Skip to main content

I am the Hague!

The Expendables 3
(2014)

(SPOILERS) The one more famous for being pirated pre-release than its content. I’d like to say that’s a shame. There are certainly those who will proclaim this as The Expendables movie that gets it right(er). But really, it’s more of the same as the last two, only with several additions to the cast that make it – periodically – a lot of fun. Not enough to guarantee – or merit – a fourth outing, however.


Indeed, Stallone appears to have been intent on shooting his lumbering franchise in its steroidally inflated foot, as he introduces a bunch of young bucks (and honorary doe) with all the personality of mainstay Randy Couture. It’s as perverse a decision as focussing on Rocky’s son and a new champ in Rocky V (and look how well that did). Patrick Hughes, thrown his Hollywood entrance exam following decent Oz thriller Red Hill, does his best to keep his head above water, but there’s little very memorable here, or that Simon West couldn’t have done.


The plot, such as it is, finds Sly’s Barney Ross bent on getting even on discovering old Expendable co-founder turned uber-villain Conrad Stonebanks (Mel Gibson) is still alive. He doesn’t want his erstwhile chums to meet a grizzly fate (poor Terry Crews – far more watchable than Couture, so I don’t know why he had to be side-lined) so he fires the lot of them and takes on four anonymous newbies (one of whom wasn’t even memorable in Twilight), courtesy of Kelsey Grammar’s talent scout (asking what Grammar is doing here is akin to pondering why he would show up in a Transformers movie; to win that Razzie). These non-presences are at least balanced by the arrival of Antonio Banderas seemingly having the best time he’s had Stateside outside of voicing Puss in Boots.


He plays a sharpshooter no one wants to work with because he can’t stop talking. Banderas, playing (mostly – at one point he starts flirting with Ronda Rousey) against type, brings the kind of goofball energy and humour The Expendables needed from the outset. Instead, the series usually opts for tedious locker room camaraderie and groan-worthy quips.


There’s some amusement to be had from the bromance chemistry between Sly and the Stat, although most of their lines of fourth rate. Many of the ones relating to the Stat’s character, based on his surname, would have been rejected from The World is Not Enough (“Christmas is coming”; “But it’s only June”; “I’m the knife before Christmas”).


The misplaced search for a new gang (“I can do that” proclaims Sly, 69 this year, unconvinced that he can equal their feats) is thankfully replaced by the return of the old when dirty rotter Stonebanks ensnares the Expendatots. The worst of this is that Sly and his co-writers have spent the entire opening section of the movie introducing a hugely watchable Wesley Snipes (asked why he was locked up, his character Doctor Death replies sportingly “Tax evasion”; when Sly references an agency spook, Snipers doesn’t miss a beat with “Excuse me?”) He even cuts his beard with an unbelievably enormous and vicious-looking knife. Perfectly. But then, he’s gone. Snipes barely registers even when he’s brought back for the big rescue. If nothing else, it’s a reminder of what a strong screen presence he can be.


On the subject of strong screen presences, there’s Mad Mel. Gibson knows how to relish being a nasty bastard, and, unlike many of his co-stars, he has a natural intensity. It means any scene he’s in can’t help but carry a conviction the picture doesn’t really deserve. I say any scene; he’s hardly in it, but he casts a long shadow. Mel makes a particular impression escaping from his Expendable captors while riling and mocking them. Later he starts shooting his own men in frustration at their ineptitude (“How hard can it be to kill 10 men?... Couldn’t you even wound a few?”) That the picture finishes on a fairly crappy fight with the (10 years his senior, lest we forget) Sly is inevitable, but otherwise Mel makes the most of every minute he’s on screen.


The action isn’t especially memorable, and at times is just irritating (the motorbike sequence stands out in that regard). And all the big explosions are in the trailer (it’s also the case that there entire third act takes place in the same unscenic derelict warehouse). So the only things to talk about are the aging cameos. 


None more aging than Harrison Ford. Ford’s arches had fallen badly when he ill advisedly returned as Indy. It now seems that his face is following suit. Sometimes cinematographer Peter Menzies Jr looks favourably on Harrison, and he bares a resemblance to the icon of old (most of these shots are in a helicopter cockpit, where Ford sits against a green screen for the majority of his slender scenes). At others, it looks like he’s been slowly melting. Ford did at least made me laugh a few times, playing on his irascibility and failing to understand Lee Christmas’ accent (“What language is he speaking?”; “Stop mumbling!”)


