The Fourth Protocol (1987)
Sometimes a perfectly competent film simply misses the boat. The Fourth Protocol is a prime example of this. Based upon the novel by Frederick Forsythe this well made, somewhat clinical thriller arrived in cinemas at a time when the cold war was coming to an end due to “glasnost” and the “red menace” was becoming a somewhat tired plot device. It didn’t help that a similar story about a rogue Russian mission to detonate a nuclear device on a US base had already featured four years earlier in the Bond film, Octopussy. Michael Caine spent several years trying to get the project off the ground, after initially reading the author’s draft manuscript of the novel. Veteran screenwriter George Axelrod was hired and John Frankenheimer was sought to direct the film. However, difficulties in financing the project led to changes in the production and Forsythe ended writing the screenplay himself, while John Mackenzie (The Long Good Friday) took on the direction.
Sometimes a perfectly competent film simply misses the boat. The Fourth Protocol is a prime example of this. Based upon the novel by Frederick Forsythe this well made, somewhat clinical thriller arrived in cinemas at a time when the cold war was coming to an end due to “glasnost” and the “red menace” was becoming a somewhat tired plot device. It didn’t help that a similar story about a rogue Russian mission to detonate a nuclear device on a US base had already featured four years earlier in the Bond film, Octopussy. Michael Caine spent several years trying to get the project off the ground, after initially reading the author’s draft manuscript of the novel. Veteran screenwriter George Axelrod was hired and John Frankenheimer was sought to direct the film. However, difficulties in financing the project led to changes in the production and Forsythe ended writing the screenplay himself, while John Mackenzie (The Long Good Friday) took on the direction.
MI5 officer John Preston (Michael Caine) discovers that British government official George Berenson (Anton Rodgers) is leaking government documents. Although his investigation is well received by British Secret Service official Sir Nigel Irvine (Ian Richardson), Preston's methods embarrass the acting Director of MI5, Brian Harcourt-Smith (Julian Glover) and he is reassigned to "Airports and Ports". Meanwhile in Russia, KGB General Yevgeny Karpov (Ray MacAnally) suspects that his immediate superior, General Gavorshin (Alan North) is mounting an unauthorised operation. He discovers that Major Valeri Petrofsky (Pierce Brosnan) has recently assumed a long established fake identity and been dispatched to the UK. In the meantime, Preston investigates the death of a Russain merchant seaman who was run over while trying to leave port without authorisation. While searching through his personal affects he discovers a metal disk. This is subsequently identified as polonium, which could be used as part of a detonator for an atomic bomb.
The Fourth Protocol has a very similar feel to The Day of the Jackal, insofar that it is procedurally driven and plays at times more like a faux docudrama rather than thriller. The fact they’re both written by the same author is obviously relevant. In the case of The Fourth Protocol, this very procedural approach to Preston’s investigation, juxtaposed with Petrofsky’s methodical collection of the various bomb parts, does come somewhat at the expense of character development. This is a film mainly about archetypes and political themes common to the spy genre. However the film does offer some great detail such as when Berenson (Anton Rodgers) is followed by an MI5 surveillance team across London. Petrofsky’s elimination of casual witnesses is also quite grim. The practicalities of creating a nuclear bomb are also starkly presented, although certain aspects of the process are ignored for practical and narrative reasons.
Caine and Brosnan do much of the heavy lifting and keep the drama afloat. The latter does very well considering he does have a minimal amount of dialogue. Caine has some smart one liners that he delivers with relish and the scene where he forensically deals with two skinheads on the London Underground who are racially harassing a passenger is spot on. The film has some very good yet somewhat low key stunts. The scene where Caine and his MI5 sidekick drive directly onto a platform at King’s Cross station and Caine leaps onto the moving train is well handled. The fact that it's executed within a single tracking shot makes it all the more impressive. The film also benefits from a solid score by Lalo Schifrin which underpins the action and enhances the drama. All in all, this is a solid thriller which keeps the viewer engaged for nearly two hours. Unfortunately, timing is important and public tastes change. Hence The Fourth Protocol was just a few years too late and didn’t quite make its mark.
A lot of people may know Luke Evans from the live action version of Beauty and the Beast or Peter Jackson’s The Hobbit trilogy. With his matinee idol good looks, charming Welsh demeanour and his “smoky” tenor singing voice, he projects a sense of old school stardom. Which brings us to No One Lives; a film which is a radical departure from his previous work. His performance is disconcerting to say the least and the film is somewhat unhinged. Directed by Ryuhei Kitamura, who made an interesting adaptation of Clive Barker’s The Midnight Meat Train, this cinematic outing is similarly replete with robust shocks and gore. There are some interesting ideas about the nature of violence, Stockholm Syndrome and whether one should deny or embrace one’s nature. However, these are ultimately minor asides. Philosophical musings in between bouts of surprisingly striking unpleasantness.
When I first saw the promotional trailer for Gangster Squad back in 2012, prior to its release, I wasn't especially impressed. I simply thought the film was another attempt to re-invent the gangster genre for a generation who were not especially familiar with it. I wasn't exactly overwhelmed with director Ruben Fleischer's resume either. I didn't particularly like Zombieland and haven't seen 30 Minutes Or Less. Then came the tragic mass shootings in Aurora, Colorado which led to the movie being delayed so that the original ending, which featured a shoot-out in a movie theatre, could be replaced. Hence when I finally watched this film recently, I wasn't expecting a movie up to the standards of say Once Upon A Time In America or Miller’s Crossing and it would seem that I was right do so. Gangster Squad is not especially noteworthy in any respect.
