Skip to main content

Old man's gotta be the old man. Fish has got to be the fish.

The Equalizer
(2014)

(SPOILERS) Why adapt source material if you’re then going to discard the very thing that made it unique? That’s likely to be the first question asked by anyone who has seen the ‘80s TV original of the big screen version of The Equalizer. The answer in this case is surely “Because it has a really cool title”. The latest formulaic Denzel Washington action vehicle is pretty much what you’d expect from a formulaic Denzel Washington action vehicle; technically accomplished, shallow and glossy.  The Equalizer also comes equipped with a ready supply of revenge/vigilante movie tropes. Its biggest problem is that amid the cobbled together succession of clichés that inform its wherewithal, no one remembered to include a modicum of wit or self-awareness. Which means, when there isn’t a steady eruption of ultra-violence to distract, this underwritten concoction’s hackneyed hues are over-powering.


Perhaps Denzel thought he needed to mix it up after last years raucous and frequently very funny 2 Guns. But without Shane Black-style arch dialogue or fleshed-out characters this becomes just another identikit picture about a mild-mannered, deadly man who unleashes fury on the (really) bad guys when roused. Tony Scott delivered something not dissimilar a decade ago in Man on Fire, and Antoine Fuqua (who worked with Washington on the superior Training Day) is nothing if not a poor man’s Tony Scott. A competent shooter (who made a competent movie called Shooter) with a modicum of slick style, his pictures are notable for being utterly devoid of personality and humour. You knew a Tony Scott movie when you saw it, even a shitty one, for its sheer vibrancy and excess. Fuqua only ever seems to be going through the motions although, with this and Olympus Has Fallen, it looks as if he is eking out a not-necessarily-to-be-sought-after signature as a new brutalist. Olympus was so over-the-top in its neck-snapping abandon that it reached levels of near-hilarity. Similarly, the biggest chuckles in The Equalizer – aside from Denzel being Mr Cool in tumultuous situations – come from the sadistic glee with which Fuqua captures the absurd desecrations Washington’s Robert McCall inflicts on his prey.


This is the birth of the Equalizer, however, and at first McCall appears as a distressingly perky old-timer working a dead-end job in a Home Mart hardware-house. In order lend some definition to McCall’s wafer-thin character, he has OCD; the kind of crude hook an undiscerning actor will consider makes the job worthwhile. McCall visits the same corner shop café every evening for a meal. He arranges his table and cutlery just so, puts a special tea bag in a cup of hot water. He reads books that proffer amazingly apt summaries of McCall himself; The Old Man and the Sea (“Gotta be who you are in this world, no matter what” is his book group appraisal), Don Quixote (“It’s about a guy who is a knight in shining armor, except he lives in a world where knights don’t exist any more”) and finally The Invisible Man. Now there’s an idea; how about Washington remakes The Gemini Man? He could even re-use his watch. 


McCall nurses a platonic friendship with young prostitute Alina (Chloë Grace Moretz, not wholly convincing, but trying, bless her), so you know he’s a trustworthy guy. He trains overweight colleague Ralphie (Johnny Skourtis) to pass his security guard exam, so he’s also in possession of a warm and giving heart. But he has a mysterious, cryptic past, as Teri observes during their stodgy dialogue exchanges.


McCall decides to take matters into his own hands when Teri’s nasty Russian mob pimp (Justified’s David Meunier) puts her into hospital. You see, he’s just like Clint in Unforgiven only with none of the nuance. He promised his wife he would put away violent things, but now she is gone there’s nothing stopping him spreading maximum carnage. And besides, these guys are evil bastards. And they’re Russian! The worst! How fortuitous to have Denzel’s encapsulation of the Land of the Free on tap, putting it to those depraved vodka-binging interlopers.  How dare they? They have no respect for foreign borders. Today the Ukraine, tomorrow America!


It would at least be something to be able to read a meagre subtext into this, such as McCall’s unfiltered excesses symbolising the unassailable rectitude of US foreign policy. After all, the man behind this is Russian oligarch Vladmir Pushkin (Vladimir Kulich). Why, that’s sounds very similar to… Putin may not be keen on the oligarchs but what’s that to Richard Wenk, the screenwriter who penned The Expendables 2 and The Mechanic? Really, though, the level of invention here tells us it’s purely that Russians are in season as Hollywood villains again (see also Jack Ryan: Shadow Recruit). And with McCall an ex-CIA guy (the TV series never made this explicit), it’s only appropriate he should have a Spetsnaz opposite number with whom to lock horns and butt heads.


