Valkyrie (2008)
In terms of its production values, Valkyrie is a throwback to the big budget war films of the sixties and seventies. However, that is where the similarities end. This is not a stylised action movie with the Nazis simply as a dramatic foil. Valkyrie focuses on facts, narrative and performances. Director Bryan Singer ensures that the true story that the film depicts is driven by the central characters. Overall Valkyrie is a very laudable production and although not an outstanding feature film, it is competently made, broadly historically accurate whilst and entertaining.
In terms of its production values, Valkyrie is a throwback to the big budget war films of the sixties and seventies. However, that is where the similarities end. This is not a stylised action movie with the Nazis simply as a dramatic foil. Valkyrie focuses on facts, narrative and performances. Director Bryan Singer ensures that the true story that the film depicts is driven by the central characters. Overall Valkyrie is a very laudable production and although not an outstanding feature film, it is competently made, broadly historically accurate whilst and entertaining.
The story manages to be genuinely suspenseful and conveys the magnitude of the plotter’s intentions. It efficiently follows the facts and is not side-tracked by superfluous sub plots or needless human drama. It clearly shows the real threat to families of the protagonists and conveys the paranoia of the German High command. Valkyrie assumes that the audience has an adequate knowledge of wartime events and does not make the mistake of trying to show why Hitler should be killed. Nor does it make the traditional Hollywood mistake of trying to render the complexities of wartime politics, down to “good Germans versus Bad Nazi”.
With regard to Tom Cruise, I’m not at all interested in his star status, his personal life or his religious beliefs. I have enjoyed his performances in several films in the past and he does not disappoint as Klaus von Stauffenberg. The rest of the ensemble cast works very well. Bill Nighy, Tom Wilkinson and the dignified Terence Stamp are all on top form, although a little underused. Eddie Izzard further demonstrates his acting talents. It should be noted that the mainly British cast do not attempt any stereotypical German accent but rather opt for neutral dialogue delivery.
Technically, the production design is accurate and authentic. The film manages to convey an atmosphere of a nation losing a war and an “ideology” that has become tarnished. The dilemma of whether to hedge your bets or endeavour to change an impossible situation, is explored efficiently and in a thought provoking way. Valkyrie remains as politically neutral as it can and strives to show career soldiers unhappy with the regime they see as betraying their country. They wish to prove that Germany and Hitler are not the same thing.
It is interesting to see a studio tackle a story that, despite its inherent drama, has an outcome that is a forgone conclusion. Like Ron Howard’s Apollo 13, the need to engage the audience with the fate of the characters is the key to the film’s success. I must admit that I was engrossed in Valkyrie and managed to disconnect my mind from the inevitable ending. However, due to the lack of historical knowledge among so many of today’s viewing public, perhaps this isn’t such an issue. May due to the march of time, the events depicted in Valkyrie may well have less impact. None the less Valkyrie is a competent and polished movie as well as a welcome change from standard multiplex fodder.
Death Sentence Unrated (2007)
Urban vigilantes have always been a mainstay of exploitation cinema. Then in 1974, the commercial success of Death Wish brought the revenge thriller sub-genre in to the mainstream. It succinctly tapped into the public's fear of urban decay, escalating crime rates and an impotent justice system. However, in recent years the tide of lawlessness has broadly turned and the public's views on crime and punishment have been tempered. Subsequently the appeal and relevance of vigilante genre has waned. However, a decade ago there was brief resurgence of movies that tackled this thorny issue, although they did so in different ways. Neil Jordan's The Brave One (2007) pursued a more cerebral approach to the genre, attempting to intellectually or philosophically justify its themes of revenge. Then in 2009, Law Abiding Citizen, took the theme of retribution to extreme levels, with a farfetched plot and outrageously contrived death scenes. Sitting in-between these two movies was James Wan’s Death Sentence, which put a contemporary spin on what was essentially a very eighties style of movie. Sadly, the film did not garner much attention at the time, with the press quick to dismiss it as exploitation fodder dressed up in studio trappings. Yet the film is more than that mainly due to the lead performance by Kevin Bacon.
Urban vigilantes have always been a mainstay of exploitation cinema. Then in 1974, the commercial success of Death Wish brought the revenge thriller sub-genre in to the mainstream. It succinctly tapped into the public's fear of urban decay, escalating crime rates and an impotent justice system. However, in recent years the tide of lawlessness has broadly turned and the public's views on crime and punishment have been tempered. Subsequently the appeal and relevance of vigilante genre has waned. However, a decade ago there was brief resurgence of movies that tackled this thorny issue, although they did so in different ways. Neil Jordan's The Brave One (2007) pursued a more cerebral approach to the genre, attempting to intellectually or philosophically justify its themes of revenge. Then in 2009, Law Abiding Citizen, took the theme of retribution to extreme levels, with a farfetched plot and outrageously contrived death scenes. Sitting in-between these two movies was James Wan’s Death Sentence, which put a contemporary spin on what was essentially a very eighties style of movie. Sadly, the film did not garner much attention at the time, with the press quick to dismiss it as exploitation fodder dressed up in studio trappings. Yet the film is more than that mainly due to the lead performance by Kevin Bacon.