The Cold War was a mainstay of many a thriller and action movie throughout the sixties, seventies and eighties. However, all too often it was depicted in terms of the US versus the Soviet Union. China didn’t seem to feature so much, although it was just as equally an “enemy” of the West. Hence when I recently read about The Chairman (which has just had a Blu-ray release), it was of interest to me. An espionage story, starring Gregory Peck with a hidden bug implanted in his skull, infiltrating China to steal a secret enzyme formula is quite an intriguing premise. Furthermore, director J. Lee Thompson had previously worked with Peck on The Guns of Navarone, which is a solid action movie. Therefore I was initially optimistic that this film which I was previously unaware of, would be an interesting diversion. Unfortunately, having now seen The Chairman, all I can really describe it as is a cinematic curiosity. One of numerous films produced by a big studio in the late sixties that failed to satisfy anyone's expectations.
Former United States Marine Corps Scout Sniper and Vietnam War veteran Jim Hanson (Liam Neeson) lives on a ranch on the Arizona-Mexico border. The mortgage on the property is in arrears after the death of his wife has left him medically bankrupt. One day while patrolling his property he encounters Mother Rosa (Teresa Ruiz) with her son Miguel (Jacob Perez) illegally crossing the border fence. He calls his step daughter Sarah (Katheryn Winnick) in the border patrol and reports them as they’re miles from any habitation. However, Rosa and Miguel are fleeing a drug cartel and Mauricio (Juan Pablo Raba), one of their enforcers. When Mauricio and his men try to forcibly take Rosa, Jim intervenes and a car chase and firefight ensue. Mauricio’s brother is killed and Rosa is fatally wounded. She gives Jim a note with her family's address in Chicago and he reluctantly agrees to take Miguel there.
Sometimes a perfectly competent film simply misses the boat. The Fourth Protocol is a prime example of this. Based upon the novel by Frederick Forsythe this well made, somewhat clinical thriller arrived in cinemas at a time when the cold war was coming to an end due to “glasnost” and the “red menace” was becoming a somewhat tired plot device. It didn’t help that a similar story about a rogue Russian mission to detonate a nuclear device on a US base had already featured four years earlier in the Bond film, Octopussy. Michael Caine spent several years trying to get the project off the ground, after initially reading the author’s draft manuscript of the novel. Veteran screenwriter George Axelrod was hired and John Frankenheimer was sought to direct the film. However, difficulties in financing the project led to changes in the production and Forsythe ended writing the screenplay himself, while John Mackenzie (The Long Good Friday) took on the direction.
Film Noir often reflects the numerous things that influenced it. German expressionism, French poetic realism and American hardboiled fiction. Hence many films from this genre have a tendency to be stylised both visually and narratively speaking, with a fatalistic tone. Kiss Me Deadly, directed by Robert Aldrich in 1955, takes all these attributes as well as others and amplifies them in one of the bleakest and most uncompromising movies of the fifties. It features a brutal protagonist who isn’t even a decent detective and a plot that seems at first glance to come straight out of Greek mythology. Yet Kiss Me Deadly is compelling and lean without any superfluous scenes or narrative baggage. There’s also what appears to be the mother of all cinematic "MacGuffins" but once the film is over and the viewer reflects upon what they have seen, it can be argued that maybe the characters and the inevitability of their actions are actually the driving plot device instead.
Forensic accountant Owen Casserly (Jake Weber) flees his home with his teenage son Connor (Finn Little) when he discovers he has been targeted by a pair of assassins (Nicholas Hoult and Aidan Gillen) who have been hired to stop him giving evidence in a major corruption case. Connor witnesses the murder of his father after their car is run off the road. Entrusted with important written evidence, he escapes into the dense forests of the Montana wilderness pursued by the killers. Seeking help he runs into smokejumper Hannah Faber (Angelina Jolie) who is stationed at a remote fire lookout tower. Hannah suffers from PTSD from a previous forest fire in which she was unable to save three young boys. Hannah attempts to lead Connor through the forest to safety. Meanwhile the assassins set fire to the forest to divert the attention of the authorities and cover their tracks.
When one considers all the various elements involved in the production of Telefon, it makes it all the more disappointing that the movie fails to reach its potential. The basic idea about sleeper agents in the US is sound but the story doesn’t really go anywhere and not a great deal happens. The strong cast featuring Charles Bronson, Lee Remick and Donald Pleasance have to do their best with an undeveloped screenplay. Considering that it was written by Peter Hyams and Stirling Silliphant (from a novel by Walter Wager) it is quite surprising how lacklustre it all is. But perhaps the most saddening aspect of the film is the somewhat indifferent direction from Don Siegel, who by his own admission was not especially engaged with the story. Considering that he had scored a major hit the previous year with John Wayne’s swansong The Shootist, makes it more curious that he wasn’t more enthused. Even Lalo Schifrin’s score fails to bolster Telefon.
There have been several movie adaptations of the books of Jonathan Stark (AKA Donald E. Westlake) featuring his career criminal lead character, Parker. Sadly not all of them have fared well, either critically or at the box office. Many have deviated from the source material, often just using mere aspects of the original plot as the basis of their screenplay. Perhaps the most successful of these has been Point Blank (1967), directed by John Boorman and starring Lee Marvin. Slayground sadly follows the pattern set by previous adaptations. It changes several character names and takes two main elements from the source text and uses them as a premise. Specifically, a robbery that goes wrong which results in an accidental death and a climactic shootout in an out of season fairground. Due to the financing of the film, half of the story takes place in the US and the other in the UK. Much of the cast are British, resulting in a curious and at first glance somewhat incongruous film.
