Skip to main content

Have a lovely day, ass-hole!

Escape Plan
(2013)

(SPOILERS) Escape Plan, Stallone’s third prison movie (I’m not counting Escape to Victory, but maybe that’s wrong) is also his middling one. On the plus side it lacks the abject sincerity of Lock Up, on the minus it is unable to embrace the unkempt energy of Tango & Cash. As full of illogicalities as the formerly titled The Tomb is, it might have passed muster if director Mikael Hafstrom had tightened the pace and sufficiently clarified plot twists that provokes a fair bit of head scratching. The consequence is, it’s left to Sly’s co-star to salvage what he can of the picture in his most enjoyable performance since I cant remember when (probably in 20 years). It’s just a shame its not in service of a better movie.


Stallone plays Ray Breslin, a guy who spends his working life breaking out of maximum-security prisons and reporting to their administrators on the systemic and procedural flaws. He gets an offer from the CIA (he thinks) to test a top secret, off the books, privately funded facility, which he accepts. Before long he is incarcerated, making pals with Arnie’s Emil Rottmayer and encountering a “good” Muslim Javed (Faran Tahir); Javed is only an opium grower and not one of those nasty extremist types (you see, by employing clichés the makers are making a valuable point about stereotyping!) 


The opening sequence incorporates a flashback showing Ray’s escape, which is the kind of thing you hope the movie will excel at (although, I’m not sure how confirmation of the four keys the guards use as the passcode will help Sly; surely than only narrows the number down to thousands of possible combinations?). After all, the point of a good prison escape movie is the slow-burn tension of planning the attempt and the ingenuity with which said attempted is enacted. Disappointingly, when it gets to the stage of trying to get out the makers forsake cunning for running about and shooting things. There’s a nice bit where Arnie begs audience with Warden Hobbes (Caviezel) and it turns out to be ruse to secure a tool Sly needs. But such developments are few and far between. Mostly, plans involve staging a fight.


This is a picture where you’re left wondering why exactly Sly’s business partner (played by Vincent D’Onfrio, so you know he’ll turn out to be a backstabbing bastard from the first moment you clap eyes on him) wants to screw him over. Because the director hasn’t put enough emphasis on his motivation; it’s for the money, it always is, but essentially he turns out to be a bad guy because he turns out to be a bad guy. It’s the same with the reveal that Arnie was Mannheim all along; I think the idea is that the bad guys want Mannheim’s device, which can bring down the world’s banking system, for their own purposes. Mannheim, because Arnie is playing him, only uses it for some kind of wealth redistribution ends… But didn’t we gather he brought down the Icelandic banking system and “the bank collapse six years ago”? 


The problem with a director like Hafstrom, who is technically adept but doesn’t seem able to judge natural rises and falls of pace, is the movie comes out at one pitch. This was a problem with 1408 too; a nice enough idea and sporadically effective, but it went on and on and on without variation. You end up with questions of “Why did such and such do this or that?” but the movie as a whole has failed to invest you with sufficient reason find it important. We’re asked to rely on Arne and Sly being good guys because they always are and D’Onfrio and Jim Caviezel being villains because they don’t really have that leading man thing (even Caviezel’s Jesus has a troubling edge to him). 


Do I really buy that no one would realise the prison is out at sea on the grounds of “stabilisers” and being positioned in calm seas? I suppose the writers at least gave a thought to possible objections, but it doesn’t fly. I had that twist spoiled for me, but it’s not as if anyone familiar with Face/Off wont have seen it before. And it’s not a reveal of the sort that turns everything upside down. The inherent problem with a prison escape movie is setting impossible objectives. There are a few nice touches (the transparent cells, the THX1138-esque guard masks) but it becomes necessary to fall back on old staples (tunnels leading to opportune places) in order to get anywhere.  There are some attempts at political commentary, but they feel rather weak. The implicit criticism of extraordinary rendition, the prison being run by “military and Blackwater rejects”, the references to the financial crisis. But it’s never more than window dressing, and as such feels slightly desperate; an attempt to boost credibility by aging superstars who never had any interest in saying anything to start with (and I include Arnie as governator; okay Arnie did come out with stuff about people being weak and needing leading early in his career didn’t he? Does that constitute keen purpose, however objectionable?)


Stallone’s post-Rocky Balboa reinvigoration hasn’t been up to much truth, be told. At least in the early ‘90s he was trying different things, albeit with mixed results. And then in the late ‘90s he did Cop Land. Since Rocky he’s been coasting on his iconic roles and ‘80s nostalgia (The Expendables). He hasn’t essayed a really memorable role, stretched himself or even looked like he was having fun. And Escape Plan is no different. Curiously, he’s looking his age more here than in the likes of Expendables and Bullet to the Head, whereas Arnie, who was really looking his years in both his Expendables cameos and The Last Stand, seems positively reinvigorated, complete with greying locks. Perhaps it’s the beard, perhaps the cinematographer had a beef with Sly. Lucky Amy Ryan gets to play Stallone's girlfriend. From The Wire to the bird of someone a quarter of a century older than you.


