Skip to main content

I want to speak to the Russians, the Chinese, the British and the French, in that order.


Olympus Has Fallen
(2013)

Gerald Butler looks like he should be propping up the bar in EastEnders. And yet, he has a fairly tidy Hollywood career going for him. One enormous hit can carry you only so far, particularly when it’s debatable how vital you were to that success. Mind you, following up 300 with a series of forgettable romcoms and trashy action movies probably isn’t the best way to verify one’s appeal. I suspect the key to Butler’s star turn in that film wasn’t his finely toned abs. Rather, it was his impressively pointy beard. Have we seen it since? No. Has he appeared in anything approaching 300’s popularity since? No.


Here, Gerald plays Secret Service agent Mike Banning, detailed to President Aaron Eckhart’s personal protection. He is reassigned to a dull desk job at the Treasury Department following a tragic incident requiring him to make the most difficult of judgement calls (this, the opening sequence, is possibly the best in the film; it’s certainly the only one showing any degree of restraint or verisimilitude). Banning and the President were best buds, of course; they boxed together, he was like a slightly mid-Atlantic uncle to the President’s son, and he even advised the President’s wife on what earrings to wear.  How can he possibly “redeem” himself? Fortunately, a whacky terrorist incident is just round the corner. It’s exactly what he needs!

This time it’s those dastardly Koreans who are up to no good. But don't worry if you’re Korean, and feel as if you are being unfairly maligned; these particularly Korean terrorists are an ill-defined breakaway faction and should not be seen as damning an entire nation (or nations)! This, of course, is in the Hollywood rulebook for the depiction of terrorists in movies; it’s okay to vilify a nation as long as you go out of your way to say that you aren’t really doing any such thing.


Their leader (Rick Yune) is North Korean, but he is not directly affiliated to North Korea (the ones we're supposed to dislike, and who don’t provide sufficiently high cinema attendance, so it’s okay to make them villains in a Hollywood movie right now). So, when he attempts to initiate nuclear holocaust, we shouldn’t assume that this is what North Korea wants. Right?  Additionally, we shouldn’t assume that all Koreans are equally undesirable, even though those stupid South Koreans enabled one of the world’s most prolific terrorists to infiltrate their cabinet (Wiki says that he’s posing as a ministerial aide, but I’m sure that’s not what I heard; either way, these South Koreans are slack). We are told this is because no photos of Kang exist, but in Hollywood speak we know this means its because all foreigners look alike (even unto each other). If you’re offended by any of this, it’s your own fault; the script makes it quite clear that all bases are covered and no one could possibly be aggrieved.

If the special effects in Olympus Has Fallen are frequently not-so-special, one still can’t fail to be impressed by the credulity writers Creighton Rothenberger and Katrin Benedikt expect of the viewer. Our terrorists mount their attack on the White House in the most ridiculously insane manner imaginable. But you know, it takes an insane plan to make a difference in America today.


As to Rick Yune’s bad guy, it suggests someone has been watching Die Another Day. Where he also plays a North Korean super-villain. Credit where it's due, Yune seems to be enjoying himself immensely. As usual in such set-ups, the security measures our hero would take are not followed by others; the new head of the President’s detail, Cole Hauser (who must have resigned himself to a career of supporting roles) says that they are following standard procedures. Why should he do otherwise, unless you’re the type who instantly assumes that a delegation of South Korean government officials (our friends, remember) will be a nest bed of North Korean extremists? Also as per the norm, there's an inside man who is identifiable in about ten seconds and has motivation so half-hearted and garbled one can only assume the writers were on a caffeine high when they thrashed him out.

Radha Mitchell plays Banning's Leah. Leah works at a nearby hospital, which is useful when the filmmakers need to show just how horrific these terrorist acts can be. This kind of incident has consequences, you know! Consequences more than justifying Banning’s use of interrogation methods, the like of which would make even Jack Bauer blanch. The set up also allows Banning a mid-carnage phone call to his missus, where he expresses his love without really saying what he’s up to;  kind of like the Sergeant Al Powell scene in Die Hard but not very good.


I seem to be watching only films with Morgan Freeman in at the cinema this year. Here he is again, the Speaker of the House (a step down from the halcyon days of his Deep Impact presidency). There's Dylan McDermott in another crappy supporting role. And there’s Melissa Leo; I seem to be watching only films with Melissa Leo in at the cinema this year. Poor Melissa’s Secretary of Defence becomes a human punchbag. Hey, she can take it. There are a number of very good actors in minor or forgettable parts (Angela Bassett, Ashley Judd, Robert Forster), but it’s that kind of film. I don’t know what Eckhart thinks he’s doing with his career, but this and Battle: Los Angeles probably aren’t the best way to go.