The Long Good Friday not only launched then career of Bob Hoskins but remains a uniquely British take on the gangster genre. Featuring authentic performances and a credible plot, the screenplay touches upon many of the social and political issues of the time; police corruption, the IRA, urban renewal and the decline of industry, along with EEC membership and the free-market economy. It’s a gritty and unrelenting drama that is still relevant today. Furthermore, the film is filled with quotable dialogue and has several stand out scenes that showcase Bob Hoskins’ smouldering performance. It’s also offers of “who’s who” of British character actors and there is one sequence still has the power to shock even today.
John le Carré's Cold War thriller Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy, is not only a good example of the spy novel genre, but a fine piece of seventies British literature per se. Therefore I was most surprised when I learned back in 2011 that it was to be made as a film. Could the complexities and subtleties of this cerebral and deliberately slowly paced book be adequately brought to the big screen, by today’s studio system? Could it compete with the previous BBC television adaptation starring Alec Guiness that was made in 1979? Thankfully, director Thomas Alfredson and Working Title films have successfully managed to distil the complex plot into the film’s 127-minute running time. Furthermore, the ensemble cast have a quality script to work with and the entire production benefits from the flair of a quality European director who brings an interesting outsiders dynamic to this very British tale.
Inside a dark, remote warehouse, seven members of an unnamed midwestern militia meet. They’ve all heard via radio or police scanners that an unnamed, armed shooter armed with a modified AR-15 has opened fire on a police funeral. The assailant also plant IEDs and the casualty rate is therefore very high. This means the authorities will be scouring the countryside, raiding all known militia groups and their affiliates in the region. The men’s concern quickly turns to panic when they discover that one of their AR-15 is missing from their weapons cache, along with body armour and explosives. Is one of their own the shooter? Ford (Chris Mulkey), the group’s no-nonsense leader, asks fellow member Gannon (James Badge Dale), a former police interrogator, to question all the men and determine who is responsible. However, matters prove more complicated as Gannon knows that one other member, Noah (Brian Geraghty), is an undercover cop. Can a solution be found before the police inevitably come calling?
Clint Eastwood is 88 years old and has a successful career spanning over six decades. During that time he has proved to be one of America’s most bankable box office stars and established himself as an actor and director of note among his peers. If The Mule turns out to be his swansong, then it is certainly a fitting end to a prestigious career. Because in many respects The Mule is a distillation of many of the themes and concepts, we’ve seen in previous Eastwood movies such as Gran Torino and The Unforgiven. Perhaps the core story of an ageing man trying to reconcile himself to a modern world and make peace with it, is in some way Eastwood commenting on the movie industry himself. It is very much his film and his performance underpins the proceedings.
What is it with director Ridley Scott and his predilection for multiple edits of his films? Is he indecisive and a consummate tinkerer (like George Lucas) or a victim of studio politics? I suspect none of these are true. So how come there are always multiple cuts of his movies? Do his terms of employment always deny him final edit on a movie? I would think not. A film maker of his stature must surely get far more favourable terms when contract to make a film? Whatever the reason it leaves audience with a problem. How is one exactly to determine which is the best version of any of his films to see? For example, Kingdom of Heaven was greatly improved in its extended format. Yet his revised version of Alien is actually inferior to the original theatrical cut. And don’t even get me started on the plethora of versions of Blade Runner. His penchant for multiple edits therefore makes it difficult to debate his work.
In a recent blog post I wrote about the difficulty that you can encounter sometimes when trying to watch movies that have been deemed “classic” by popular consensus. I listed 10 films of note that I intend to watch this year and to see if my views aligned with the various institutions and critics that praise them. The first on that list was the iconic sixties thriller Bullitt starring Steve McQueen. Having now watched the movie, I thought it would be prudent to collate my thoughts on it. Considering the immense amount of material that has already been written about it, I see no reason to present a review per se. Rather, here are my initial impressions for consideration. I’ve tried to highlight some specific aspects of the film that I think are of note or merit debate.
Legend is an extremely lavish biopic. Despite being about a pair of notorious British villains it has both the look and feel of an American gangster epic. There is no real attempt to depict either the period or the locations accurately nor is the story of the Kray twins themselves factually correct. As ever with American productions of this nature both the era and the subject matter are viewed through a miasma of sentimentality and faux nostalgia. The Krays are portrayed as folk heroes rather than the petty thugs that they were. However if you are prepared to overlook these deliberate biases then Legend is can still be an entertaining movie.
The Island (1980)
After the commercial success of Jaws and The Deep, Universal Studios decided to explore the works of Peter Benchley a little further and adapt his novel The Island. Benchley wrote the screenplay himself and director Michael Ritchie was given the job of bringing this rather dour tale to the screen. A substantial budget of $22 million was assigned to the production and a somewhat eclectic cast was assembled. The resulting movie was very poorly received and subsequently pilloried by the critics who found it both risible and revolting. 35 years on is The Island as bad as some would have you think?
After the commercial success of Jaws and The Deep, Universal Studios decided to explore the works of Peter Benchley a little further and adapt his novel The Island. Benchley wrote the screenplay himself and director Michael Ritchie was given the job of bringing this rather dour tale to the screen. A substantial budget of $22 million was assigned to the production and a somewhat eclectic cast was assembled. The resulting movie was very poorly received and subsequently pilloried by the critics who found it both risible and revolting. 35 years on is The Island as bad as some would have you think?
