Skip to main content

W.A.R.A. Now, what the hell is that?

Sky Riders
(1976)

(SPOILERS) In Sky Riders, fiendish terrorists have kidnapped the wife and children of wealthy industrialist Jonas Bracken (Robert Culp) and, unsurprisingly, the authorities aren’t much use getting them back. In times such as this, what you need is an estranged husband, a bit of a maverick, the kind of guy who can get things done: step in, New York cop John McClane. Or, failing him, vagabond black marketer Jim McCabe (James Coburn). If nothing else, he’ll come up with a barking mad scheme to get his (sort of) family back. And it might just work.


McCabe’s plan is to rescue Ellen Bracken (Susannah York) and her two kids (one of whom is McCabe’s) from the remote mountain monastery where they’re held by hang-gliding in on a moonlit night. McCabe has never had a lick of hang gliding experience, but it’s okay as he’s persuaded the circus troupe training him up in double quick time to come along. Quite why they are so content to pick up arms and kill people (and get killed themselves) is just one of the many pertinent questions Sky Riders fails to address.


It’s okay though, as for the most part this very definition of high concept action thriller gets by through not hang (gliding) around for long enough to debate its own silliness. Credit is due to reliable B-director Douglas Hickox (his best known picture is Theatre of Blood, but he also delivered John Wayne-in-London cop thriller Brannigan and the Zulu prequel no one asked for, Zulu Dawn) for keeping the Greek locations scenic and the pace from flagging. Still, it’s that kind of pre-blockbuster era action picture that devolves into a climax with lots of random people shooting at each other (including, for some reason, the Greek police allowing Culp to pick up a machine gun and have a go; perhaps he slipped them a drachma or two?)


Weren’t ‘70s terrorists the worst, though? They could show up anytime, any place, anywhere, without any warning and armed with the most rudimentary of schemes and shaky of convictions. In this case the World Activist Revolutionary Army have a mission “to liberate the oppressed peoples of the world”, “fighting the tyranny of worldwide imperialism”. Which is all well and good. I suppose you have to start somewhere. 


But they haven’t really though this out, certainly not their nameless leader (Werner Pochath, who looks about 12; a bit like casting Matt Smith as a terrorist mastermind, Sky Pirates could have really used a big cheese with some oomph). As it is, Pochath is thoroughly undermined as soon as he divulges his ethos to Ellen (they must use force against force, commit murder for murder and allow no compromise) who gives him a slow clap.


Still, fair dues to them, they’re just doing their best. Which is why, after demanding $5 million from Culp, they proceed to add a whole arsenal of weapons to their list.  They have some semblance of order though, what with their pretty cool hideout (also used in For Your Eyes Only) and matching t-shirts.


If the terrorists are unimposing lot (Jason Voorhees hockey masks aside), so are the circus freaks. And, if you’re casting Robert Culp, you could at least make use of his sense of humour. Having both Coburn and Culp in a movie is a bit of a coup, but no one capitalises on it (initially there’s suspicion Culp might have been involved, but once the set up is established there aren’t any surprises in store). No less than six writers worked on the picture, which you’d never believe to look at it.


Besides Culp, there’s crooner Charles Aznavour as the obstructive Greek Inspector Nikolidis and cameos from Harry Andrews and Kenneth Griffith as chums of McCabe. The latter is particularly good value, ribbing McCabe over how Ellen looks ten years younger now she’s left him (“What a difference a good marriage can make, aye McCabe?”) He also evidences why kidnappers should always photograph their captives against a black backdrop.


The suggestion, left at that, is that Ellen was the unwitting goods in a transaction between Jonas and Jim; the former gets the girl in exchange for a 5-year sentence commuted to 2 for the latter. It’s not dwelt upon though, and while it’s clear that Ellen sees Jim as a real man, he’s still, come the last scene –as a real man would be – left on his own, shot up, and assuring her there’s no hurry for his kid know his true identity. So instead, Coburn makes chums with Aznavour as he’s stretchered out. Very Casablanca.


York wasn’t getting a huge number of memorable roles by this point in the ‘70s, albeit The Shout and Superman’s mum were just around the corner. She’s a very yummy mummy in this, and is very much in the Bonnie Bedelia mode of not putting up with any shit (but still need a man to save her). It’s easy to see why Coburn would go chasing after her and can’t even be mad he doesn’t get her back (“You always did put me through hell, baby”).


Mostly though, this is Coburn’s show. He’s a guy with a million dollar grin (after the introductory scene, he doesn’t flash it until past the half hour mark, though; things are that serious!) and struts white flared suits like nobody’s business. Indeed, at one point he’s wearing a shirt with collars the size of pterodactyl wings, and it looks like the most natural ensemble in the world. McCabe’s so damn rugged, he quips “I’ll walk back” after the last hang glider escapes the monastery without him. He doesn’t of course; he leaps on the landing skid of a helicopter and then gets shot full of lead. What a guy!


You can see Sky Riders in all its glory on YouTube (in widescreen too), often the sign of something even the studios can’t be bothered to defend, but it’s actually not a bad movie. Undemanding, daft, but with a solid cast and a director who knows what he’s doing. The big sell of the hang gliding stunts is probably the least of its attractions, but it’s a reminder of an all round happier time, when terrorists could be snuffed out just like that and the world had James Coburn on speed dial to get it out of a tight spot.











Comments

Popular posts from this blog

They'll think I've lost control again and put it all down to evolution.

Time Bandits (1981) (SPOILERS) Terry Gilliam had co-directed previously, and his solo debut had visual flourish on its side, but it was with Time Bandits that Gilliam the auteur was born. The first part of his Trilogy of Imagination, it remains a dazzling work – as well as being one of his most successful – rich in theme and overflowing with ideas while resolutely aimed at a wide (family, if you like) audience. Indeed, most impressive about Time Bandits is that there’s no evidence of self-censoring here, of attempting to make it fit a certain formula, format or palatable template.

