Skip to main content

Is your phone an Android?

Blackhat
(2015)

(SPOILERS) I’m a Michael Mann apologist. I rate Public Enemies, and I’ll even say good things about his big screen Miami Vice. With Blackhat, though, it’s as if he’s distilled all the familiar obsessions of his oeuvre (cops and criminals, men doing what men do in an unflinchingly masculine manner) and, bereft of coherent structure to support this, be it through sheer bravura style or winning performances, has been left floundering foolishly for all to see, in the most unflattering light possible. Blackhat is a ridiculous movie, one that could even be used to retrospectively mock those running themes and obsessions as they appear in his classics.


Because it isn’t as if Mann’s self-spun scripts are dazzlingly complex when it comes down to it. Heat could easily end up a forgettable L.A. Takedown TV movie without its director’s visual and aural majesty and the riveting performances. Mann plays cops and robbers in the most captivating and immersive style. In Blackhat he’s also playing cops and robbers, but he’s out of his comfort zone in applying them to the milieu of cybercrime and warfare. Worse, he ends up looking like and out-of-touch old man struggling to grasp hold of some kind of relevance in a world that increasingly mystifies him. If you add to that some bafflingly ugly and aggressively aesthetically displeasing choices in digital photography, you have a picture that has no problem in resting at the bottom of his cinematic pile.


It isn’t a complete stinker. There are a couple of decent shootouts, even if there’s no plausible good reason that they should be even there; the climax, as utterly ludicrous as it is, is at least dynamic, and there’s still something of the Mann ambient veneer to keep one occupied, courtesy of Harry Gregson-Williams and Atticus Ross’ score (with Ryan Amon pieces from Elysium used too). Stuart Dryburgh’s cinematography is mostly poop, though, presumably intentionally so when you compare it to his gorgeous work on the (otherwise redundant) The Secret Life of Walter Mitty remake.


But you expect a liberal dose of the meticulous from Mann amid his hyperrealism. Here, it’s as if he’s stumbled upon a plotline (the screenplay is courtesy of Mann and Morgan Davis Foehl) by way of a desire to insert a host of topics that have been weighing heavily on his mind. So we get nuclear catastrophes (caused by a hacker), cybercrime, with a Chinese angle by having the FBI work with their authorities (meaning China can’t be accused of perpetrating anything on this occasion) and the all-seeing eyes of the NSA (but here our hero hacks into the NSA, not the other way round; take that Big Brother!)


The mechanism by which he inflicts this upon us is to have Nicholas Hathaway (Chris Hemsworth, all blond locks and immaculately shiny chest; Thor, basically), a convicted computer hacker, released from the clink in order to help his old MIT buddy and Chinese Cyber Crime officer Chen Dawai (Leehom Wang) track down the perpetrator of the an attack on a Hong Kong nuclear facility. You see, Hathaway and Chen designed the original code of the RAT (Remote Access Tool) employed to accomplish the hack. Hathaway’s no fat, greasy cyber nerd, though (it would have been fantastic if Mann had gone that route, but he deals with worlds of real men doing really manly things; I doubt emptying one’s keyboard of crisps and spilling a litre of Coke over the portable hard drive would have appealed to him).


No, he’s super-buff, the kind of guy who can more than take care of himself, and who treats prison time like going to college. He’s better than the cops, basically. And he’s got principals too. Like Robin Hood. He only steals from the banks, since the average Joe won’t get hurt that way (the last seven years tell a different story, unfortunately, since you can’t transpose all your principles from the Old West).


So super-buff Hathaway gets investigating, and along the way falls for Chen’s sister Lien (Tang Wei, cute but forgettable; she serves the same arm candy function as Gong Li in Miami Vice, except that relationship at least had a semblance of passion; this is strictly perfunctory, and there’s zero chemistry between the leads). This leads to laborious lulls in which Hathaway says manly things, and even a moment on a helicopter, en route for some nuclear action, when Hathaway and Chen discuss sis, asking what kind of life nine more years of prison would be (as if she’d wait that long, what does he thinks she’s stupid, waiting for fat grease ball Nick all that time?)


