Skip to main content

VSF, man. VSF!


Air America
(1990)

Post-Good Morning Vietnam, a comedy based on the CIA’s Air America operation in Laos probably seemed like a dead cert. Vietnam was doing solid box office, serious (Platoon, Full Metal Jacket) or funny. The subject matter was rich enough for either a satirical take (the M*A*S*H approach), or a straight one (paging Oliver Stone). Unfortunately, the result lacks substance on any level, the politics and illegality of the activities reduced to window-dressing as the action plays out on the broadest and most formulaic of levels.

Which is pre-amble to say I recall enjoying the film quite a bit at the time. The trailer (below) is tellingly brief (as in, don’t show too much of what the movie consists of), but fairly reflective of the tone. Crucially, however, it makes the film look much more agreeably irreverent than it is.

Based on Christopher Robbins’ book of the same name, this was originally a Richard Rush (The Stunt Man and, er, Color of Night) project – he has co-screenplay credit – before going through a number of directors and leads (Costner and Connery were the most prestigious). Most likely it was more barbed/confrontational at that outset (1985) than five years later.

Sure, the film takes in CIA moneymaking from the opium trade (working complicitly with General Soong – played by none other than Burt “Cato” Kwouk!), pilots involved in arms dealing and buffoonish propaganda campaigns, all the while claiming innocence (“There is no war in Laos”) and that Air America is purely a civilian outfit. But these elements sweep by with blockbuster sheen and rehearsed outrage (from newbie employee Billy - Robert Downey Jr.). Essentially, the result is an incredibly lazy take on provocative material.

Carolco Pictures, Mario Kassar and Andrew Vajna’s production company that finally went belly-up thanks to Cutthroat Island, had two years of pictures with mediocre returns behind it when the summer of 1990 arrived. Fortunately, they had a hit with the hugely expensive Total Recall. But Air America was yet another disappointment; Gibson didn’t come cheap and, with the extensive location shooting and stunt work, the budget ballooned. With a reported cost of $35m, it made only $31m at the US box office. Meanwhile, Gibson’s other film that summer, the cheaper Bird on a Wire, proved a surprise hit for Universal.

Journeyman director Roger Spottiswoode might well have got the nod due to the more overtly political Under Fire, but his last film was Turner and Hooch. He’d go on to preside over troubled Bond shoot Tomorrow Never Dies. Spottiswoode stages the action competently enough, and Roger Deakins photography is never less than splendid, but the watered-down nature of the production extends from the script and director down.

Gibson’s cynical Gene is Mel on autopilot “crazy” mode, all quips and daredevil sub-Martin Riggs antics (just without the psychosis); yet he takes Billy to his home where he is revealed as a nice family man (with a Laotian wife and child). It doesn’t add up because it’s writing by committee.  The substance of the last half concerns Billy’s grudge against General Soong, and its wholly formulaic. Downey Jr. doesn’t even try to fit in with the period, all ‘80s hair and attitude (he reportedly doesn’t think much of the film, labeling it “Air Generica”). Of course, a script like this needs a love interest so beautifully coiffured Nancy Travis has a random role as an aid worker (guess what, the big climax requires a choice between saving refugees or arms!)

The shame is that the supporting cast are mostly very good. Art LaFleur and Tim Trancers Thomerson are great as grizzled old pilots, even when required to reel of “Ker-razee!” dialogue (one particularly “trying too hard” bit has Thomerson and Gibson fighting over a children’s colouring book). Ken Jenkins’ Major and Lane Smith’s Senator also make the most of the thin and laboured material that forms the “meat” of the political intrigue.

 ‘60 classics tunes are deposited clumsily throughout, the slack taken up by a horrifically bad score from Charles Gross. The soundtrack album (which features none of the score) is actually pretty good, although it omits the most fun item, a cabaret version of Horse with No Name.

It’s been noted that the plot of the first Lethal Weapon featured antagonists involved in Air America; if it inspired Mad Mel, it wasn’t enough to make a good film (although with a war movie record that includes We Were Soldiers and The Patriot, it may be fortunate that Air America goes as far as it does). The not-really-all-that whackiness extends to “What Happened Next” titles at the end (à la Animal House) that just go to emphasis how neutered the whole affair is.

**1/2



Comments

Popular posts from this blog

She writes Twilight fan fiction.

Vampire Academy (2014)
My willingness to give writer Daniel Waters some slack on the grounds of early glories sometimes pays off (Sex and Death 101) and sometimes, as with this messy and indistinct Young Adult adaptation, it doesn’t. If Vampire Academy plods along as a less than innovative smart-mouthed Buffy rip-off that might be because, if you added vampires to Heathers, you would probably get something not so far from the world of Joss Whedon. Unfortunately inspiration is a low ebb throughout, not helped any by tepid direction from Daniel’s sometimes-reliable brother Mark and a couple of hopelessly plankish leads who do their best to dampen down any wit that occasionally attempts to surface.

I can only presume there’s a never-ending pile of Young Adult fiction poised for big screen failure, all of it comprising multi-novel storylines just begging for a moment in the Sun. Every time an adaptation crashes and burns (and the odds are that they will) another one rises, hydra-like, hoping…

My name is Dr. King Schultz, this is my valet, Django, and these are our horses, Fritz, and Tony.