Olympus follows the Die Hard template scrupulously, but it lacks the wit or finesse of that (the original, at any rate) film. Actually, saving the President is probably the only place John McClane could go now, so they missed a trick not adapting this for him. But the first Die Hard had the veneer of a screenplay that actively sought to plug plot holes or make a virtue of them. Olympus definitely doesn’t do that.


Any film that has a terrorist takeover of the Oval Office as its premise is unlikely to hold up to much scrutiny, but there seems to be an active contempt for internal logic here.  It’s understandable to an extent, because if the party line of non-negotiation were adhered to you wouldn’t have a movie (it’s rather quaint that Hollywood still wheels out the “terrorists with hostages making demands” premise, as it seems entirely antiquated in the today’s world). But it would be refreshing if a movie like this found a way to surprise in its choices, rather than going the usual clichéd route of stalling while the hero takes out more bad guys.

Especially as the ultimatums in this film are so ludicrously large that there’d never be any question of bending to them for the sake of a few lives. In particular, the Cerberus sub-plot makes not a jot of sense; surely if the terrorists could do what they can do with only one code, the President wouldn’t even conceive of his staff surrendering them. It’s also very considerate, and inefficient, of Kang to leave great gaps of time between demanding each code. The whole idea would be more suited to Colossus: The Forbin Project.


Antoine Fuqua stages the action coherently and effectively, occasionally let down by a scale his budget will not allow. Brooklyn’s Finest suggested Fuqua was intent on finding material with a bit more meat to it, but this indicates he has forsaken such lofty aims for B-movie pulp. It should also be noted that, despite only carrying a “15” certificate, this is a relentlessly, graphically, violent film. I’m not going to be hypocritical and suggest it isn’t enjoyable, but there’s a point where you do start to wonder if less might not be more; by the time of the bloody, ticking clock showdown it’s all become a bit wearisome.


Fuqua’s never been the most ironic of directors and, for a stupid film, Olympus Has Fallen takes itself much too seriously (just watch that tattered American flag falling in slow motion!). Butler occasionally gets a bit quippy, but it’s more on the level of Jason Statham than prime Willis. The closest you get is the realisation, when Butler says he's gong to stick a knife in someone's brain, that is exactly what will happen. That, and stoving in a terrorist’s head with a bust of Abraham Lincoln. It’s not exactly Noel Coward. Perhaps Fuqua could have achieved the status of a minor classic with a polish by Shane Black (and the self-consciousness of his script for Last Boy Scout). Instead, this is two hours of mindless but diverting mayhem; instantly gratifying but unlikely to demand a repeat performance.

***

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…

We’re not owners here, Karen. We’re just passing through.

Out of Africa (1985)
I did not warm to Out of Africa on my initial viewing, which would probably have been a few years after its theatrical release. It was exactly as the publicity warned, said my cynical side; a shallow-yet-bloated, awards-baiting epic romance. This was little more than a well-dressed period chick flick, the allure of which was easily explained by its lovingly photographed exotic vistas and Robert Redford rehearsing a soothing Timotei advert on Meryl Streep’s distressed locks. That it took Best Picture only seemed like confirmation of it as all-surface and no substance. So, on revisiting the film, I was curious to see if my tastes had “matured” or if it deserved that dismissal. 

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…

Rejoice! The broken are the more evolved. Rejoice.

Split (2016)
(SPOILERS) M Night Shyamalan went from the toast of twist-based filmmaking to a one-trick pony to the object of abject ridicule in the space of only a couple of pictures: quite a feat. Along the way, I’ve managed to miss several of his pictures, including his last, The Visit, regarded as something of a re-locating of his footing in the low budget horror arena. Split continues that genre readjustment, another Blumhouse production, one that also manages to bridge the gap with the fare that made him famous. But it’s a thematically uneasy film, marrying shlock and serious subject matter in ways that don’t always quite gel.

Shyamalan has seized on a horror staple – nubile teenage girls in peril, prey to a psychotic antagonist – and, no doubt with the best intentions, attempted to warp it. But, in so doing, he has dragged in themes and threads from other, more meritable fare, with the consequence that, in the end, the conflicting positions rather subvert his attempts at subversion…

If you could just tell me what those eyes have seen.

