Skip to main content

He's a friend to all mankind. Pure of heart and mind!

Movies on My Mind
Week Ending 4 June 2016

Doc Savage

Have no fear, the Man of Bronze is here! I loved the 1970s Doc Savage when I was a kid. I’m fully aware that it doesn’t stand up, divested of such fledgling enthusiasm (it can’t quite sustain the camp brio of Adam West’s Batman or Roger Moore’s Bond it so wants to), but it felt like the perfect distillation of all things superheroically pulpy.

It was ahead of its time in some respects, anticipating the throwback adventuring of Lucas and Spielberg’s serialised storytelling (it even ended on a cliffhanger, and I was accordingly most disappointed there was no follow up to be had; as doubtless was Warner Bros, when the film was lacerated by critics and shunned by the public), and the po-faced, slightly sent-up heroism of the Christopher Reeve Superman.

Where it was fundamentally shipwrecked was in the choice of director Michael Anderson, never a visionary, but a guy who sometimes got lucky (Logan’s Run, a couple of years later, lives on, but more due to Jenny Agutter than filmmaking prowess). That Savage was producer George Pal’s last film also testifies to its status as the tail end of a certain approach to movie production, lumbering along rather than spurred by enthusiasm and invigoration (I say that, but Flash Gordon, also camp and lumbering, has become a cult favourite).

Doc Savage was a movie that, like The Land that Time Forgot, I cherished, not as cheap and cheerful, or laughably shoddy in places, but as wildly imaginative. Can Shane Black distil the essence of the Man of Bronze? I shouldn’t really be proprietorial, as I haven’t read any of the stories, and for some strange reason have a desire to see him done right because of a movie most people don’t rate at all.

I think if anyone can, Black can. He’s got a lead with bags of natural charisma and a great sense of humour, regardless that Dwayne Johnson hasn’t had a really strong starring role in his career thus far. There’s also the simple fact that Black’s one of the best writers in Hollywood (to be fair, there isn’t a lot of competition, but that’s not to do him down). The question that interests me less since Iron Man Three’s PG-13/12 is whether he can rein himself in for a family movie. Which leaves whether he can bring his unique style to a period romp, some forty years prior to his recent period romp. I’m betting he can; it’s only a shame this can’t leap frog The Predator into production. Oh, and he should definitely re-use the theme song.


Rogue One: A Star Wars Story

So Disney suits didn’t warm to a movie all the pre-publicity announced was tonally different from a straight, episodic Star Wars movie, owing to it being more of a war movie, because they’ve now discovered it’s tonally different from a straight, episodic Star Wars movie, owing to it being more of a war movie? Well, it’s good to know they keep up with their memos. I suspect this means that, if Alan Tudyk’s droid wasn’t a funny droid before, he will be now, because, you know, Tudyk is a funny guy. 

I didn’t have much anticipation for this from the get-go, and the trailer failed to change that one iota. The cumulative sense from Monsters and Godzilla is that Gareth Edwards might be best off making movies carrying a glacially distant, cerebral theme (if he could just find one), but with bags of action, so getting past the small problem of not really being able to invest in his characters. His visuals are full of portent, but unsupported by content. But hey, I’m sure this will be a fun-filled romp by the time the reshoots are complete. Alternatively, all of the above (including some reports suggesting up to 40% is to be done over, which does sound absurd) is BS, and there's no big deal at all. Which may or may not be damage limitation and spin.  


Monster Trucks

Just, WTF? It boggles the mind, this. I’d understand if Chris Wedge made Monster Trucks as some sort of vanity project package, guaranteeing an Ice Age 19, but it’s from Paramount. Perhaps that explains it; they’re a studio desperate for a decent franchise (they have Transformers, but I did say decent), or one they can keep afloat (I’m looking at you Star Trek, and Jack Reacher), and are unable to boast even a successful animation beyond SpongeBob. Thus they have a string of pictures audiences will struggle to find remotely enticing, including a Rings sequel, xXx3, Ghost in the Shell, Baywatch, and World War Z 2. The latter might turn out okay, depending on whether zombie fatigue has set in, but there lie slim pickings.