There are also a FBI agent Viola Davis (whose character is able to engineer a 9/11 reference in the clumsiest of fashions, but that’s how relevant Mann is in this movie) and Deputy US Marshall Holt McCallany, who inevitably surf a route from despising Hathaway to respecting his skilled ways.


For a picture ostensibly concerning cybercrime, there’s precious little talk or action of that nature in the mix. Just as well, since Mann’s idea of visualising the throes technology is flying around microcircuits and putting the camera under virtual keyboards like he’s a dysfunctional David Fincher. At several points Hathaway proves his savvy in scenes that have already been roundly (and justifiably) ridiculed; he resets the timer on the marshal’s phone so he can’t trace Hathaway’s ankle bracelet. He also knows what an Android is and can use it to track Wi-Fi cos he’s a ruddy genius.


Apart from that, Nick’s deductions are of the sort that a cop should be making, and his heroics are too (Mann contrives that Nick has to go into the highly radioactive nuclear facility in order to remove a data drive; Nick’s so manly that, while others succumb to the fumes, he emerges with ne’er any radiation sickness and only a case of cancer brewing in another 10 years or so; if nothing else, Mann’s incredibly flippant and irresponsible in his treatment of the cons of nuclear industry; this might as well be last year’s Godzilla for all the realism on display).


Most bizarrely, or perhaps not as its that kind of internally batty movie, the nuclear attack serves no grand plan. It’s just a means to test out the RAT for the hacker’s big score, making money from trading tin futures (see, Mann can even get the financial crisis in there, just about). Fortunately, Hathaway knows how to hack away and foils the villain’s scheme, leading to some stabbings and shootings involving the hacker (Yorick van Wageningen; as soon as he appears – alas, right near the end – the picture musters some semblance of interest, he’s that kind of performer, but it’s too little too late) and his henchman (Ritchie Coster, playing a completely different kind of bad guy in season two of True Detective).


The climax is entirely serviceable; in another movie, with other actors, it would be suitably rousing. But Hathaway’s such an incorrigible badass geek, the result is rather silly, and the gunfire in a crowded place goes one step beyond the Collateral nightclub shootout into pure WTF? territory.


In the hands of someone from whom we expect this kind of brain-dead plotting and indifferent performing (Hemsworth is entirely bland, although I’m not blaming him necessarily), say a Michael Bay, Blackhat would be to be of expectedly bargain basement quality. Hell, take it down a notch. This is the kind of consummate daftness whereby you could see Van Damme in his prime playing Hathaway, such is the non-existent grip on anything approaching realism or believability. That feeling is added to by the cheap and nasty texture elicited by Mann, undermining the tranche of locations visited (US, Hong Kong, Malaysia, Indonesia).


Blackhat was originally called the even more underwhelming Cyber, a fair indication of just how rote and inessential this is. But has there been a decent hacker movie since War Games? I doubt that there’ll be another vying for attention in the aftermath of Blackhat, or any time soon, since it was a box office disaster (Legendary took a $90m write-down, so it’s just as well Jurassic World was round the corner).



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.

All the world will be your enemy, Prince with a Thousand Enemies.

Watership Down (1978) (SPOILERS) I only read Watership Down recently, despite having loved the film from the first, and I was immediately impressed with how faithful, albeit inevitably compacted, Martin Rosen’s adaptation is. It manages to translate the lyrical, mythic and metaphysical qualities of Richard Adams’ novel without succumbing to dumbing down or the urge to cater for a broader or younger audience. It may be true that parents are the ones who get most concerned over the more disturbing elements of the picture but, given the maturity of the content, it remains a surprise that, as with 2001: A Space Odyssey (which may on the face of it seem like an odd bedfellow), this doesn’t garner a PG certificate. As the makers noted, Watership Down is at least in part an Exodus story, but the biblical implications extend beyond Hazel merely leading his fluffle to the titular promised land. There is a prevalent spiritual dimension to this rabbit universe, one very much

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

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.

Maybe the dingo ate your baby.

Seinfeld 2.9: The Stranded The Premise George and Elaine are stranded at a party in Long Island, with a disgruntled hostess.

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.