Martin Csokas’ Teddy is aforesaid Russkie, a tattooed psychopath with a Hitler haircut, one who works for Pushkin. Teddy steers a path of icy calm (at first) that mirrors McCall’s, and Csokas is clearly having the most fun among the cast. We’ve seen him in everything from The Lord of the Rings to The Bourne Supremacy to this summer’s The Amazing Spider-Man 2; his Dr Kafka was an OTT highlight, albeit much derided by many. As ruthlessly efficient as Teddy is, he’s no match for McCall, even with a batch of uncouth goons at his side. There are a couple of effective scenes between Washington and Csokas that don’t involve blood baths, where the two actors are able to surmount the hokey dialogue; best of these is an impromptu restaurant tête-à-tête in which McCall lets the over-confident Teddy know he has the lowdown on him.


But that’s the essence of the problem with The Equalizer. Effective individual scenes that fail to amount to anything memorable. The best of the action sequences comes early on (relatively; the movie really takes its time getting going, a big problem when the characters fail to engage). McCall brings $9,800 to Meunier to buy out his interest in Alina. This is prelude to McCall’s storm. Surrounded by heavies, he shows nerves of steel and even indulges his OCD by rearranging skull paperweights. When he gets turned down he looks to be leaving, but instead repeatedly opens and closes the office door before going to work, timing his precision-engineered massacre on his watch (there’s more than a whiff of the pre-meditated fight planning in Guy Ritchie’s Sherlock Holmes movies). Much shooting and stabbing and snapping ensue, reaching a grizzly plateau when McCall skewers one goon with a corkscrew beneath the jaw that promptly come ups through his open mouth. Delightful!


This is superior to the home store climax, in which Denzel, Predator-like, takes out his superior-armed enemies with alacrity, barbed wire, power tools, and a nail gun. While the corkscrewing and a garrotting were edited to get this a 15 certificate (ridiculously arbitrary, as it feels like an 18), and thus presumably more bums on seats, the Driller Killer moment was not among them. Which means it must be the only example of constraint here (we don’t see it work havoc on Ivan’s cranium). The showdown does go on a bit, a common symptom of modern Hollywood, and that’s after it takes the mob an inordinate amount of time not to kill the first hostage after Teddy gives the order. But to succeed would mean McCall screwed up, so we can’t have that. Ralphie, his useless fat sidekick, even returns to help McCall at a crucial moment and thus prove he isn’t so fat and useless after all (it’s Sergeant Al Powell Syndrome). Fuqua ensures much of the violence is cathartically played out, even if he overdoes it with an “atmospheric” sprinkler system deluge (he also does the walk away from a huge explosion in slow motion, so he's clearly fond of dusty visual devices); Denzel as the unstoppable force, and he makes the unsavoury palatable because these are such unutterably awful blighters. McCall even gives them repeated chances to back out but they refuse, the fools.


Of course, the final act should never have occurred. McCall, remarkably efficient when it comes to premeditating his opponents’ behaviour, and MacGuyver-like in his ability to fashion surveillance equipment out of bits and bobs, manages not to take any notice of Teddy’s warning that he will come for those closest. If he was really good, and not a victim to screenwriting inconsistency, McCall would have sent Ralphie, his mom, and any co-workers away for a fun-packed weekend in the country while he took care of business.


McCall is Batman, just less aerodynamic. That’s why, as soon as he gets back in the game there’s a near-montage of needy souls to defend. Although, his alter ego is more akin to Hong Kong Phooey. Remarkable how these things go. All that time, nothing, and then one day the floodgates open. So he sorts out some dirty cops (they missed a trick in this scene, not having him backlit like Woodward in the TV series titles), and takes care of an armed robber (with a hammer he dutifully returns to the store; what kind of self-respecting vigilante would allow innocents to purchase a murder weapon?). Dear Denzel even returns the stolen ring his co-worker’s grandmother gave her. He just can’t help himself. 


In among the dirty cops is the second appearance in two weeks for David Harbour, who gives a colourful turn, full of spleen. His character, Masters, is involved in one of the superior McCall grandstanding sequences in which Mr Equalizer visits a money laundering operation and shuts it down without firing a shot (there is also an oblique reference to a Special Agent Moseley, FBI, on the payroll list McCall accesses, but I can’t figure out why this picture would make a shout out to Midnight Run).


