Skip to main content

Don't know how many times I've been crossed off the list and left for dead. So this... this ain't nothing new.


Riddick
(2013)

Vin’s back in his most-loved role (by him, at least). To get into training, the action star gargled a mouthful of gravel for a full 40 minutes every morning, rather than his usual 20. The extra effort has served him well, as his monotone drawl manages (mostly) to pass off the most uninspired dialogue. With that in mind, it should be little surprise that the best parts of this trilogy-maker are the sequences where Richard B. Riddick has no one to talk to.


Riddick is something of a disappointment; needs must, or at least budgets must, that the overblown space opera of Chronicles has been pared down to the bone. But why did director David Twohy and his star think it was a good idea to put all that solid groundwork in for what becomes to a tepid reheat of the first movie? Probably because the fans repeated that Pitch Black was the one they really loved.


Vin is nothing if not interactive with his groupies, ever posting piccies from projects and updating his Facebook like the kind of madman who is wants to satisfy 47 million thumbs-ups. The rights to his night-visioned anti-hero were bundled to him in return for a cameo in Tokyo Drift (Universal was that attached to the franchise following the underperformance of Chronicles). He’ll explain how he mortgaged his house (only one of them?) to secure the financing for his labour of love. All did not go according to plan, despite the long gestation period. The funding hiccupped, and the planned location shoot in Egypt fell through; the result was a planet surface entirely created in the studio. One could complain that the lack of locale is very evident, but it goes to underline that this is an unashamed B-movie. The problem is, there are great B-movies and then there are the rest.


The crashing of Chronicles also resulted in an ever-so slight hiccup in the extended space opera Twohy and Diesel envisaged for their character. All that Necromonging and bestowance of supreme leadership had to be curtailed (wherever it was they planned to send Richie, you can bet it was vast). So, in a rather half-arsed flashback (graced by a cameo return from Karl Urban), we discover that he was betrayed by his adopted people, ending up presumed dead on an unnamed planet, which is where we meet him.


I was fully on-board with the B-trappings, and Twohy makes an effort to accentuate the alien inhospitability of this world (just about the first thing we learn is not to drink the water, or at least be very careful about the water you drink). The CGI creatures are very evidently just that, but no better or worse than those in your average blockbuster. In particular, Riddick’s adopted jackal is rendered with sufficient personality that we are invested in the one-man-and-dog Mad Max 2-esque relationship. But, if the dog is a positive slice of invention, the death’s head-tailed predators never attain a status other than as an overly referential nod to those of Pitch Black. Instead of creatures that come out at night, there are creatures that come out in the rain.


So, while the one man against the wilderness first act is engaging, Twohy fumbles both the conceptualisation and delivery of the other two. Instead of effectively building momentum once Riddick realises he has to get out that place, the director-writer evaporates it by engaging with the activities of the unengaging mercenaries who arrive to take him captive. There's absolutely no good reason a lean mean 100-minute movie should last two hours. The consequence is vague boredom setting in during the middle section (one of my fellow cinema goers fell asleep, which might be a slightly excessive critical response).


All the squabbling mercs seem capable of is exchanging banal expletives; it’s especially disappointing that a writer-turned-director should show such a tin ear for dialogue. And its particularly galling, as the overinflated running time seems designed to spotlight these characters; as if they should be a source of pride rather than a selection of tiresome clichés (the lesbian character announces she’s a lesbian within seconds, the young pup is religious so unconvincingly starts praying as soon as the attack begins). Instead of concentrating on what this motley crew were up to, I became distracted at how one character, who has a particular beef against Riddick, could be the father of a someone he encountered in an earlier movie, despite only three years separating the actors involved. It makes the eight years between Cary Grant and mum Jessie Royce Landis in North by Northwest look like perfectly reasonable casting.


The lacklustre elements aside, there are pleasures to be had along the way. There’s no doubt that Riddick continues to have potential as good bad guy, but I can’t help thinking he would be served better if Twohy came up with some characters with equal weight, who are other than stock types. I like the motif of cocky Riddick predicting just how he's going to best his adversaries, even if some of the actual scenarios lack real cunning (the locked cabinet) and others are just woeful (going balls-deep in Starbuck, or rather Katee Sackhoff). There are less illustrious activities than coming up with classic ways for Riddick to off bad guys (unfortunately the tea cup scene in Chronicles is not trumped here, however). Katee’s main purpose in the movie appears to have been to flash a nipple so Riddick can do his Peeping Tom act. Except… well, I come to that.


