond me. Again, I think this is another example of studio politics and how certain producers still lack confidence in R rated movies, preferring to explore more lucrative options. So, in one respect Punisher: War Zone is a minor milestone is so far as don’t see a picture of this kind too often. Eight years on, Deadpool is the most comparable comparison. As the rights to The Punisher have now returned to Marvel and the franchise has found a home on Netflix, it is highly unlikely we’ll see another cinematic outing again.
The Commuter (2018)
There are action movies. There are subsets of action movies such as the martial arts, heroic bloodshed and the “Die Hard on a [insert mode of transport here]”sub-genre. And then there are Liam Neeson action movies which are a unique a form of films in their own right. Because few actors have achieved what Liam Neeson has done. Some actors start their careers stuck in low budget, exploitation films, only to claw their way up the greasy pole until the wow us with a serious performance and effectively re-invent themselves as a quality character actor. Liam Neeson has done the reverse. After making his mark as a serious actor, with an Oscar nomination under his belt, he then took a serious change in direction to become an action movie star in his mid-fifties. In doing so he found himself a completely new audience and proved a star at the box office. It’s a curious yet strangely laudable achievement. This leads us neatly onto The Commuter. It’s Neeson’s swansong to the action genre, as he has subsequently announced that he’s retiring from this type of movie.
There are action movies. There are subsets of action movies such as the martial arts, heroic bloodshed and the “Die Hard on a [insert mode of transport here]”sub-genre. And then there are Liam Neeson action movies which are a unique a form of films in their own right. Because few actors have achieved what Liam Neeson has done. Some actors start their careers stuck in low budget, exploitation films, only to claw their way up the greasy pole until the wow us with a serious performance and effectively re-invent themselves as a quality character actor. Liam Neeson has done the reverse. After making his mark as a serious actor, with an Oscar nomination under his belt, he then took a serious change in direction to become an action movie star in his mid-fifties. In doing so he found himself a completely new audience and proved a star at the box office. It’s a curious yet strangely laudable achievement. This leads us neatly onto The Commuter. It’s Neeson’s swansong to the action genre, as he has subsequently announced that he’s retiring from this type of movie.
Our titular commuter is an insurance manager named Michael McCauley. He rides the train every day to a somewhat perfunctory office job. When Michael is made redundant just as his son is about to apply for colleges, he and his wife (Elizabeth McGovern) face financial ruin. However, he is thrown a potential lifeline when a mysterious woman played by Vera Farmiga, offers him a deal of Faustian proportions. All he has to do is use his skills to identify a passenger on board “who doesn’t belong”, mark them with a tracker and then walk away with a large sum of money in cash. He is given no further details and told not seek them. As she leaves our mystery lady hints that she knows that prior to his career in insurance, that Michael was a cop. However, all is not as it seems and Michael soon learns that’s he doesn’t really have a choice in the matter, as his wife has been kidnapped. However, this is a Liam Neeson movie and naturally our hero is not going to capitulate to the bad guys demands. Punching and mayhem ensues, a solid supporting cast are given nothing to do and logic goes out the window. Overall it’s a bit silly. However, it is also incredibly entertaining too.
The Commuter begins with in an impressive opening montage which references the changing seasons and varying weather conditions while travelling to New York City. It’s quite an artsy start to the movie which briefly kindles a fool’s hope that this may be a more complex and cerebral action movie. However, the overly complex set up soon dispels any notions of this. Furthermore, once the tortuous plot has been established, it is quickly jettisoned and as the movie progresses, the narrative contradicts and confuses itself further. However, all of this is mitigated by Mr Neeson punching, hitting and bludgeoning sundry bad guys while wisecracking like a Roger Moore tribute act. In a selfless attempt to mitigate the sheer incredulity of a man of Neeson’s mature years fighting his way through an army of mercenaries, the screenplay features several scenes where he references his own age “ironically”. It’s all like an ultra-violent version of Poirot, whose suffering from existential angst. However, beating someone with an electric guitar proves to be somewhat therapeutic.
The Commuter marks the fourth collaboration between Neeson and director Jaume Collet-Serra; a curious film maker who seems to have created and filled a niche market in the action genre, somewhere between Tony Scott and Antoine Fuqua. His films, include Neeson’s Unknown (2011), Non-Stop (2014) and Run All Night (2015). The Commuter is an unashamed variation on an established theme. Not only does Collet-Serra plagiarise classic elements of the action genre but he even plunders his own back catalogue. To call The Commuter Hichcockian would be far too generous, possibly even libellous. If you take a moment to step back and logically assess what is happening, you will find yourself wondering how anyone would choose to finance such a preposterous load of arse gravy. Yet, there is a single mitigating factor that defuses any incredulity the viewer may have and absolves them of any guilt they may have for watching. And that is Liam Neeson; a man who punches wolves, is Lion Jesus and fights trains. I don’t know of any actor currently at work in Hollywood who has such public goodwill. So go see The Commuter and rejoice in the high-concept of a sexagenarian action star.