The TV series really wasn’t all that good. It had a superb theme tune courtesy of Stewart Copeland (the most unforgivable aspect of this remake is that it doesn’t even have the artistic decency to recognise a good thing and rework it; further compounding this omission is the bludgeoning score from Harry Gregson-Williams, one remove from a cacophony) and exciting, atmospheric, opening titles, but mostly it was rather dull and plodding. The show had the same basic plot as The A-Team, but with a veneer of edginess. What random stranger needs McCall’s help this week? When they remade The A-Team as a movie, they at least made some attempt to stay true to the characters. But McCall was Edward Woodward; the series was defined by the incongruity of an aging British actor righting wrongs in NYC (the movie transfers him to Boston). Without him, it’s only another non-descript crime-fighting TV show. And, without such unlikely casting, you have another bland but violent vigilante movie, Cskokas and cameos from Melissa Leo and (bland) Bill Pullman aside. So they have that in common; indeed the unselfconscious corniness of the movie is the one element where it can stand shoulder-to-shoulder with ‘80s US TV.


A problem with Washington’s work is that he’s so conservative and reliable in his choices. He rarely surprises, and he’s rarely adventurous. On the plus side, you know what you’re getting; all he has to do is glower or turn on the ever-so-slightly-goofy charm. But, even if his movies aren’t, there’s a ponderous feel to his choices. Even though he’s eminently watchable, he tends to make pictures that aren’t memorable, don’t linger in the mind, and don’t really have anything to say or even an interesting way of not saying it. There’s no need for The Equalizer to take as long it does not to say anything or, more perfunctorily, to crunch all the bones it feels obliged to crunch.


But you can’t say Denzel doesn’t equalize the shit out of this move. Unlike the likes of Unforgiven or Man on Fire, where all this violence takes its toll, McCall is positively rejuvenated by his headlong pitch into mass murder. And it seems there could be an Equalizer 2. I’ll believe it when I see it, since Washington has conspicuously avoided sequels throughout his career. By the end of The Equalizer we see how things have moved on since the ‘80s; rather than using a newspaper, McCall advertises online. He’ll probably have a Facebook page and a Twitter account too come Part 2.



Comments

Popular posts from this blog

How would Horatio Alger have handled this situation?

Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas (1998) (SPOILERS) Gilliam’s last great movie – The Zero Theorem (2013) is definitely underrated, but I don’t think it’s that underrated – Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas could easily have been too much. At times it is, but in such instances, intentionally so. The combination of a visual stylist and Hunter S Thompson’s embellished, propulsive turn of phrase turns out, for the most part, to be a cosmically aligned affair, embracing the anarchic abandon of Raoul Duke and Doctor Gonzo’s Las Vegas debauch while contriving to pull back at crucial junctures in order to engender a perspective on all this hedonism. Would Alex Cox, who exited stage left, making way for the Python, have produced something interesting? I suspect, ironically, he would have diluted Thompson in favour of whatever commentary preoccupied him at the time (indeed, Johnny Depp said as much: “ Cox had this great material to work with and he took it and he added his own stuff to it ”). Plus

He’s so persistent! He always gets his man.

Speed (1994) (SPOILERS) It must have been a couple of decades since I last viewed Speed all the way through, so it’s pleasing to confirm that it holds up. Sure, Jan de Bont’s debut as a director can’t compete with the work of John McTiernan, for whom he acted as cinematographer and who recommended de Bont when he passed on the picture, but he nevertheless does a more than competent work. Which makes his later turkeys all the more tragic. And Keanu and Sandra Bullock display the kind of effortless chemistry you can’t put a price tag on. And then there’s Dennis Hopper, having a great old sober-but-still-looning time.

But everything is wonderful. We are in Paris.

Cold War (2018) (SPOILERS) Pawel Pawlikowski’s elliptical tale – you can’t discuss Cold War without saying “elliptical” at least once – of frustrated love charts a course that almost seems to be a caricature of a certain brand of self-congratulatorily tragic European cinema. It was, it seems “ loosely inspired ” by his parents (I suspect I see where the looseness comes in), but there’s a sense of calculation to the progression of this love story against an inescapable political backdrop that rather diminishes it.

You were a few blocks away? What’d you see it with, a telescope?