While the third act is entertaining enough, we’ve already seen him pulling off exactly the same thing in the first movie. The way to make a B-movie like this shine is to make a virtue of the supporting players and give them memorable rather than just ripe dialogue; Cameron’s Aliens ought to be the template for this sort of picture (that’s how you make a B-movie). Unfortunately, only David Bautista (who makes Vin look like a wee fellow) makes an impression.


By default, the most entertaining aspect has already received a fair amount of scrutiny from the bemused online community; the (intentional?) subtext of homosexual angst exhibited by Richard B. Straight off the bat, our non-plussed protagonist makes himself unpopular with the Necromongers when he demurs from taking advantage of a harem of its shaven ladies. He comments, something to the effect that he wasn’t into it. Fair enough, you think; horses for courses. But later, when he encounters devout lesbian Starbuck, he's all over her with his deep balls.  Presumably because there's no danger she'll be turned? Is our man Vin trying to let us know something here? He’s certainly not leaving much room for doubt.


Twohy, like any connoisseur of rip-offs, indulges a number of movie references; I mentioned Mad Max 2, but there’s also Apocalypse Now (Riddick rising from the undrinkable water) and Die Hard 3 (a family member out for revenge). He doesn’t do anything really interesting with them, though.  I loved his last film, A Perfect Getaway, which was gleefully batshit crazy and bserkly watchable even if you guessed the twist. And I had a good time with the first two Riddicks. But this one, with a title that suggests a self-titled album by an uninspired band struggling for back-to-basics glory, fails through beating a safe retreat. If you get another chance, David, throw Riddick into a scenario as different as Chronicles was from Pitch Black. I’m still rooting for the goggle-bound hulk.

**1/2

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

I never strangled a chicken in my life!

Rope (1948) (SPOILERS) Rope doesn’t initially appear to have been one of the most venerated of Hitchcocks, but it has gone through something of a rehabilitation over the years, certainly since it came back into circulation during the 80s. I’ve always rated it highly; yes, the seams of it being, essentially, a formal experiment on the director’s part, are evident, but it’s also an expert piece of writing that uses our immediate knowledge of the crime to create tension throughout; what we/the killers know is juxtaposed with the polite dinner party they’ve thrown in order to wallow in their superiority.

They'll think I've lost control again and put it all down to evolution.

Time Bandits (1981) (SPOILERS) Terry Gilliam had co-directed previously, and his solo debut had visual flourish on its side, but it was with Time Bandits that Gilliam the auteur was born. The first part of his Trilogy of Imagination, it remains a dazzling work – as well as being one of his most successful – rich in theme and overflowing with ideas while resolutely aimed at a wide (family, if you like) audience. Indeed, most impressive about Time Bandits is that there’s no evidence of self-censoring here, of attempting to make it fit a certain formula, format or palatable template.

You must have hopes, wishes, dreams.

Brazil (1985) (SPOILERS) Terry Gilliam didn’t consider Brazil the embodiment of a totalitarian nightmare it is often labelled as. His 1984½ (one of the film’s Fellini-riffing working titles) was “ the Nineteen Eighty-Four for 1984 ”, in contrast to Michael Anderson’s Nineteen Eighty-Four from 1948. This despite Gilliam famously boasting never to have read the Orwell’s novel: “ The thing that intrigues me about certain books is that you know them even though you’ve never read them. I guess the images are archetypal ”. Or as Pauline Kael observed, Brazil is to Nineteen Eighty-Four as “ if you’d just heard about it over the years and it had seeped into your visual imagination ”. Gilliam’s suffocating system isn’t unflinchingly cruel and malevolently intolerant of individuality; it is, in his vision of a nightmare “future”, one of evils spawned by the mechanisms of an out-of-control behemoth: a self-perpetuating bureaucracy. And yet, that is not really, despite how indulgently and glee

Oh, you got me right in the pantaloons, partner.

The Party (1968) (SPOILERS) Blake Edwards’ semi-improvisational reunion with Peter Sellers is now probably best known for – I was going to use an elephant-in-the-room gag, but at least one person already went there – Sellers’ “brown face”. And it isn’t a decision one can really defend, even by citing The Party ’s influence on Bollywood. Satyajit Ray had also reportedly been considering working with Sellers… and then he saw the film. One can only assume he’d missed similar performances in The Millionairess and The Road to Hong Kong ; in the latter case, entirely understandable, if not advisable. Nevertheless, for all the flagrant stereotyping, Sellers’ bungling Hrundi V Bakshi is a very likeable character, and indeed, it’s the piece’s good-natured, soft centre – his fledgling romance with Claudine Longet’s Michele – that sees The Party through in spite of its patchy, hit-and-miss quality.