Upon watching The Island the first question that crosses one’s mind is did any of the studio executives have the vaguest inkling about the content of the source novel? Where they seeking a traditional swashbuckling “man versus pirates” action movie, with the pirates firmly being from the school of Robert Newton? I would surmise they were oblivious to the true nature of the book. Despite the film’s commercial failure, director Michael Ritchie delivered quite an honest adaptation that captures the unsavoury themes and elements of the novel. The key to appraising this movie’s merits depends on how you approach it.
Newspaper reporter Blair Maynard (Michael Caine) travels to the Caribbean to investigate a spate of missing boats and pleasure craft. His young son is far from happy with this change in itinerary, having been promised a trip to Disney World. The trail leads to an uncharted island where a group of pirates have lived in isolation from society for hundred years. This inbred, semi-literate group of murderer’s have remained faithful to their traditions of looting and pillaging. However, with their numbers dwindling due to their closed gene pool, they keep Maynard for breeding stock and look to his son as a possible future leader. As Justin (Jeffrey Frank) is slowly brainwashed and turned against his father, Maynard desperately tries to find a means of escape.
The pirates in The Island as a far removed from Jack Sparrow as can possibly be. They are a dirty, violent, unwholesome bunch led by David Warner and a curious array of British character actors like Don Henderson, Colin Jeavons and Dudley Sutton. Their credibility is bolstered not only by the quality of the cast but the fact that despite their nature, they do follow a code that has been passed down for generations. Australian actress Angela Punch McGregor is the sole female character, playing a widow to whom Michael Caine is given in compensation. It’s all rather sordid and unpleasant. The sort of film that makes you want to take a shower after watching. However it’s not sleaze for the sake of sleaze. There’s a curious air of honesty to it all; from the pitiful shanty town where the pirates live to their curious hybrid language.
Yet the movies tone and moral ambiguity ultimately alienated the alleged target audience. The advertising campaign for the movie was also ill conceived. Jaws and The Deep are the embodiment of high adventure. Universal obviously thought that was what they were going to get. Instead they took custody of a bleak, grotesque adult adventure that most certainly was (and still is) an acquired taste. Michael Caine is an unlikely hero playing a weekend Dad who puts his career over the needs of his parental obligations. The film is also quite violent. Although not excessively graphic, the oppressive atmosphere and sordid ambience does heighten the impact. There is a jarring axe attack at the beginning of the movie and the final plot resolution is hard hitting. The current vogue for romanticising pirates glosses over the fundamental reality that pirates were by nature, murderers, robber and rapists. The Island does not shy away from the truth.
The international nature of The Island does make the film a horse of a different colour. American director Michael Ritchie, French cinematographer Henri Decae and Italian composer Ennio Morricone along with a global cast all manage to pull in the same direction, offering a dark but coherent experience. The film also reflects the culture of the times. Journalism is driven by newspapers. The notion of isolated and uncharted island was still tangible due to the technological restraints of the time. There’s also a nice reference to contemporary drug culture. After the pirates raid a schooner they find a large stash of cocaine, which they have no need for. When asked what it is, Michael Caine informs them that it is a drug. “What does it cure” he is asked. “Insecurity” he replies.
I usually don’t like to make obvious comparisons to other movies and try to distil a film into a simply analogy. Under Siege, it’s Die Hard on boat for example. But if I were to cite a few examples of films with a similar vibe to The Island I would perhaps include Deliverance, The Naked Prey and The Light at the End of the World. Don’t be mistaken, The Island does not fall into the “hidden gem” category. It is a competently made piece of cinema that may be of interest to those viewers with a more robust constitution and tolerance for the bleak and grimy. For those expecting a comparable companion piece to Peter Benchley’s previous cinematic outings, you may prefer to look elsewhere.
Jason Statham is an exemplar of the US mantra of “staying in your lane”. He makes action movies and occasionally strays into action comedies. His formula broadly works and is sufficiently lucrative to keep Mr. Statham employed. Therefore, if you watch a film in which he stars, you have a fairly good idea of what you’ll be getting. Of late, the criteria for his action vehicles have become more succinct. Jason Statham will play an innocuous character, such as a construction foreman or a bee keeper. Something terrible will subsequently befall another character who Mr. Statham has an emotional connection with in some capacity. He will subsequently hunt down those responsible and meet out death and violence. At some point the villain of the story will enquire as to how this innocuous person is so lethal. Research will then show that our Jason is in fact an ex-police officer/special forces operative/international assassin. There’s then a showdown and the villain dies. Job done.
The Light at the Edge of the World presented itself as an action movie upon its release in 1971. Based upon a story by Jules Verne, the Spanish American co-production was driven by its star Kirk Douglas, who curiously hired British director Kevin Billington to helm the project. This tale of a lighthouse keeper fighting a war of attrition against a group of pirates that have captured his island, was market as an adventure film ostensibly in the idiom of the authors previous works and as a pirate movie. MGM bought the rights to distribute the film in the UK on the misunderstanding that it was a family friendly production. It was not and remains so. They subsequently had to cut 15 minutes of violence and torture as well as an undercurrent of sexual assault to secure a suitable rating. Conversely, the US distributors received an arbitrary PG rating, despite the fact this is one of a handful of films that honestly depicts pirates as murderers, rapists and worse.