Alita: Battle Angel (2019)
(SPOILERS) Robert Rodriguez’ film of James Cameron’s at-one-stage-planned film of Yukito Kishiro’s manga Gunnm on the one hand doesn’t feel overly like a Rodriguez film, in that it’s quite polished, so certainly not of the sort he’s been making of late – definitely a plus – but on the other, it doesn’t feel particularly like a Jimbo flick either. What it does well, it mostly does very well – the action, despite being as thoroughly steeped in CGI as Avatar – but many of its other elements, from plotting to character to romance, are patchy or generic at best. Despite that, there’s something likeable about the whole ludicrously expensive enterprise that is Alita: Battle Angel, a willingness to be its own kind of distinctive misfit misfire.

Mountains are old, but they're still green.

Roma (2018)
(SPOILERS) Roma is a critics' darling and a shoe-in for Best Foreign Film Oscar, with the potential to take the big prize to boot, but it left me profoundly indifferent, its elusive majesty remaining determinedly out of reach. Perhaps that's down to generally spurning autobiographical nostalgia fests – complete with 65mm widescreen black and white, so it's quite clear to viewers that the director’s childhood reverie equates to the classics of old – or maybe the elliptical characterisation just didn't grab me, but Alfonso Cuarón's latest amounts to little more than a sliver of substance beneath all that style.

Life is like a box of timelines. You feel me?

Russian Doll Season One
(SPOILERS) It feels like loading the dice to proclaim something necessarily better because it’s female-driven, but that’s the tack The Hollywood Reporter took with its effusive review of Russian Doll, suggesting “although Nadia goes on a similar journey of self-discovery to Bill Murray’s hackneyed reporter in Groundhog Day, the fact that the show was created, written by and stars women means that it offers up a different, less exploitative and far more thoughtful angle” (than the predominately male-centric entries in the sub-genre). Which rather sounds like Rosie Knight changing the facts to fit her argument. And ironic, given star Natasha Lyonne has gone out of her way to stress the show’s inclusive message. Russian Dollis good, but the suggestion that “unlike its predecessors (it) provides a thoughtfulness, authenticity and honesty which makes it inevitable end (sic) all the more powerful” is cobblers.

We’re looking for a bug no one’s seen before. Some kind of smart bug.

Starship Troopers (1997)
(SPOILERS) Paul Verhoeven’s sci-fi trio of Robocop, Total Recall and Starship Troopers are frequently claimed to be unrivalled in their genre, but it’s really only the first of them that entirely attains that rarefied level. Discussion and praise of Starship Troopers is generally prefaced by noting that great swathes of people – including critics and cast members – were too stupid to realise it was a satire. This is a bit of a Fight Club one, certainly for anyone from the UK (Verhoeven commented “The English got it though. I remember coming out of Heathrow and seeing the posters, which were great. They were just stupid lines about war from the movie. I thought, ‘Finally someone knows how to promote this.’”) who needed no kind of steer to recognise what the director was doing. And what he does, he does splendidly, even if, at times, I’m not sure he entirely sustains a 129-minute movie, since, while both camp and OTT, Starship Troopers is simultaneously required t…

Even after a stake was driven through its heart, there’s still interest.

Prediction 2019 Oscars
Shockingly, as in I’m usually much further behind, I’ve missed out on only one of this year’s Best Picture nominees– Vice isn’t yet my vice, it seems – in what is being suggested, with some justification, as a difficult year to call. That might make for must-see appeal, if anyone actually cared about the movies jostling for pole position. If it were between Black Panther and Bohemian Rhapsody (if they were even sufficiently up to snuff to deserve a nod in the first place), there might be a strange fascination, but Joe Public don’t care about Roma, underlined by it being on Netflix and stillconspicuously avoided by subscribers (if it were otherwise, they’d be crowing about viewing figures; it’s no Bird Box, that’s for sure).

You use a scalpel. I prefer a hammer.

Mission: Impossible - Fallout (2018)
(SPOILERS) The latest instalment of the impossibly consistent in quality Mission: Impossible franchise has been hailed as the best yet, and with but a single dud among the sextet that’s a considerable accolade. I’m not sure it's entirely deserved – there’s a particular repeated thematic blunder designed to add some weight in a "hero's validation" sense that not only falls flat, but also actively detracts from the whole – but as a piece of action filmmaking, returning director Christopher McQuarrie has done it again. Mission: Impossible – Fallout is an incredible accomplishment, the best of its ilk this side of Mad Max: Fury Road.