And what’s with animators’ obsession with cars? Is it because they were all nerds and they’re now enacting some sort of wish fulfilment over being uncool at school? I have no idea how Monster Trucks got the green light, and why anyone thought E.T. developing a symbiotic relationship with a carburettor would sell tickets. On one level I admire the flagrant impulse to flush money down the toilet. On another, the pursuit of the most banal imagining imaginable is quite tragic. The creative equivalent of a sterile promontory, but then, this is from Derek Connolly, co-writer of the highly imaginative Jurassic World and the likely to be equally so Kong: Skull Island. And, alas Star Wars Episode IX. I hope no one’s expecting Monster Trucks to make a fortune. Or even half of what Cars 2 brought in (minus merchandising).


No Exit

Last week I expressed my doubts over the glorification of Deepwater Horizon, with Peter Berg turning an environmental disaster into a chronicle of oil rig heroes battling the odds. No Exit is another upcoming tale of valour in the face of the scourging of nature, documenting the 2013 Yarnell fire in Arizona and focussing on the Granite Mountain Hotshots, only one of 20 of whom survived. This sounds like more laudable subject matter than the Beg movie (or treatment thereof, at least, with the caveat that the screenwriter also penned Black Hawk Down), but it still feels like the pursuit of a vague, slender hope of audience response. We all know firefighting movies are popular. To wit Backdraft, and Ladder 49

The big shame is how director Joseph Kosinski’s TRON 3 fell through last year, after Disney (of all studios, given they have more dead certs than any kid on the block) got cold feet and pulled the plug. I bet now they’re wishing they’d gone with it rather than Alice 2. One has a definite cult following, the other had a definite number of kids trying out 3D specs. There’s a vocal view out there proclaiming that TRON: Legacy sucks, but purveyors of such opinions probably also decry Prometheus. They’re both movies with more than their share of flaws, but if you can’t get with the plus points, well, I pity the fool.

Batman v Superman: Brunch of Justice

Sure, there have been longer versions in the past that have either completely salvaged (Once upon a Time in America) or rehabilitated (Heaven’s Gate) maligned or mangled movies. Generally, though, these have been arisen from the ashes of studio edicts or tampering in the first place. To be fair, I doubt the longer cut will harm Batman v Superman in any way. It might make it even duller, yes, but I feel fairly certain it couldn’t render the opening half less coherent. Unlike many, I didn’t outright despise the picture, but I felt it fundamentally lacked drive and pace, which is probably the worst thing for a superhero movie.


Box Office

The summer sequel slaughter continues. I didn’t expect most of these to improve on the performance of the originals, but neither did I expect audience indifference to so accurately mirror my complete lack of interest in The Huntsman: Winter’s War, Neighbors 2: Sorority Rising, Alice Through the Looking Glass and now Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: Out of the Shadows. Which arrives with an opening weekend take of about half the original’s. And is anyone going to line up for Now You See Me 2 next week?

At least The Conjuring 2 ought to perform, so that weekend shouldn’t be a complete flounder (Warcraft also topples headfirst onto US screens, having failed to make much impact internationally). For the rest of June, Finding Dory is a no-brainer. Can Central Intelligence find a space for itself? Independence Day: Resurgence might prove to be an Alice 2, or it might be a less substantial echo of Jurassic World  (it at very least needed Will Smith to stand a chance of being that kind of monster). And Free State of Jones might prove successful counterprogramming, or it might just disappear.

The potential for further summer cinematic corpses doesn’t end there. In July, The BFG and Jason Bourne ought to click, The Purge: Election Year will probably turn out fine, and The Secret Life of Pets might benefit from not being a sequel at that point, or get crushed by Ice Age 5. Ghostbusters, Star Trek Beyond and The Legend of Tarzan have big question marks hanging over them, though. And in August, while Suicide Squad is sure to open, less confident are Pete’s Dragon, War Dogs and – surely a stinker of Warcraft proportions – Ben-Hur.  

Does this mean kids thought TMNT 1 was lousy, all told? In which case, there’s hope for the next generation, and its success can be put down to the kind of aberrance that saw Inspector Gadget garner an audience. Perhaps international grosses will make up the difference for Out of the Shadows. If not, bring on the next reboot.

Agree? Disagree? Mildly or vehemently? Let me know in the comments below.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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).

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.