It’s an established action film trope. The fire team comprised of ex-military personnel, move in on their target. Only to have the tables turned by someone they don’t deem a threat. What makes it different in The Last Stand of Ellen Cole is a throwaway line of dialogue. The bested operative lies bleeding on the floor and the protagonists stands over them ready to finish them off. “Don’t, I have a cat” they feebly plead. For me that was the icing on the cake. The movie had already established it was taking the “same old, same old” and doing something different. Something fun, if taken in the right spirit. This scene tipped the balance and I embraced this film because it was being honest about what it is. This is a modern B movie that decides to give a very specific sub-genre a makeover. Furthermore, its clearly done with an affectionate wink, which is very different to sly wink. This isn’t deliberate self-knowing irony. Its just a film doing something different and possibly silly but it genuinely wants to have fun with it.
Stephen King’s dystopian story, The Running Man, was previously adapted very loosely in 1987, as a vehicle for Arnold Schwarzenegger. That version focused mainly on the “Battle Royale” element of the story and leaned heavily into Arnie’s personality, rather than the politics of the book. It also wasn’t well received by the author. Edgar Wright’s remake follows the source text a lot more closely and is far more interested in its political themes and wider social commentary. Furthermore, this version re-establishes the everyman quality of the hero of Ben Richards, rather than him being the muscle bound, ex-military hero as per Mr. Schwarzenegger’s prior interpretation. This time round, The Running Man uses a lot of the visual and narrative tropes of contemporary reality TV, making this forty three year old story very relevant to today’s viewers and couching the film in a style that is recognisable and accessible.
After the success of Raiders of the Lost Ark in 1981, filmmakers scrambled to find existing intellectual properties that they could use for similar films. Hence archaic heroes such as Alan Quatermain were hastily given a modern makeover and thrust into generic movies, in a vague attempt to replicate Steven Spielberg’s successful formula. Which brings us neatly on to James Charles Bigglesworth AKA “Biggles”, a fictional pilot and adventurer from a series of books written by W. E. Johns between 1932 and 1968. Several attempts had been made in the past to bring this character to the silver screen, including one by Disney but they all failed. However, the commercial and critical success of Indiana Jones provided sufficient impetus to greenlight a new film. However, due to some curious production choices, when Biggles was finally released it was far from just a period set, action movie.
Setting aside the hubris of remaking a film such as Red Dawn, the 2012 reboot had a troubled production. Shot over the course of late 2009, on location in Michigan, MGM intended to release the film in September 2010. However, the studio’s financial problems became unsustainable over the course of that year and the film was shelved, while a financial solution was sought. Furthermore, while Red Dawn was in post production, there was a major economic shift within Hollywood due to the increasing importance of the Chinese market. This was a significant problem for MGM because the new version of Red Dawn had the Chinese invading the USA instead of Russia. Hence there were reshoots and the need for additional visual effects, so that the Chinese could be replaced with North Koreans. MGM eventually went bankrupt and the distribution rights to Red Dawn were sold off. The film was eventually released in 2012.
When I first saw the promotional trailer for Gangster Squad back in 2012, prior to its release, I wasn't especially impressed. I simply thought the film was another attempt to re-invent the gangster genre for a generation who were not especially familiar with it. I wasn't exactly overwhelmed with director Ruben Fleischer's resume either. I didn't particularly like Zombieland and haven't seen 30 Minutes Or Less. Then came the tragic mass shootings in Aurora, Colorado which led to the movie being delayed so that the original ending, which featured a shoot-out in a movie theatre, could be replaced. Hence when I finally watched this film recently, I wasn't expecting a movie up to the standards of say Once Upon A Time In America or Miller’s Crossing and it would seem that I was right do so. Gangster Squad is not especially noteworthy in any respect.
Levon Cade (Jason Staham) is a former Royal Marine Commando who has retired from military service and now works as the leader of a construction team in Chicago. He has a close relationship with Joe and Carla Garcia (Michael Peña and Noemi Gonzalez ) who run the company and considers them as family. Outside of work, Levon is involved in a bitter custody battle for his daughter, against her maternal grandfather, who blames Levon for his daughter’s suicide. When Garcia's teenage daughter Jenny (Arianna Rivas) goes missing, Levon reluctantly agrees to help her parents and get her back. Beginning his search at the nightclub where Jenny was last seen, he soon discovers that she was abducted by Russian traffickers. Furthermore, the culprit is Dimi Kolisnyk (Maximilian Osinski), the wayward son of a senior ranking gangster.
PC Nicholas Angel (Simon Pegg) is an exemplary Police Officer, with a strict adherence to the letter of the law. As a result of making the rest of the London Metropolitan Police look bad, he is transferred to the rural town of Sandford, Gloucestershire. On arrival, Angel finds that the local Inspector, Frank Butterman (Jim Broadbent), takes a far more laissez-faire approach to policing. His colleagues are incompetent and he is further hampered by the Neighbourhood Watch Alliance (NWA), who prioritise low crime statistics over law enforcement due to their desire to win the title of “Village of the Year”. Furthermore, Angel is partnered with the Inspector’s son, Constable Danny Butterman (Nick Frost), who is infatuated with “buddy cop” movies and is in awe of Angel’s London experience. “Have you ever fired two guns while jumping through the air?” However, a sudden spate of grisly accidents lead Angel to believe that there's more to the seemingly tranquil and picture-perfect community than meets the eye.