The Eyes of Laura Mars (1978) (SPOILERS) John Carpenter’s first serial-killer screenplay to get made, The Eyes of Laura Mars came out nearly three months before Halloween. You know, the movie that made the director’s name. And then some. He wasn’t best pleased with the results of The Eyes of Laura Mars, which ended up co-credited to David Zelag Goodman ( Straw Dogs , Logan’s Run ) as part of an attempt by producer Jon Peters to manufacture a star vehicle for then-belle Barbra Streisand: “ The original script was very good, I thought. But it got shat upon ”. Which isn’t sour grapes on Carpenter’s part. The finished movie bears ready evidence of such tampering, not least in the reveal of the killer (different in Carpenter’s conception). Its best features are the so-uncleanly-you-can-taste-it 70s New York milieu and the guest cast, but even as an early example of the sub-genre, it’s burdened by all the failings inherit with this kind of fare.

No matter how innocent you are, or how hard you try, they’ll find you guilty.

The Wrong Man (1956) (SPOILERS) I hate to say it, but old Truffaut called it right on this one. More often than not showing obeisance to the might of Hitchcock during his career-spanning interview, the French critic turned director was surprisingly blunt when it came to The Wrong Man . He told Hitch “ your style, which has found its perfection in the fiction area, happens to be in total conflict with the aesthetics of the documentary and that contradiction is apparent throughout the picture ”. There’s also another, connected issue with this, one Hitch acknowledged: too much fidelity to the true story upon which the film is based.

To survive a war, you gotta become war.

Rambo: First Blood Part II (1985) (SPOILERS?) I’d like to say it’s mystifying that a film so bereft of merit as Rambo: First Blood Part II could have finished up the second biggest hit of 1985. It wouldn’t be as bad if it was, at minimum, a solid action movie, rather than an interminable bore. But the movie struck a chord somewhere, somehow. As much as the most successful picture of that year, Back to the Future , could be seen to suggest moviegoers do actually have really good taste, Rambo rather sends a message about how extensively regressive themes were embedding themselves in Reaganite, conservative ‘80s cinema (to be fair, this is something one can also read into Back to the Future ), be those ones of ill-conceived nostalgia or simple-minded jingoism, notional superiority and might. The difference between Stallone and Arnie movies starts right here; self-awareness. Audiences may have watched R ambo in the same way they would a Schwarzenegger picture, but I’m

The game is rigged, and it does not reward people who play by the rules.

Hustlers (2019) (SPOILERS) Sold as a female Goodfellas – to the extent that the producers had Scorsese in mind – this strippers-and-crime tale is actually a big, glossy puff piece, closer to Todd Phillips as fashioned by Lorene Scarfia. There are some attractive performances in Hustlers, notably from Constance Wu, but for all its “progressive” women work male objectification to their advantage posturing, it’s incredibly traditional and conservative deep down.

You don’t know anything about this man, and he knows everything about you.

The Man Who Knew Too Much (1956) (SPOILERS) Hitchcock’s two-decades-later remake of his British original. It’s undoubtedly the better-known version, but as I noted in my review of the 1934 film, it is very far from the “ far superior ” production Truffaut tried to sell the director on during their interviews. Hitchcock would only be drawn – in typically quotable style – that “ the first version is the work of a talented amateur and the second was made by a professional ”. For which, read a young, creatively fired director versus one clinically going through the motions, occasionally inspired by a shot or sequence but mostly lacking the will or drive that made the first The Man Who Knew Too Much such a pleasure from beginning to end.

One final thing I have to do, and then I’ll be free of the past.

Vertigo (1958) (SPOILERS) I’ll readily admit my Hitchcock tastes broadly tend to reflect the “consensus”, but Vertigo is one where I break ranks. To a degree. Not that I think it’s in any way a bad film, but I respect it rather than truly rate it. Certainly, I can’t get on board with Sight & Sound enthroning it as the best film ever made (in its 2012’s critics poll). That said, from a technical point of view, it is probably Hitch’s peak moment. And in that regard, certainly counts as one of his few colour pictures that can be placed alongside his black and white ones. It’s also clearly a personal undertaking, a medley of his voyeuristic obsessions (based on D’entre les morts by Pierre Boileau and Thomas Narcejac).

What do they do, sing madrigals?

The Singing Detective (2003) Icon’s remake of the 1986 BBC serial, from a screenplay by Dennis Potter himself. The Singing Detective fares less well than Icon’s later adaptation of Edge of Darkness , even though it’s probably more faithful to Potter’s original. Perhaps the fault lies in the compression of six episodes into a feature running a quarter of that time, but the noir fantasy and childhood flashbacks fail to engage, and if the hospital reality scans better, it too suffers eventually.