Loosely based on the Brian Garfield novel, Death Sentence starts with successful risk analyst Nick Hume (Kevin Bacon) taking his eldest son to his Hockey match. A chance stop at a Gas Station on the wrong side of town, ends with his son being murdered by a gang. The impact upon the Hume family is immediate and as the parents grieve for their eldest, they seem to overlook the needs of their youngest son. When the perpetrator is arrested, the DA feels that he cannot secure a life time conviction and aims to plea bargain for a shorter sentence. Furthermore, it becomes apparent that robbery was incidental and the murder of Hume’s son was a gang initiation ritual. At the pre-trial hearing, Hume deliberately implies uncertainty in his own evidence, securing a dismissal for the prime suspect. Hume then rashly plots and hastily carries out his revenge, only to make matters far worse for himself and his family.
Although Death Sentence is a thriller with strong action scenes, it does not totally capitulate to the baser needs of the genre and tries to explore the subject matter with a degree of rigour. Kevin Bacon is credible as a man whose job is based around numbers, risk and statistical balance. Although he may not know how to fight, his intelligence makes him a dangerous wild card. Yet, where other movies would simply have him glibly triumphing over his foes, director James Wan shows that there are consequences to his actions. Hume makes several errors that allow the gang to identify him. Tragedy begets tragedy and retributions comes with little satisfaction. It is here that Bacon excels, delivering a credible and sympathetic performance as a man out of his depth, driven purely by his convictions.
Technically, Death Sentence is well constructed. There is a notable chase scene that takes the audience through litter strewn alley ways, a restaurant kitchen, ending in a multi-storey carpark. There is a superb three-minute tracking shot by cinematographer John R. Leonetti, that really places the viewer in to the middle of the action. The set pieces are also well conceived and gritty. Nick Hume is an academic, not a fighter, yet he’s smart enough to use what is available as make shift weapons. In one scene, he literally pulls the rug out from under a gang member pointing a gun at him. The violence is relatively realistic and grim, which is appropriate given the subject matter. There is a particularly nasty shotgun amputation, which trumps a similar scene in Steven Seagal's Out for Justice. An obvious homage to Taxi Driver is also crow barred into the proceedings. One particular aside amused me, where our Hume familiarises himself with the firearms he bought by reading the manual. It not as preposterous as it initially seems.
Death Sentence also benefits from an interesting supporting performance from John Goodman, playing against established preconceptions, as a sleazy gun dealer. His slow and measured delivery of his lines is entertaining and he has an amusing soliloquy about the death, revenge and cash paying customers. Garrett Hedlund has less to do as the story’s main antagonists, Billy Darley. The complex relationship he has with John Goodman is only hinted at and would have been an interesting angle to explore further. Too often, genres such as this coast somewhat when defining their villains. It is easy and convenient to establish a character’s evil intent simply by them committing an act of violence. Similarly, most of the gang are merely cannon fodder. Also, Detective Jessica Wallis (Aisha Tyler), who is investigating the Hume case, is more of a expositionary device than a fully rounded character.
However, despite some rough edges and lazy trappings from the exploitation genre, Death Sentence still manages to do something sufficiently different. It certainly is not meant to be a serious social or political study of crime and punishment. Conversely, it’s not a tacit endorsement of personal justice, like Michael winner’s movies. It offers a contemporary entry point into the vigilante genre for a whole generation of viewers who are unfamiliar with movies such as Death Wish or The Exterminator. It also showcases a change of direction for James Wan, who is usually associated with horror movies. Out of the two cuts of the film that are available, I would suggest that the unrated version is better than the theatrical cut. In this instance, there is no extra action or violence. Just five minutes of additional scenes that bolster the narrative. A nominal change made to the final scene also offers a definitive and sombre ending.