As a collection of history's worst tyrants and criminal masterminds gather to plot a war to wipe out millions, one man must race against time to stop them. Discover the origins of the very first independent intelligence agency in The King's Man. Based on the Comic Book “The Secret Service” by Mark Millar and Dave Gibbons. 20th Century Studios
Matthew Vaughn’s The King’s Man is an inconsistent film, both narratively and tonally. It veers between serious themes and stylised, hyperbolic action. At times it does quite a good job of exploring such complex subjects as global politics, mechanised warfare and colonialism. Sadly it then wrenches the viewer out of these cerebral reveries as it lapses into the sort of over the top action sequences that were notable in the two earlier films. It’s a shame because The King’s Man gets so many other aspects of the production right. The casting is very interesting, especially Ralph Fiennes as the “pacifist” Duke of Oxford. He is actually a very good fit for the action genre. Djimon Hounsou and Gemma Arterton are given little backstory beyond being respectively the faithful manservant and the family nanny but both are notable due to their own inherent acting chops and personal charisma. Rhys Ifans obviously has a great time as Grigori Rasputin, ensuring all the man’s vices are robustly depicted.
On paper, a video games franchise such as Assassin’s Creed lends itself perfectly to a cinematic adaptation. The parkour action scenes, the historical settings and the contemporary conspiracy theory themes are all elements that should play well with a modern youth audience. Hence with the backing of a major studio such as Twentieth Century Fox and a budget of $125 million, the 2016 movie should have been a guaranteed box office hit. The casting of Michael Fassbender, an actor who is comfortable with serious roles and big Hollywood franchises, should have carried this film comfortably over the finishing line. Director Justin Kurzel, who had found critical success with his adaptation of MacBeth a year previously, must have looked like a safe pair of hands to handle such a project. Sadly, that was not the case. Assassin’s Creed is not the sum of its parts, in fact many elements appear to be pulling in opposite directions. The resulting feature film is staggeringly dull, soulless and a chore to watch. A testament to how modern big budget franchise movies have become a production line, with all the art stripped from them.
300: Rise of an Empire is a curious beast, being neither a sequel nor a prequel. It is infact a tale that takes place simultaneously with those of the original movie. While Gerard Butler is busy making a last stand at the Battle of Thermopylae, fellow warrior and politician Themistokles, played by the singularly uncharismatic Sullivan Stapleton, leads a similar army of buffed Greeks against the Persian fleet. Once again we have a movie that is the epitome of style over substance, complete with a sound design that challenges what can physically be endured by human hearing. They say the first casualty of war is innocence but in this type of movie it's closely followed by historical accuracy and authentic depictions of ethnicity. 300: Rise of an Empire is a cinematic assault upon the senses but not in a good way like Mad Max: Fury Road.
Back in September 2017, Liam Neeson stated in an interview with Sky News that he was retiring from the action genre, due to his age. He felt that audiences would question his credibility in such roles. After the release of The Commuter (2018) and Cold Pursuit (2019) Mr Neeson appeared to return to human dramas and films that focus on performance rather than punching man and beast. Ordinary Love and Made in Italy, both released in 2019, demonstrate the actor’s versatility and skill. People seem to forget that he is a thespian who was initially known for his character driven roles in films such as The Mission (1986), Rob Roy (1995 and Michael Collins (1996). It was only in 2008 that he reinvented himself as an action hero. It’s all a far cry from Schindler’s List and his performance that earned him an academy award nomination. The reason I mention all of this is because The Ice Road is the third action movie I’ve seen in 2021 that stars Liam Neeson.
One of the stand out tropes of the modern action film is that the stakes are always cranked right up to 11. Terrorists, biological weapons and nuclear bombs are common threats in such movies with a hero or heroes trying to save the world from death and destruction or worse. However, back in the sixties and seventies, things were a little more straight forward and in some respects more credible. Take When Eight Bells Toll, released in 1971, for example. British Treasury secret agent Phillip Calvert investigates the theft of £8,000,000 in gold bullion by a gang of international smugglers. In the context of the times this was no small beer however it’s somewhat mundane compared to fighting super villains and their space lasers. Frankly I prefer these low key plot devices as they can make a film a little more plausible within the confines of the genre. A concept that is often forgotten today.
Forensic accountant Owen Casserly (Jake Weber) flees his home with his teenage son Connor (Finn Little) when he discovers he has been targeted by a pair of assassins (Nicholas Hoult and Aidan Gillen) who have been hired to stop him giving evidence in a major corruption case. Connor witnesses the murder of his father after their car is run off the road. Entrusted with important written evidence, he escapes into the dense forests of the Montana wilderness pursued by the killers. Seeking help he runs into smokejumper Hannah Faber (Angelina Jolie) who is stationed at a remote fire lookout tower. Hannah suffers from PTSD from a previous forest fire in which she was unable to save three young boys. Hannah attempts to lead Connor through the forest to safety. Meanwhile the assassins set fire to the forest to divert the attention of the authorities and cover their tracks.
I must admit that I did not have particularly high hopes for Paul W S Anderson's remake of the 1975 Roger Corman produced cult classic. Anderson’s work varies greatly. Event Horizon and Soldier are solid genre films but I still have not fully come to terms with Alien vs. Predator. Jason Statham is also a name that divides the public, with solid material such as The Transporter and unfathomable tosh like Revolver. But despite these considerations, Death Race is in fact quite a surprise and does not follow the path that so many remakes do. It takes the basic themes and concept associated with the original and tries to do something different with them. It doesn’t reinvent the wheel nor is it a genre milestone. But it does offer a different spin on things, have some engaging action scenes and provide some dumb but enjoyable entertainment. When combined with snacks and some beer this is a passable way to kill 111 minutes.