Django Unchained (2012)
(MINOR SPOILERS) Since the painful misstep of Grindhouse/Death Proof, Quentin Tarantino has regained the higher ground like never before. Pulp Fiction, his previous commercial and critical peak, has been at very least equalled by the back-to-back hits of Inglourious Basterds and Django Unchained. Having been underwhelmed by his post Pulp Fiction efforts (albeit, I admired his technical advances as a director in Kill Bill), I was pleasantly surprised by Inglourious Basterds. It was no work of genius (so not Pulp Fiction) by any means, but there was a gleeful irreverence in its treatment of history and even to the nominal heroic status of its titular protagonists. Tonally, it was a good fit for the director’s “cool” aesthetic. As a purveyor of postmodern pastiche, where the surface level is the subtext, in some ways he was operating at his zenith. Django Unchained is a retreat from that position, the director caught in the tug between his all-important aesthetic pr…

If a rat were to walk in here right now as I'm talking, would you treat it to a saucer of your delicious milk?

Inglourious Basterds (2009)
(SPOILERS) His staunchest fans would doubtless claim Tarantino has never taken a wrong step, but for me, his post-Pulp Fiction output had been either not quite as satisfying (Jackie Brown), empty spectacle (the Kill Bills) or wretched (Death Proof). It wasn’t until Inglourious Basterds that he recovered his mojo, revelling in an alternate World War II where Adolf didn’t just lose but also got machine gunned to death in a movie theatre showing a warmly received Goebbels-produced propaganda film. It may not be his masterpiece – as Aldo Raines refers to the swastika engraved on “Jew hunter” Hans Landa’s forehead, and as Tarantino actually saw the potential of his script – but it’s brimming with ideas and energy.

Check it out. I wonder if BJ brought the Bear with him.

Death Proof (2007)
(SPOILERS) In a way, I’m slightly surprised Tarantino didn’t take the opportunity to disown Death Proof, to claim that, as part of Grindhouse, it was no more one of his ten-official-films-and-out than his Four Rooms segment. But that would be to spurn the exploitation genre affectation that has informed everything he’s put his name to since Kill Bill, to a greater or less extent, and also require him to admit that he was wrong, and you won’t find him doing that for anything bar My Best Friend’s Birthday.

Poor Easy Breezy.

Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood (2019)
(SPOILERS) My initial reaction to Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood was mild disbelief that Tarantino managed to hoodwink studios into coming begging to make it, so wilfully perverse is it in disregarding any standard expectations of narrative or plotting. Then I remembered that studios, or studios that aren’t Disney, are desperate for product, and more especially, product that might guarantee them a hit. Quentin’s latest appears to be that, but whether it’s a sufficient one to justify the expense of his absurd vanity project remains to be seen.

Hey, everybody. The bellboy's here.

Four Rooms (1995)
(SPOILERS) I had an idea that I’d only seen part of Four Rooms previously, and having now definitively watched the entire thing, I can see where that notion sprang from. It’s a picture that actively encourages you to think it never existed. Much of it isn’t even actively terrible – although, at the same time, it couldn’t be labelled remotely good– but it’s so utterly lethargic, so lacking in the energy, enthusiasm and inventiveness that characterises these filmmakers at their best – and yes, I’m including Rodriguez, although it’s a very limited corner for him – that it’s very easy to banish the entire misbegotten enterprise from your mind.

He tasks me. He tasks me, and I shall have him.

Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan
(1982)
(SPOILERS) I don’t love Star Trek, but I do love Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan. That probably isn’t just me, but a common refrain of many a non-devotee of the series. Although, it used to apply to The Voyage Home (the funny one, with the whales, the Star Trek even the target audience for Three Men and a Baby could enjoy). Unfortunately, its high regard has also become the desperate, self-destructive, song-and-verse, be-all-and-end-all of the overlords of the franchise itself, in whichever iteration, it seems. This is understandable to an extent, as Khan is that rare movie sequel made to transcendent effect on almost every level, and one that stands the test of time every bit as well (better, even) as when it was first unveiled.

Just because you are a character doesn't mean that you have character.

Pulp Fiction (1994)
(SPOILERS) From a UK perspective, Pulp Fiction’s success seemed like a fait accompli; Reservoir Dogs had gone beyond the mere cult item it was Stateside and impacted mainstream culture itself (hard to believe now that it was once banned on home video); it was a case of Tarantino filling a gap in the market no one knew was there until he drew attention to it (and which quickly became over-saturated with pale imitators subsequently). Where his debut was a grower, Pulp Fiction hit the ground running, an instant critical and commercial success (it won the Palme d’Or four months before its release), only made cooler by being robbed of the Best Picture Oscar by Forrest Gump. And unlike some famously-cited should-have-beens, Tarantino’s masterpiece really did deserve it.

That woman, deserves her revenge and… we deserve to die. But then again, so does she.

Kill Bill: Vol. 2  (2004)
(SPOILERS) I’m not sure I can really conclude whether one Kill Bill is better than the other, since I’m essentially with Quentin in his assertion that they’re one film, just cut into two for the purposes of a selling point. I do think Kill Bill: Vol. 2 has the movie’s one actually interesting character, though, and I’m not talking David Carradine’s title role.

The adversary oft comes in the shape of a he-goat.

The Witch (2015)
(SPOILERS) I’m not the biggest of horror buffs, so Stephen King commenting that The Witchscared the hell out of me” might have given me pause for what was in store. Fortunately, he’s the same author extraordinaire who referred to Crimson Peak as “just fucking terrifying” (it isn’t). That, and that general reactions to Robert Eggers’ film have fluctuated across the scale, from the King-type response on one end of the spectrum to accounts of unrelieved boredom on the other. The latter response may also contextualise the former, depending on just what King is referring to, because what’s scary about The Witch isn’t, for the most part, scary in the classically understood horror sense. It’s scary in the way The Wicker Man is scary, existentially gnawing away at one through judicious martialling of atmosphere, setting and theme.


Indeed, this is far more impressive a work than Ben Wheatley’s Kill List, which had hitherto been compared to The Wicker Man, succeeding admirably …