The A-Team Unrated Extended Cut (2010)
Despite an excess of CGI driven action scenes, Joe Carnahan's reboot of the iconic eighties TV show The A-Team, still manages to capture elements of the original. The plans are complex but come together and there are improvised devices and munitions made from sundry items. Due to the strong cast, there is also a good dynamic between the lead characters. It's all very loud, incredibly stupid, yet surprisingly entertaining. Don't get me wrong, this far from a hidden gem. Merely an enjoyable, bombastic exercise in cinematic self-indulgence,
Despite an excess of CGI driven action scenes, Joe Carnahan's reboot of the iconic eighties TV show The A-Team, still manages to capture elements of the original. The plans are complex but come together and there are improvised devices and munitions made from sundry items. Due to the strong cast, there is also a good dynamic between the lead characters. It's all very loud, incredibly stupid, yet surprisingly entertaining. Don't get me wrong, this far from a hidden gem. Merely an enjoyable, bombastic exercise in cinematic self-indulgence,
The A-Team are now Iraq War veterans but the essential traits of the main characters are still there. Bradley Cooper takes to the roll Templeton Peck like a duck to water. Liam Neeson is suitably gruff as Hannibal Smith. But I actually found Sharlto Copley and Quinton Jackson as Mad Murdock and Bosco B.A. Baracus, to be the most absorbing protagonists. Although the script is hardly a masterpiece its greatest strength is the interplay among the team itself. Copley performance is strong and more than just arbitrarily quirky. Jackson also had more to do than just be a bad ass and I warmed to his storyline and personal conflict.
Another aspect of The A-Team that I enjoyed was at how at times, it felt like a throwback to sixties caper movies and a variation on the heist sub-genre. The humourous undertone also did a lot to make the over the top nature of some of the set pieces a little more palatable. The plot regarding stolen plates for printing bank notes, inter-governmental department duplicity and international globetrotting is self-indulgent and at times clumsily telegraphed for those who may have been napping. But when one considers the original TV show, that to was hardly an exercise in subtlety and restraint. Overall The A-Team is sufficiently different enough not to be just straight forward PG-13 action fodder.
The Unrated Extended cut of the movie runs eighteen minutes longer than the theatrical version and mainly contains longer scenes of plot exposition and dialogue, rather than violence. One action sequence does feature some additional footage of contract soldiers being shot whilst in their car, but it happens at night and is light on detail. There are some a few more instance of stronger language, as well. Full details of the differences can be found over at Movie-Censorship.com along with screen captures. The longer running time does make The A-Team a more rounded picture and therefore this is the cut I would recommend.
Doomsday (2008)
Neil Marshall's third film is fast paced action movie, which pays homage to the "Post Apocalypse" genre and much more. It is a text book example of a film in three acts and is also pretty much the sum of its parts. The dialogue is minimalist, the acting adequate and the action frenetic and violent. Be warned, this film has earned it's 18 certificate for its UK release. However, none of these attributes are bad things. Doomsday makes its intention clear right from the beginning. If you want any further clues, take a look at the UK theatrical poster. The club with spikes is a fair indication that subtlety is not this movie’s strong point.
Neil Marshall's third film is fast paced action movie, which pays homage to the "Post Apocalypse" genre and much more. It is a text book example of a film in three acts and is also pretty much the sum of its parts. The dialogue is minimalist, the acting adequate and the action frenetic and violent. Be warned, this film has earned it's 18 certificate for its UK release. However, none of these attributes are bad things. Doomsday makes its intention clear right from the beginning. If you want any further clues, take a look at the UK theatrical poster. The club with spikes is a fair indication that subtlety is not this movie’s strong point.
A deadly plague, known as the “Reaper Virus,” has killed hundreds of thousands and left Scotland devastated. In desperation, the British Government evacuates as many survivors as it can out of the infected area, and then builds a wall, preventing the remainder from escaping. Thirty years later, with the wall still up and the victims all but forgotten, the virus appears to breaks out again in London. The Government decides to send a crack team of operatives, led by Major Eden Sinclair, into the hot zone behind the wall, to investigate the possibility of a cure.
Neil Marshall’s previous two films, Dog Soldiers and The Descent were very well received by both the public and critics. The latter was tightly written and directed and stood out compared to the usual contrived commercial studio fodder. Doomsday is a far more main stream affair and does not have the same level of tension and sophistication. It is a high octane action film that deliberately pays tribute to such pictures as Escape From New York, The Medieval Dead and Mad Max 2. However, the story unfolds at such a fast pace and lurid fashion, it is easy to overlook the plot flaws and inherent silliness of the premise.
The first act showing the outbreak of the reaper virus, the isolation of Scotland and then the subsequent raid into the forbidden territory, is by far the most engaging. Acts two and three are a series of action sequences in two different environments. They serve to expedite and close some plot lines and whittle down the cast. The production values are good and the film is littered with visual jokes and references. Performances are exactly the kind you need in such a movie. Bob Hoskins gives it plenty of "South London", Malcolm McDowell is suitably sinister and Craig Conway is cheerfully psychotic. Rhona Mitra proves that women can happily take on the role of action hero.
