Skip to main content

You’re a monster, and my father is a great man. You’re nothing like my father!


Air Force One
(1997)

President Harrison Ford takes down the terrorist. This year’s “terrorists take over the White House” movies require the President to be saved by brave Special Forces types. Not so back in the ‘90s, when Russkies assumed control of Air Force One. Back when Indiana Jones was a ‘Nam vet President and recipient of the Medal of Honor, more than qualified to kick-ass.

Wolfgang Peterson’s Die Hard-on-the-President’s-plane was such a big hit (and not just in its core US market) that I wondered if I had missed something when I came away from seeing it non-plussed. I’m a fairly willing audience for Die Hard-derivative movies, even knowing that most of them turn out to be shitty. But Air Force One, despite a goofy premise only topped by Olympus Has Fallen and White House Down, possessed a prestige cast (led by Ford, Glenn Close and Gary Oldman) and a director who had previously scored critically and commercially with a political thriller (In the Line of Fire). It sounded like it might work; why else would it attract such talent?

The only conclusion can be; handsome paydays. Andrew W Marlowe may have partially redeemed himself with the TV series Castle, but Air Force One is contusion of half-baked set pieces and ultra-corny sentiment. Peterson lends it a certain gloss (although the CGI is frequently dreadful), and a couple of the actors nobly attempt to liven the proceedings up (Oldman’s terrorist leader Korshunov chews the scenery, just not quite with the abandon seen when working for Luc Besson, while Dean Stockwell’s Secretary of Defense is winningly unsentimental about the plane’s chances and political realities) but Ford is less than engaging. He’s moved into the earnest bore period in his career, typified by Jack Ryan and Richard Kimble; films that make the right kind of signals to attract an audience but which he can sleepwalk through. It must have given him a false sense of security, until his box office clout dried up at the turn of the millennium.

Ford’s President Marshall has set his mast out as a humanitarian, interventionist leader; he has zero tolerance for terrorism, against the advice of his staff. And he will be neither bucked nor bowed by economic or political pressures. Rather, he is led by a higher moral imperative; to do what is right. He has the prescience and clear judgement to make this sort of call, you see; it isn’t just grandstanding because Harrison Ford is always sincere. Consequently, he’s inclined to deliver nonsensical lines in his addresses that have the appearance of sage truths (“Peace isn’t merely the absence of conflict, but the presence of justice”). The only thing missing from his mission statement is that God is on his side and that he prays every night.

You see, his Damascus moment results from the US’s delayed involvement in deposing and capturing Jurgen Prochnow’s General Radek. An empathic President Marshall recognises that this slowness to act indirectly resulted in much suffering and death. Radek had set himself up as dictator in Kazakhstan (Who knows anything about Kazakhstan, right? No one will care if they’re the bad guys!) and it takes a joint Russian-American operation to bring him down. This is the classic Hollywood “terrorists as villains” approach; make a nationality the antagonists as long as, at some point, you make it clear that their entire country is not evil. It doesn’t matter if the audience takes away Russians=bad guys, you’ve absolved yourself of any responsibility.

As with Olympus Has Fallen, the villain of the piece is intent on unifying his country (there Korea, here the Soviet Union); the first step towards this is the release of his beloved General Radek. And, as with that film, he gains access to the President’s inner sanctum with astonishing ease (anything else and you wouldn’t have a movie). As usual, there’s a traitor on the inside, and as usual his motivations are at best broad strokes at worst nonsensical. Both films make an idle gesture of balance by suggesting that the President, and America, is guilty of villainy and atrocities (Korshunov brings up Iraq), but of course we don’t really believe this. We’re talking about President Harrison Ford here. He agonises over his every action and endures a constipated expression to prove it.

The supporting cast are underwritten and fail to make much impression accordingly. It’s not as if Ford and Oldman have any great lines (“Get off my plane!” anyone?), and they’re the leads. Prochnow’s is little more than a cameo, William H Macy has a nice noble moment or two and Xander Berkeley does what he does best. Close surely had a patio that needed paving as she called upon merely to adopt her best steely gaze.

Peterson and Marlowe have to jump through hoops to try and make this premise work. The President needs to be on the loose, continually evading capture and engaging in altercations with terrorists, for at least an hour or you don’t have a movie. This is never very convincing, particularly when Korshunov seals him in the lower deck. There’s the occasional ruthless ultimatum, eliciting a John McClane-seque stoical response at first (but, as with Olympus Has Fallen , the President pussies out when his family are threatened; what kind of President does that?)

We know the President did the right thing to stay on board, as a plump aide thanks him personally (her face is later adorned with a hilariously beatific smile as she parachutes earthwards to safety). The odd instance of plotting suggests the writer may have some wit to him (Marshall’s “I’m counting on you, red, white and blue” when he’s hotwiring the fuel tank) but you’re mostly left with the impression of empty-headed “America, the beautiful”. Certainly, this is reinforced by Peterson’s decision to cut back to whooping and cheering in the White House Situation Room every time the President takes out a bad guy or a potential disaster is diffused.  

It’s not just the lack of self-consciousness; Marlowe doesn’t have an original idea. The President is even called on to pilot the plane, just as Kurt Russell was during his terrorist encounter in the previous year’s Executive Decision. Apparently the Department of Defense co-operated in the making of the film; presumably their failure to suggest any remedies for its incoherence of plot was by the bye as long as the whole was resolutely patriotic. They were hardly going to tell Hollywood producers how Air Force One actually functions, were they?

Jerry Goldsmith’s score underpins the film’s air of avowed patriotism in a vomit-inducingly stone-faced manner. Still, rather him than Randy Newman (Peterson rejected Newman’s score, so Goldsmith was a last minute replacement).

Despite the overall nonsensicality, the President-goes-all-John McClane scenes are reasonably engaging. It’s when Korshunov catches him that Marlowe’s script begins to test the patience. Maybe the problem is that the jingoistic claptrap the film embraces resists irreverence and outrageousness of the kind these types of film need to really work. If you’re going to treat a B-movie premise like this over-earnestly, you’re doomed from start.

**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…

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.

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…

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.

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.

I am forever driven on this quest.

Ad Astra (2019)
(SPOILERS) Would Apocalypse Now have finished up as a classic if Captain Willard had been ordered on a mission to exterminate his mad dad with extreme prejudice, rather than a mysterious and off-reservation colonel? Ad Astra features many stunning elements. It’s an undeniably classy piece of filmmaking from James Gray, who establishes his tone from the get-go and keeps it consistent, even through various showy set pieces. But the decision to give its lead character an existential crisis entirely revolving around his absent father is its reductive, fatal flaw, ultimately deflating much of the air from Gray’s space balloon.

Our very strength incites challenge. Challenge incites conflict. And conflict... breeds catastrophe.

The MCU Ranked Worst to Best

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.

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 …