Unfortunately Dolph has little to do. And neither does Arnie. He gets to reel off his Predator line “Get to the choppa!” several times, to rather desperate effect. But then, something very peculiar happens. He’s paired up with Jet Li, and the genuinely hilarious, playful Arnie is let loose. He accuses Sly of jealousy at their special relationship, while Li mocks Lundgren; “Tall people don’t live long”.


Robert Davi (Special Agent Johnson) appears for all of one scene, alas. The Expendables 3 is fundamentally quite crappy, but there’s enough sporadically likable silliness to make this, by a whisker, the most enjoyable of the trilogy. Just follow the through line from Snipes to Gibson to Banderas and on to Arnie and Li (there’s a good 10 minutes post-final fight, but the latter duo make it bearable). Stallone wisely (at least since the early ‘90s) contents himself with being the eternal straight man.


Popular posts from this blog

Your Mickey Mouse is one big stupid dope!

Enemy Mine (1985) (SPOILERS) The essential dynamic of Enemy Mine – sworn enemies overcome their differences to become firm friends – was a well-ploughed one when it was made, such that it led to TV Tropes assuming, since edited, that it took its title from an existing phrase (Barry Longyear, author of the 1979 novella, made it up, inspired by the 1961 David Niven film The Best of Enemies ). The Film Yearbook Volume 5 opined that that Wolfgang Petersen’s picture “ lacks the gritty sauciness of Hell in the Pacific”; John Boorman’s WWII film stranded Lee Marvin and Toshiro Mifune on a desert island and had them first duking it out before becoming reluctant bedfellows. Perhaps germanely, both movies were box office flops.

If I do nothing else, I will convince them that Herbert Stempel knows what won the goddam Academy Award for Best goddam Picture of 1955. That’s what I’m going to accomplish.

Quiz Show (1994) (SPOILERS) Quiz Show perfectly encapsulates a certain brand of Best Picture nominee: the staid, respectable, diligent historical episode, a morality tale in response to which the Academy can nod their heads approvingly and discerningly, feeding as it does their own vainglorious self-image about how times and attitudes have changed, in part thanks to their own virtuousness. Robert Redford’s film about the 1950s Twenty-One quiz show scandals is immaculately made, boasts a notable cast and is guided by a strong screenplay from Paul Attanasio (who, on television, had just created the seminal Homicide: Life on the Streets ), but it lacks that something extra that pushes it into truly memorable territory.

Say hello to the Scream Extractor.

Monsters, Inc. (2001) (SPOILERS) I was never the greatest fan of Monsters, Inc. , even before charges began to be levelled regarding its “true” subtext. I didn’t much care for the characters, and I particularly didn’t like the way Pixar’s directors injected their own parenting/ childhood nostalgia into their plots. Something that just seems to go on with their fare ad infinitum. Which means the Pixars I preferred tended to be the Brad Bird ones. You know, the alleged objectivist. Now, though, we learn Pixar has always been about the adrenochrome, so there’s no going back…

Other monks will meet their deaths here. And they too will have blackened fingers. And blackened tongues.

The Name of the Rose (1986) (SPOILERS) Umberto Eco wasn’t awfully impressed by Jean Jacques-Annaud’s adaptation of his novel – or “ palimpsest of Umberto Eco’s novel ” as the opening titles announce – to the extent that he nixed further movie versions of his work. Later, he amended that view, calling it “ a nice movie ”. He also, for balance, labelled The Name of the Rose his worst novel – “ I hate this book and I hope you hate it too ”. Essentially, he was begrudging its renown at the expense of his later “ superior ” novels. I didn’t hate the novel, although I do prefer the movie, probably because I saw it first and it was everything I wanted from a medieval Sherlock Holmes movie set in a monastery and devoted to forbidden books, knowledge and opinions.

No one can be told what the Matrix is. You have to see it for yourself.