Doomsday is very entertaining on a "what you see is what you get" basis. It may particularly appeal to people of the director’s age group. Those who can remember the "Post Apocalypse" direct-to-video releases that saturated the market in the eighties. The soundtrack by Tyler Bates reflects this with its use of synthesisers and songs by "Adam and the Ants" and "Frankie Goes To Hollywood". The car chases and pyrotechnics are good for the films budgetary limitations. Be warned, as I said earlier, this film is violent. Bodies are crushed, limbs hacked off and there's even cannibalism.
My only criticism relating to Doomsday is the modern, rapid fire editing, that seems to be so fashionable these days. This actually dilutes some of the action sequences, rather than enhance them, which is a shame as some of the combat scenes have been well choreographed. But apart from this issue, I consider Doomsday to be a solid and affectionate tribute to the action genre of the eighties and nineties. Viewers get a professionally crafted action vehicle, that is tonally spot on for such genre material. It may not be the director’s best work but it’s possibly the most fun.
The Most Dangerous Game (1932)
“He talks of wine and women as a prelude to the hunt. We barbarians know that it is after the chase, and then only, that man revels. You know the saying of the Ogandi chieftains: "Hunt first the enemy, then the woman." It is the natural instinct. The blood is quickened by the kill. One passion builds upon another. Kill, then love! When you have known that, you have known ecstasy."
The concept of hunting people for sport is hardly a new cinematic idea. Over the years there have been numerous movies that have explored the subject. A Game of Death (1945) Run for the Sun (1954) and Surviving the Game (1994) to name but a few. However back in 1932, this was a bold plot device. Cinema was still a relatively unregulated industry (the Motion Picture Production Code didn’t start being enforced until 1934) and as a result was under increasing scrutiny for its increasingly salacious tendencies. However, such issues did not dissuade producers Merian C. Cooper and Ernest Schoedsack who were quick to see the potential of Richard Connell’s short story "The Hounds of Zaroff". It offered an opportunity to examine the “sin of Cain” with its plot about a reclusive Russian aristocrat who hunted men for pleasure on a private Caribbean island. And then there was scope to explore some of the more “adult” elements of the story (as the above quote alludes to).
“He talks of wine and women as a prelude to the hunt. We barbarians know that it is after the chase, and then only, that man revels. You know the saying of the Ogandi chieftains: "Hunt first the enemy, then the woman." It is the natural instinct. The blood is quickened by the kill. One passion builds upon another. Kill, then love! When you have known that, you have known ecstasy."
The concept of hunting people for sport is hardly a new cinematic idea. Over the years there have been numerous movies that have explored the subject. A Game of Death (1945) Run for the Sun (1954) and Surviving the Game (1994) to name but a few. However back in 1932, this was a bold plot device. Cinema was still a relatively unregulated industry (the Motion Picture Production Code didn’t start being enforced until 1934) and as a result was under increasing scrutiny for its increasingly salacious tendencies. However, such issues did not dissuade producers Merian C. Cooper and Ernest Schoedsack who were quick to see the potential of Richard Connell’s short story "The Hounds of Zaroff". It offered an opportunity to examine the “sin of Cain” with its plot about a reclusive Russian aristocrat who hunted men for pleasure on a private Caribbean island. And then there was scope to explore some of the more “adult” elements of the story (as the above quote alludes to).
The Most Dangerous Game was shot on the existing sets of King Kong (1933) thus giving the film a lush tropical environment without the inconvenience of a location shoot. The movie is also a surprisingly adult undertaking for the times with some very subtle themes about sexuality and the predatory nature of man. The cast is strong with Joel McCrea, (Bob Rainsford) Fay Wray, (Eve Trowbridge) and Leslie Banks (Count Zaroff). It should be noted that the acting style of the times was a lot more theatrical than it is today. However, this does not diminish the tone of the film or its brooding atmosphere. The cinematography is very innovative, featuring overhead tracking shots, often during action sequences. The use of the “close-up” was also a very novel device in 1932 and later became an integral tool in Italian and particularly Japanese cinema. Max Steiner's score is clever and compliments the film immensely.
The Most Dangerous Game is a grim film featuring an impaling, severed heads in jars and undercurrent of sexual menace. Do not be fooled by the quaint early thirties idioms and style, this is very much adult material. The Most Dangerous Game has a nasty streak running through its relatively short hour plus running time and is all the better for it. As a study of the baser aspects of human nature it has not dated and still makes a pertinent statement. It also showcases some early examples of special effects techniques such as matte paintings, foreground miniatures and travelling mattes. Contextually these are very good. This was a cutting-edge film upon its original release. The Most Dangerous Game is therefore required viewing for any scholar of cinema. It succinctly illustrates that sex and violence are by no means a modern cinematic invention and have been an integral part of film making since the birth of the industry.