I did not watch Zero Dark Thirty upon its initial release, due to the politics surrounding it. I wanted to be able to view it free from bipartisan debate. Eight years on I believe this now achievable and although debate still exists it is now more measured and less strident. Zero Dark Thirty is certainly a compelling movie. It plays as a docudrama, providing an in-depth study of the US intelligence services hunt for Osama Bin Laden. It cannot be faulted on a technical level and the performances are very strong. It does not adopt a celebratory or triumphalist tone in its approach to the story. Director Kathryn Bigelow endeavours to keep the proceedings focused upon the intricacies of an intelligence driven manhunt. There is little or no tubthumping, jingoism. The decision to find Bin Laden is shown as a political and military exercise of foreign policy. The film solely focuses on the story from a US perspective but that is perfectly acceptable as it is not intended to be an exploration of geo-politics.
Firestorm was originally written as a vehicle for Sylvester Stallone, however when the production company Savoy Pictures went bankrupt the screenplay was bought by Twentieth Fox and the scope of the movie reduced to suit a lower budget. It’s broadly similar to Cliffhanger in so far as the lead character is a specialist in a certain field who runs afoul of criminals in a perilous environment. Whereas Cliffhanger is set in the Rocky Mountains, Firestorm takes place in the forests of Northern Wyoming. After the script was revised four times, the finished screenplay was given a final “polish” by Graham Yost who has considerable experience with the action movie genre. As stallone was no longer associated with the project and the production had been repurposed to be less extravagant, the movie was assigned to former NFL star Howie Long. Long had already appeared in the John Woo movie Broken Arrow (1996) and the Firestorm was seen as a means to give him a star vehicle.
The original French movies District 13 and its sequel District 13: Ultimatum, conceived and produced by Luc Besson, were enjoyable variations of the Escape from New York theme. Their charm lay in their European pedigree and the skilful use of parkour. The two leads, David Belle and Cyril Raffaelli, were eminently suited to the minimalist roles and the screenplays were fun. Half of these movies appeal was the fact that they were not mainstream US products. Brick Mansions is the Hollywood remake of District 13, as well as being Paul Walkers’ final movie. Sadly, this film is far from a fitting epitaph, being devoid of any charisma or innovations. It is blandly shot , poorly edited and has been stripped of everything that made the original entertaining.
Arnold Schwarzenegger's return to the big screen after his political career has been uneven to say the least. His cameos in The Expendables and The Expendables 2 were well received, with their self referential charm and age related irony. Yet his first major movie The Last Stand, although competent, failed to find an audience. Escape Plan fared better at the box office but did not put Arnie back on the A list. Effectively there's a large percentage of the contemporary cinematic audience who were born after his heyday and are simply not overt fans of his work. His core audience is more than likely of the age group that consume most of their film entertainment at home. Which may explain why Sabotage tanked in the US upon release on March 28th 2014. It was the worst opening box office of Arnie's career. He used to break first day opening records.
Sequels and reboots are hardly a new concept and have been a part of Hollywood culture since the 1930s. The success of the Universal Horror movies from that era being a prime example of direct follow ups and retconned movies. However, there is one fundamental rule that distinguishes a good sequel from a bad one. You should never mitigate, undermine or make irrelevant the events of the previous movie, just to provide your new film with a raison d'être. For example, the events of Aliens do not contradict or trivialise those that happened in Alien. In fact with that franchise there is a very clear logical progression between the two movies. The same is true for Mad Max and Mad Max 2 or Star Wars and The Empire Strikes Back. The key is to progress a story, enhance it or explore things from an alternative angle and bring something new to the cinematic table. Sadly this philosophy is all too often lost on corporate film making. Which means that many sequels are just tedious replays of prior films. Terminator: Dark Fate falls squarely into this category.
The enduring appeal of the character John Rambo in First Blood comes from the fact that he is a traumatised ex- service man who keeps himself to himself as he drifts from job to job, trying to come to terms with his wartime experiences. His poor treatment at the hands of a small-town Sheriff is a succinct metaphor for the social and political indifference that Vietnam veterans were shown upon their return to the US. He’s a man with a code in a world that no longer has any use for him. His simple and honest patriotism is not returned and he is in fact viewed with shame by many from the nation he loves. Furthermore, the first movie does not paint him as a cold-blooded killer. Despite provocation he is not the first person to shoot to kill. Rambo is in many ways a victim. A broken man, who society has asked to do unspeakable things. Now society wants nothing to do with him and fears the “monster” they created. Although clearly an action movie, First Blood had narrative depth and a flawed but sympathetic protagonist. 37 years and four movies later, such dramatic themes have long left the franchise. The central character is indeed a caricature of its former self.
It was hardly surprising that the movie adaptation of Chris Kyle's autobiography American Sniper, would cause controversy. The Iraq war, US Foreign Policy and national pride are seldom subjects that are discussed in a calm and measured fashion. And then there are the personal politics of director Clint Eastwood to consider. Hence there were claims from some quarters upon the movie’s release, that it was Islamophobic and counter claims that criticisms of the late Chris Kyle were unpatriotic. There still remain issues regarding the authenticity of events depicted in the source text and subsequently the movies screenplay by Jason Hall. Yet none of these factors have in anyway impacted upon the film's box office returns which currently stands at $247,900,417 worldwide.