The Matrix  (1999) (SPOILERS) Twenty years on, and the articles are on the defining nature of The Matrix are piling up, most of them touching on how its world has become a reality, or maybe always was one. At the time, its premise was engaging enough, but it was the sum total of the package that cast a spell – the bullet time, the fashions, the soundtrack, the comic book-as-live-action framing and styling – not to mention it being probably the first movie to embrace and reflect the burgeoning Internet ( Hackers doesn’t really count), and subsequently to really ride the crest of the DVD boom wave. And now? Now it’s still really, really good.

Piece by piece, the camel enters the couscous.

The Forgiven (2021) (SPOILERS) By this point, the differences between filmmaker John Michael McDonagh and his younger brother, filmmaker and playwright Martin McDonagh, are fairly clearly established. Both wear badges of irreverence and provocation in their writing, and a willingness to tackle – or take pot-shots – at bigger issues, ones that may find them dangling their toes in hot water. But Martin receives the lion’s share of the critical attention, while John is generally recognised as the slightly lesser light. Sure, some might mistake Seven Psychopaths for a John movie, and Calvary for a Martin one, but there’s a more flagrant sense of attention seeking in John’s work, and concomitantly less substance. The Forgiven is clearly aiming more in the expressly substantial vein of John’s earlier Calvary, but it ultimately bears the same kind of issues in delivery.

You ever heard the saying, “Don’t rob the bank across from the diner that has the best donuts in three counties”?

2 Guns (2013) (SPOILERS) Denzel Washington is such a reliable performer, that it can get a bit boring. You end up knowing every gesture or inflection in advance, whether he’s playing a good guy or a bad guy. And his films are generally at least half decent, so you end up seeing them. Even in Flight (or perhaps especially in Flight ; just watch him chugging down that vodka) where he’s giving it his Oscar-nominatable best, he seems too familiar. I think it may be because he’s an actor who is more effective the less he does. In 2 Guns he’s not doing less, but sometimes it seems like it. That’s because the last person I’d ever expect blows him off the screen; Mark Wahlberg.

Twenty dwarves took turns doing handstands on the carpet.

Bugsy (1991) (SPOILERS) Bugsy is very much a Warren Beatty vanity project (aren’t they all, even the ones that don’t seem that way on the surface?), to the extent of his playing a title character a decade and a half younger than him. As such, it makes sense that producer Warren’s choice of director wouldn’t be inclined to overshadow star Warren, but the effect is to end up with a movie that, for all its considerable merits (including a script from James Toback chock full of incident), never really feels quite focussed, that it’s destined to lead anywhere, even if we know where it’s going.

In a few moments, you will have an experience that will seem completely real. It will be the result of your subconscious fears transformed into your conscious awareness.

Brainstorm (1983) (SPOILERS) Might Brainstorm have been the next big thing – a ground-breaking, game-changing cinematic spectacle that had as far reaching consequences as Star Wars (special effects) or Avatar (3D) – if only Douglas Trumbull had been allowed to persevere with his patented “Showscan” process (70mm film photographed and projected at 60 frames per second)? I suspect not; one only has to look at the not-so-far-removed experiment of Ang Lee with Billy Lynn’s Long Halftime Walk , and how that went down like a bag of cold sick, to doubt that any innovation will necessarily catch on (although Trumbull at least had a narrative hinge on which to turn his “more real than real” imagery, whereas Lee’s pretty much boiled down to “because it was there”). Brainstorm ’s story is, though, like its title, possibly too cerebral, too much concerned with the consciousness and touting too little of the cloyingly affirmative that Bruce Rubin inevitably brings to his screenplays. T

Haven’t you ever heard of the healing power of laughter?

Batman (1989) (SPOILERS) There’s Jaws , there’s Star Wars , and then there’s Batman in terms of defining the modern blockbuster. Jaws ’ success was so profound, it changed the way movies were made and marketed. Batman’s marketing was so profound, it changed the way tentpoles would be perceived: as cash cows. Disney tried to reproduce the effect the following year with Dick Tracy , to markedly less enthusiastic response. None of this places Batman in the company of Jaws as a classic movie sold well, far from it. It just so happened to hit the spot. As Tim Burton put it, it was “ more of a cultural phenomenon than a great movie ”. It’s difficult to disagree with his verdict that the finished product (for that is what it is) is “ mainly boring ”. Now, of course, the Burton bat has been usurped by the Nolan incarnation (and soon the Snyder). They have some things in common. Both take the character seriously and favour a sombre tone, which was much more of shock to the