Oh, you got me right in the pantaloons, partner.

The Party (1968) (SPOILERS) Blake Edwards’ semi-improvisational reunion with Peter Sellers is now probably best known for – I was going to use an elephant-in-the-room gag, but at least one person already went there – Sellers’ “brown face”. And it isn’t a decision one can really defend, even by citing The Party ’s influence on Bollywood. Satyajit Ray had also reportedly been considering working with Sellers… and then he saw the film. One can only assume he’d missed similar performances in The Millionairess and The Road to Hong Kong ; in the latter case, entirely understandable, if not advisable. Nevertheless, for all the flagrant stereotyping, Sellers’ bungling Hrundi V Bakshi is a very likeable character, and indeed, it’s the piece’s good-natured, soft centre – his fledgling romance with Claudine Longet’s Michele – that sees The Party through in spite of its patchy, hit-and-miss quality.

I never strangled a chicken in my life!

Rope (1948) (SPOILERS) Rope doesn’t initially appear to have been one of the most venerated of Hitchcocks, but it has gone through something of a rehabilitation over the years, certainly since it came back into circulation during the 80s. I’ve always rated it highly; yes, the seams of it being, essentially, a formal experiment on the director’s part, are evident, but it’s also an expert piece of writing that uses our immediate knowledge of the crime to create tension throughout; what we/the killers know is juxtaposed with the polite dinner party they’ve thrown in order to wallow in their superiority.

You must have hopes, wishes, dreams.

Brazil (1985) (SPOILERS) Terry Gilliam didn’t consider Brazil the embodiment of a totalitarian nightmare it is often labelled as. His 1984½ (one of the film’s Fellini-riffing working titles) was “ the Nineteen Eighty-Four for 1984 ”, in contrast to Michael Anderson’s Nineteen Eighty-Four from 1948. This despite Gilliam famously boasting never to have read the Orwell’s novel: “ The thing that intrigues me about certain books is that you know them even though you’ve never read them. I guess the images are archetypal ”. Or as Pauline Kael observed, Brazil is to Nineteen Eighty-Four as “ if you’d just heard about it over the years and it had seeped into your visual imagination ”. Gilliam’s suffocating system isn’t unflinchingly cruel and malevolently intolerant of individuality; it is, in his vision of a nightmare “future”, one of evils spawned by the mechanisms of an out-of-control behemoth: a self-perpetuating bureaucracy. And yet, that is not really, despite how indulgently and glee

Miss Livingstone, I presume.

Stage Fright (1950) (SPOILERS) This one has traditionally taken a bit of a bruising, for committing a cardinal crime – lying to the audience. More specifically, lying via a flashback, through which it is implicitly assumed the truth is always relayed. As Richard Schickel commented, though, the egregiousness of the action depends largely on whether you see it as a flaw or a brilliant act of daring: an innovation. I don’t think it’s quite that – not in Stage Fright ’s case anyway; the plot is too ordinary – but I do think it’s a picture that rewards revisiting knowing the twist, since there’s much else to enjoy it for besides.

I'm an old ruin, but she certainly brings my pulse up a beat or two.

The Paradine Case (1947) (SPOILERS) Hitchcock wasn’t very positive about The Paradine Case , his second collaboration with Gregory Peck, but I think he’s a little harsh on a picture that, if it doesn’t quite come together dramatically, nevertheless maintains interest on the basis of its skewed take on the courtroom drama. Peck’s defence counsel falls for his client, Alida Valli’s accused (of murder), while wife Ann Todd wilts dependably and masochistically on the side-lines.

Never lose any sleep over accusations. Unless they can be proved, of course.

Strangers on a Train (1951) (SPOILERS) Watching a run of lesser Hitchcock films is apt to mislead one into thinking he was merely a highly competent, supremely professional stylist. It takes a picture where, to use a not inappropriate gourmand analogy, his juices were really flowing to remind oneself just how peerless he was when inspired. Strangers on a Train is one of his very, very best works, one he may have a few issues with but really deserves nary a word said against it, even in “compromised” form.

A herbal enema should fix you up.

Never Say Never Again (1983) (SPOILERS) There are plenty of sub-par Bond s in the official (Eon) franchise, several of them even weaker than this opportunistic remake of Thunderball , but they do still feel like Bond movies. Never Say Never Again , despite – or possibly because he’s part of it – featuring the much-vaunted, title-referencing return of the Sean Connery to the lead role, only ever feels like a cheap imitation. And yet, reputedly, it cost more than the same year’s Rog outing Octopussy .

I don’t like fighting at all. I try not to do too much of it.

Cuba (1979) (SPOILERS) Cuba -based movies don’t have a great track record at the box office, unless Bad Boys II counts. I guess The Godfather Part II does qualify. Steven Soderbergh , who could later speak to box office bombs revolving around Castro’s revolution, called Richard Lester’s Cuba fascinating but flawed. Which is generous of him.

You’re easily the best policeman in Moscow.

Gorky Park (1983) (SPOILERS) Michael Apted and workmanlike go hand in hand when it comes to thriller fare (his Bond outing barely registered a pulse). This adaptation of Martin Cruz Smith’s 1981 novel – by Dennis Potter, no less – is duly serviceable but resolutely unremarkable. William Hurt’s militsiya officer Renko investigates three faceless bodies found in the titular park. It was that grisly element that gave Gorky Park a certain cachet when I first saw it as an impressionable youngster. Which was actually not unfair, as it’s by far its most memorable aspect.