Either way, Arnie’s having enormous fun. He gets all the best lines too, accusing Sly of hitting like a vegetarian, trying to persuade him to lay off the pummelling (“Relax, it’s pretend!”), spinning Hobbes a yarn about wanting to be an artist before displaying the results (“I told you I no talent”) insulting Javed’s mother (“and she could polish a helmet!”) or grabbing hold of a mounted machine gun and opening fire with the uproariously delivered but bargain-basement quip “Have a lovely day, ass-hole!”. And the scene where he gets to mouth off in German is a treat.


As with any Sly movie that isn’t Rocky, Rambo or The Expendables, Escape Plan flopped in the US. In contrast it did reasonably well worldwide, suggesting the duo might not be put out to pasture quite yet. Arnie’s other comeback movies have bombed (to his credit, he seems refreshingly willing to mix up his choices), so it’s as well he has a no doubt CGI-aided Terminator in the offing. Stallone can rely on another Expendables. But whether anyone is interested in either carrying a movie solo any more is debatable. In Arnie’s case it might be a good thing. He’s making interesting choices. Escape Plan may not be a particularly interesting movie as a whole, but it becomes so when the Austrian Oak is in frame.


**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…

Why would I turn into a filing cabinet?

Captain Marvel (2019)
(SPOILERS) All superhero movies are formulaic to a greater or lesser degree. Mostly greater. The key to an actually great one – or just a pretty good one – is making that a virtue, rather than something you’re conscious of limiting the whole exercise. The irony of the last two stand-alone MCU pictures is that, while attempting to bring somewhat down-the-line progressive cachet to the series, they’ve delivered rather pedestrian results. Of course, that didn’t dim Black Panther’s cultural cachet (and what do I know, swathes of people also profess to loving it), and Captain Marvel has hit half a billion in its first few days – it seems that, unless you’re poor unloved Ant-Man, an easy $1bn is the new $700m for the MCU – but neither’s protagonist really made that all-important iconic impact.

Basically, you’re saying marriage is just a way of getting out of an embarrassing pause in conversation?

Four Weddings and a Funeral (1994)
(SPOILERS) There can be a cumulative effect from revisiting a movie where one glaring element does not fit, however well-judged or integrated everything else is; the error is only magnified, and seems even more of a miscalculation. With Groundhog Day, there’s a workaround to the romance not working, which is that the central conceit of reliving your day works like a charm and the love story is ultimately inessential to the picture’s success. In the case of Four Weddings and a Funeral, if the romance doesn’t work… Well, you’ve still got three other weddings, and you’ve got a funeral. But our hero’s entire purpose is to find that perfect match, and what he winds up with is Andie McDowell. One can’t help thinking he’d have been better off with Duck Face (Anna Chancellor).

Can you float through the air when you smell a delicious pie?

Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse (2018)
(SPOILERS) Ironically, given the source material, think I probably fell into the category of many who weren't overly disposed to give this big screen Spider-Man a go on the grounds that it was an animation. After all, if it wasn’t "good enough" for live-action, why should I give it my time? Not even Phil Lord and Christopher Miller's pedigree wholly persuaded me; they'd had their stumble of late, although admittedly in that live-action arena. As such, it was only the near-unanimous critics' approval that swayed me, suggesting I'd have been missing out. They – not always the most reliable arbiters of such populist fare, which made the vote of confidence all the more notable – were right. Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse is not only a first-rate Spider-Man movie, it's a fresh, playful and (perhaps) surprisingly heartfelt origins story.

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…

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

The MCU Ranked Worst to Best

Do you read Sutter Cane?

In the Mouth of Madness (1994)
(SPOILERS) The concluding chapter of John Carpenter’s unofficial Apocalypse Trilogy (preceded by The Thing and Prince of Darkness) is also, sadly, his last great movie. Indeed, it stands apart in the qualitative wilderness that beset him during the ‘90s (not for want of output). Michael De Luca’s screenplay had been doing the rounds since the ‘80s, even turned down by Carpenter at one point, and it proves ideal fodder for the director, bringing out the best in him. Even cinematographer Gary K Kibbe seems inspired enough to rise to the occasion. It could do without the chugging rawk soundtrack, perhaps, but then, that was increasingly where Carpenter’s interests resided (as opposed to making decent movies).

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…

Only an idiot sees the simple beauty of life.

Forrest Gump (1994)
(SPOILERS) There was a time when I’d have made a case for, if not greatness, then Forrest Gump’s unjust dismissal from conversations regarding its merits. To an extent, I still would. Just not nearly so fervently. There’s simply too much going on in the picture to conclude that the manner in which it has generally been received is the end of the story. Tarantino, magnanimous in the face of Oscar defeat, wasn’t entirely wrong when he suggested to Robert Zemeckis that his was a, effectively, subversive movie. Its problem, however, is that it wants to have its cake and eat it.

Do not mention the Tiptoe Man ever again.

Glass (2019)
(SPOILERS) If nothing else, one has to admire M Night Shyamalan’s willingness to plough ahead regardless with his straight-faced storytelling, taking him into areas that encourage outright rejection or merciless ridicule, with all the concomitant charges of hubris. Reactions to Glass have been mixed at best, but mostly more characteristic of the period he plummeted from his must-see, twist-master pedestal (during the period of The Village and The Happening), which is to say quite scornful. And yet, this is very clearly the story he wanted to tell, so if he undercuts audience expectations and leaves them dissatisfied, it’s most definitely not a result of miscalculation on his part. For my part, while I’d been prepared for a disappointment on the basis of the critical response, I came away very much enjoying the movie, by and large.