I'm an old ruin, but she certainly brings my pulse up a beat or two.

The Paradine Case (1947) (SPOILERS) Hitchcock wasn’t very positive about The Paradine Case , his second collaboration with Gregory Peck, but I think he’s a little harsh on a picture that, if it doesn’t quite come together dramatically, nevertheless maintains interest on the basis of its skewed take on the courtroom drama. Peck’s defence counsel falls for his client, Alida Valli’s accused (of murder), while wife Ann Todd wilts dependably and masochistically on the side-lines.

A herbal enema should fix you up.

Never Say Never Again (1983) (SPOILERS) There are plenty of sub-par Bond s in the official (Eon) franchise, several of them even weaker than this opportunistic remake of Thunderball , but they do still feel like Bond movies. Never Say Never Again , despite – or possibly because he’s part of it – featuring the much-vaunted, title-referencing return of the Sean Connery to the lead role, only ever feels like a cheap imitation. And yet, reputedly, it cost more than the same year’s Rog outing Octopussy .

She was addicted to Tums for a while.

Marriage Story (2019) (SPOILERS) I don’t tend to fall heavily for Noah Baumbach fare. He’s undoubtedly a distinctive voice – even if his collaborations with Wes Anderson are the least of that director’s efforts – but his devotion to an exclusive, rarefied New York bubble becomes ever more off-putting with each new project. And ever more identifiable as being a lesser chronicler of the city’s privileged quirks than his now disinherited forbear Woody Allen, who at his peak mastered a balancing act between the insightful, hilarious and self-effacing. Marriage Story finds Baumbach going yet again where Woody went before, this time brushing up against the director’s Ingmar Bergman fixation.

You can’t climb a ladder, no. But you can skip like a goat into a bar.

Juno and the Paycock (1930) (SPOILERS) Hitchcock’s second sound feature. Such was the lustre of this technological advance that a wordy play was picked. By Sean O’Casey, upon whom Hitchcock based the prophet of doom at the end of The Birds . Juno and the Paycock , set in 1922 during the Irish Civil War, begins as a broad comedy of domestic manners, but by the end has descended into full-blown Greek (or Catholic) tragedy. As such, it’s an uneven but still watchable affair, even if Hitch does nothing to disguise its stage origins.

I think you’re some kind of deviated prevert.

Dr. Strangelove  or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb (1964) (SPOILERS) Kubrick’s masterpiece satire of mutually-assured destruction. Or is it? Not the masterpiece bit, because that’s a given. Rather, is all it’s really about the threat of nuclear holocaust? While that’s obviously quite sufficient, all the director’s films are suggested to have, in popular alt-readings, something else going on under the hood, be it exposing the ways of Elite paedophilia ( Lolita , Eyes Wide Shut ), MKUltra programming ( A Clockwork Orange, Full Metal Jacket ), transhumanism and the threat of imminent AI overlords ( 2001: A Space Odyssey ), and most of the aforementioned and more besides (the all-purpose smorgasbord that is The Shining ). Even Barry Lyndon has been posited to exist in a post-reset-history world. Could Kubrick be talking about something else as well in Dr. Strangelove ?

Sir, I’m the Leonardo of Montana.

The Young and Prodigious T.S. Spivet (2013) (SPOILERS) The title of Jean-Pierre Jeunet’s second English language film and second adaptation announces a fundamentally quirky beast. It is, therefore, right up its director’s oeuvre. His films – even Alien Resurrection , though not so much A Very Long Engagement – are infused with quirk. He has a style and sensibility that is either far too much – all tics and affectations and asides – or delightfully offbeat and distinctive, depending on one’s inclinations. I tend to the latter, but I wasn’t entirely convinced by the trailers for The Young and Prodigious T.S. Spivet ; if there’s one thing I would bank on bringing out the worst in Jeunet, it’s a story focussing on an ultra-precocious child. Yet for the most part the film won me over. Spivet is definitely a minor distraction, but one that marries an eccentric bearing with a sense of heart that veers to the affecting rather than the chokingly sentimental. Appreciation for