Skip to main content

I’m not putting my hands in horse urine!

Grudge Match
(2013)

I have to admit, I though the conceit of Grudge Match was a pretty good one. It’s difficult to tell if it bombed because everyone else thought differently, or it was simply that the finished picture is frequently on the ropes. Maybe the Stallone renaissance was so 2007, or maybe the puzzled one was trying his hand at his most rewarding genre; comedy. Maybe the most interesting thing about a De Niro performance these days is how much his nose has grown over the past decade. Grudge Match isn’t actively bad, well sometimes it is, but it’s obvious in the most tiresome of ways. A movie that might have been quite clever and sparky just coasts on automatic pilot.


Old guys movies have been in fully aging swing recently, but they haven’t been finding the audience of Best Exotic Marigold Hotel. Probably because they want to be debauched and crude rather than gentle and heart-warming; others include Stand up Guys and Last Vegas (that one did reasonably well). Commonly they have found once-great performers slumming it with sloppy scripts and stodgy scenarios. This one has the irresistible pitch of Rocky vs Raging Bull (despite the unlikelihood of their respective weights with regard to such a bout).


Henry “Razor” Sharp (Sly) was beaten by Billy “The Kid” McDonnen (Bobby) in 1982. Then Razor emerged victorious in a 1984 fight and subsequently retired (because The Kid slept with his girlfriend Sally, Kim Basinger). Since then, The Kid has petulantly chewed over his desire for a deciding rematch; he runs a car dealership and owns a bar so he doesn’t need the money, it’s all about his pride. He also does stand-up (see what they did they’re; they’re so clever, these writer guys!) Stallone, meanwhile, is in full blue-collar mode devoting his time to the shipyard like Springsteen never went out of fashion. So the lines are familiar straightaway; De Niro playing up the boorish wiseguy persona while Stallone does the noble warrior thing. Both these guys fought in ‘Nam, though. Ain’t that something. No cliché left unchecked.


Along for the supporting roles are Alan Arkin as Razor’s old trainer. No matter how hopeless the material, Arkin emerges unscathed (just as he did in Stand Up Guys), and here his surly banter with Kevin Hart’s promoter is one of the few parts of the picture that actually ekes laughs (although the less said about the “hilarious” bucket of horse piss, the better). LL Cool J pops up in a role that involves having his arse handed to him by an old guy, so he must be desperate for cash or have lost all sense of pride (NCIS: Los Angeles will probably do that to you). 


Jon Bernthal retains dignity as The Kid’s son, although to be honest he could have equally played Razor’s. Bernthal’s a great actor, and if someone really has to remake Escape from New York they couldn’t go wrong with him. He also has a precocious brat of a son allowing for antics with Granddad Bob (much of which revolve around an extremely poor taste blow job gag). Basinger has the thankless girlfriend role (with the honour of draping herself over sweaty old Stallone) although she looks fantastic for 60, which must be some compensation.


The plot follows the expected course; reluctance to get back in the ring (on Razor’s part), followed by training montage bullshit (The Kid is out of shape, not that you’d ever have thought it looking at De Niro). Right on cue, when it looks as if everything is looking good pre-fight, everything has to fall apart before to instil some “tension” into the decision to fight after all. There are also supposed to be whole barrels of laughs involved but Peter Segal’s never been the kind of director to settle for comedy gold, not when pleasantly predictable will do. Tim Kelleher co-wrote the screenplay with Rodney Rothman; the former’s credentials, as a Two and a Half Men stalwart, are impugnable, but we might expect more from Rothman who has worked with Phil Lord and Christopher Miller.


The movie is as full of adolescent vulgarity, much of it involving the aging process, as a PG-13/12A will allow. It’s akin to a “family” Adam Sandler movie, or one of those cash-grab Ben Stiller efforts. Utterly characterless. In that sense, one might expect it to do reasonably well, although both their stars have been on the wane of late too. Arkin can almost make it fly (“Man, are you going to be feisty when you hit puberty” he tells Hart). Stallone reminds us that he was only ever any good in comedies when he played the straight man; don’t waste good lines on him (although, with the likes of “Isn’t anybody here going to rape this guy?” he isn’t exactly being thrown pearls). De Niro has so little shame left, he even does a Dancing with the Stars bit.


Everyone learns something from their experience, which is nice; they go into it for the money but come out with something even better. Love, and family. And money. It’s the American Dream, or retch. The makers clearly didn’t learn that a Mike Tyson cameo is a very bad thing, however. His continued veneration is mystifying. As for the match, the only means of making it remotely convincing is having Razor blind in one eye, and even that doesn’t do the trick. Sly’s steroids are going to outmatch De Niro’s 70-year old moobs any day. I’m most likely making the picture out to be worse than it is, but it’s so utterly pedestrian and formulaic on every level that it deserves recriminations for the waste of the talent involved and the decent kernel of an idea at its centre. If you want to see a decent De Niro/Stallone movie, check out Copland.



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…

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 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. 

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.

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…

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…

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).

Now we're all wanted by the CIA. Awesome.

Mission: Impossible – Rogue Nation (2015)
(SPOILERS) There’s a groundswell of opinion that Mission: Impossible – Rogue Nation is the best in near 20-year movie franchise. I’m not sure I’d go quite that far, but only because this latest instalment and its two predecessors have maintained such a consistently high standard it’s difficult to pick between them. III featured a superior villain and an emotional through line with real stakes. Ghost Protocol dazzled with its giddily constructed set pieces and pacing. Christopher McQuarrie’s fifth entry has the virtue of a very solid script, one that expertly navigates the kind of twists and intrigue one expects from a spy franchise. It also shows off his talent as a director; McQuarrie’s not one for stylistic flourish, but he makes up for this with diligence and precision. Best of all, he may have delivered the series’ best character in Rebecca Ferguson’s Ilsa Faust (admittedly, in a quintet that makes a virtue of pared down motivation and absen…

Yeah, she loused up one of the five best days of your life.

Kramer vs. Kramer (1979)
(SPOILERS) The zeitgeist Best Picture Oscar winner is prone to falling from grace like no other. Often, they’re films with notable acting performances but themes that tend to appear antiquated or even slightly offensive in hindsight. Few extol the virtues of American Beauty the way they did twenty years ago, and Kramer vs. Kramer isn’t quite seen as exemplifying a sensitive and balanced examination of the fallout of divorce on children and their parents the way it was forty years previously. It remains a compelling film for the performances, but it’s difficult not to view it, despite the ameliorating effect of Meryl Streep (an effect she had to struggle to exert), as a vanity project of its star, and one that doesn’t do him any favours with hindsight and behind-the-scenes knowledge.