Do I really need to present you with some sort of plot synopsis for Transporter 3? No, I didn’t think so. More of the same as Frank Martin (Jason Statham) and his police chum, Inspector Tarconi (Francois Berleand) become embroiled in yet another high-octane escapade. There's fights, car stunts, exotic international locations and a strong sense of humour. This time, the disposable love interest is a Ukrainian girl named Valentina (Natalya Rudakova) who fulfils her role succinctly. The film benefits by being set back in Europe, after the mistake of basing Transporter 2 in the US. This time, the story takes us to such locations as Budapest and Odessa. The international film crew once again bring a veneer of panache to the production that is conspicuously absent in US action movies. For a modest budget fil, Transporter 3 it looks very good. Again the proceedings are given a boost by a pertinent soundtrack by Alexandre Azaria and a selection of European “tunes”.
Jason Bourne originally graced our screens for the first time seventeen years ago. The Bourne Identity was a gritty, minimalist take on the espionage genre and a welcome change from the excesses of the Pierce Brosnan Bond era. The story arc was sustained over three movies and ended efficiently and succinctly. After which Matt Damon moved on, as did the director of two of the movies, Paul Greengrass. Which leaves us with The Bourne Legacy; the tangential sequel that arrived in 2012. A film that exists because the money men and bean counters hate to pass up on a franchise until it has been squeezed utterly dry. Hence, they commissioned the writer of the series, Tony Gilroy, to come up with a screenplay and direct a spinoff movie. Jeremy Renner was cast in the lead role. Yet despite narrative and production continuity, The Bourne Legacy was not a Jason Bourne movie with the star appeal of Matt Damon. Although the film turned a profit, it had the lowest box office returns out of the entire franchise.
During the eighties there was a clear league table of action movie stars. By the mid-nineties this system fell into decline and the Hollywood lacked any clearly defined exponents of the genre. A decade later, due to the success of Luc Besson’s Transporter films, Jason Statham became a bankable box office star in this field. When you look at Statham's early work in Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels it is hard to envisage the "mockney geezer" as an international action star. Yet he has successfully stepped into the role and enjoys a large following. I enjoy his work as he has a likeable on-screen persona. My 88-year-old Mum likes him to because "he wears nice suits". The action genre seldom reaches such a diverse demographic.
Before we start, I recollect that one well known UK critic described Safe House as sub-Tony Scott, upon its release. Now I’ve always been conflicted over Scott’s back catalogue, as I’ve always found his movies to be hampered by their own unique style. The subtleties of his characters and depth of his themes are all too often drowned out by his frenetic style and fast paced editing. Therefore a comment such as this really sets off alarm bells for me. Having recently watched The Equalizer 2, I wanted a further fix of Denzel Washington in a similar action vehicle. As Safe House was available on Netflix UK, I decided to kill a couple of hours and see what actually constitutes as “sub-Tony Scott”.
13 Assassins is one of Takashi Miike's most restrained and mature movies. Set in Feudal Japan and based on true events, a venerable clan suffers under the reign of the cruel young Lord Naritsugu (Goro Inagaki), who commits atrocities at will. Unable to break their oaths, the samurai are torn between duty and shame. Some of the masters in the clan even go so far as to commit Seppuku in protest. Unable to endure the status quo, a plan is formed to gather a small team of the deadliest samurai and assassinate Lord Naritsugu while he is travelling between clan territories. The responsibility falls upon Shinzaemon Shimada (Koji Yakusho) to take on this potentially fatal task. The matter is further complicated by Lord Naritsugu’s personal bodyguard (and Shimada’s former rival) master samurai Hanbei (Masachika Ichimura), who is a force to be reckoned with.
Adapted from the novel by Wilbur Smith, Shout at the Devil is the sort of big budget, sprawling, period set high adventure movie that has fallen out of vogue in recent decades. Its main attraction are its stars, location and robust action scenes. Crafted by former Bond director and long-time editor Peter Hunt, this is a full on, no nonsense character driven drama of the kind that were common place during the seventies. Sometimes the enormity of these sorts of productions meant that something suffered by omission. Be it a weak script, excessive set pieces or too many cameos by an all-star cast. Shout at the Devil broadly manages to avoid such pitfalls. There is however a notable tonal shift in the story about halfway through the film, which does take events in a different direction.
There are many films about war. There are many films about the Vietnam war. A few have transcended mere historical depiction and managed to capture the utter horror and political insanity of the situation, along with the tragic human cost. And then there are those which simply seek to use the setting as a vehicle for an exploitation movie, in the hope of making a fast buck. The Last Hunter (L'ultimo cacciatore) falls firmly into the second camp. This Italian "macaroni combat" movie (yes, I didn’t know that’s a thing either) offers a straight forward tale of an incursion behind enemy lines by an officer charged with destroying a radio transmitter, broadcasting anti-US propaganda. It is violent, action packed and surprisingly honest about what sort of film it is. You’ll find no pretentious philosophical musings here. Just explosions, rotting corpses and Viet Cong booby traps.
Exit 8 is a sophisticated and claustrophobic psychological thriller directed by Genki Kawamura, which skilfully transforms a minimalist indie walking-simulator game into a cinematic existential enigma. This overtly metaphorical film renders the repetitive nature and drudgery of modern working life into a physical environment in which the lead character is trapped and must find a way out. A random, brutal maze filled with an atmosphere of indifference to the lab rats that find themselves trapped within. Or is it their personal guilt that has put them there? Genki Kawamura’s psychological mystery draws inspiration from the Japanese video game of the same name, as well as from the cyclical nature of Groundhog Day and endless corridors of the Overlook Hotel in Kubrick’s The Shining. Although there are jump scares and some ghoulish imagery, this is not a horror vehicle. Instead this is a disquieting psychological drama with a strong sense of morality.