Skip to main content

Stay quiet, stay close, and stay fast.

No Escape
(2015)

(SPOILERS) Alternatively titled Those Lousy Central Americans Really Want to Kill Poor Owen Wilson and His Dearly Beloved, this picture received not a little lambasting on its release for perceived brazen racism and xenophobia, the fear of Johnny (or gooky) foreigner writ large. And that’s not without some justification. No Escape is certainly a ridiculously insensitive movie, in which an all-American family of the United States variety are relentlessly pursued by faceless hoards, bent on their destruction, after a coup unleashes anarchy in their newly arrived locale (and Owen only went there to help the natives, that kindly patrician westerner, him!). But that’s probably (I say probably, as I’m feeling charitable) more because this a horror movie disguised as a suspense thriller disguised as cautionary tale of the dangers of being an expat in an unstable locale; it’s made by a horror director, highly effectively it must be said, and his gangs of nationality-obscure locals (the country borders Vietnam, it was filmed in Thailand) are essentially zombie legions, or the legions of the damned found in any urban, night-shrouded horror.


To wit, I don’t think No Escape is necessarily the same kind of reprehensible exhibit that, say, Blackhawk Down is. Opportunistic yes, but that comes with the genre trappings; you can see at every turn that John Erick Dowdle (co-written with his brother Drew) is thinking “How can I really make this unnerving, really tighten the screws?” and he’s very successful at hitting his target. From hapless Wilson getting caught in a street fight, to the mayhem in his besieged hotel, the tension is ratcheted up with devilish skill. I’m not familiar with the Dowdles’ previous pictures, but if this is their attempt to broaden their palette (John devised the story following a near miss with the 2006 Thai coup), he very nearly succeeds, just unfortunately failing to make the content in his genre switch any more respectable.


So yeah, No Escape might put the fear up Americans considering a sojourn in foreign climes, but it comes from the same place as putting the fear up a rural type finding themselves alone in the big city. The mechanism is more visceral than political, even though such flagrant disregard isn’t to be commended.


And besides, there is at least a dump of wholly unfinessed exposition, courtesy of Pierce Brosnan in a top-form supporting role (“Got into a foit with a toiger”), enjoying himself as a less-than-suave secret agent (and showing he still has the moves nearly a decade and a half on from his last 007 outing). He admits it’s the gluttonous West that has caused the coup (“Guys like me pave the way for guys like you to wind up here”), going on to note that the undiscerning victims don’t usually fight back; the corporations who run the UK and the US offer a loan to pay for their services, knowing the debt can’t be repaid, and then “we own them”.


The problem is, excised from the horror genre, or even the more flamboyant action movie, the successive feats of unlikely derring-do increasingly beggar belief, from Wilson throwing his kids across streets onto roofs opposite, to Lake Bell going apeshit mental with a shovel. The push-pull between grounding and pure pulp exploitation is ultimately too uneasy to make No Escape a winner, the high point coming early on, when Wilson desperately kills a man and his reaction is every bit as shocked as it should be. But as the ante is upped, with the kids used for increasingly flagrant, tension-rousing purposes (including doing very stupid things) and Bell being subject to an attempted rape, the feeling of being led into something much less judiciously managed begins to take over. Nevertheless, with the right script, Dowdle could make something really impressive at some point.


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

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

We live in a twilight world.

Tenet (2020)
(SPOILERS) I’ve endured a fair few confusingly-executed action sequences in movies – more than enough, actually – but I don’t think I’ve previously had the odd experience of being on the edge of my seat during one while simultaneously failing to understand its objectives and how those objectives are being attempted. Which happened a few times during Tenet. If I stroll over to the Wiki page and read the plot synopsis, it is fairly explicable (fairly) but as a first dive into this Christopher Nolan film, I frequently found it, if not impenetrable, then most definitely opaque.

She was addicted to Tums for a while.

Marriage Story (2019)
(SPOILERS) I don’t tend to fall heavily for Noah Baumbach fare. He’s undoubtedly a distinctive voice – even if his collaborations with Wes Anderson are the least of that director’s efforts – but his devotion to an exclusive, rarefied New York bubble becomes ever more off-putting with each new project. And ever more identifiable as being a lesser chronicler of the city’s privileged quirks than his now disinherited forbear Woody Allen, who at his peak mastered a balancing act between the insightful, hilarious and self-effacing. Marriage Story finds Baumbach going yet again where Woody went before, this time brushing up against the director’s Ingmar Bergman fixation.

You can’t climb a ladder, no. But you can skip like a goat into a bar.

Juno and the Paycock (1930)
(SPOILERS) Hitchcock’s second sound feature. Such was the lustre of this technological advance that a wordy play was picked. By Sean O’Casey, upon whom Hitchcock based the prophet of doom at the end of The Birds. Juno and the Paycock, set in 1922 during the Irish Civil War, begins as a broad comedy of domestic manners, but by the end has descended into full-blown Greek (or Catholic) tragedy. As such, it’s an uneven but still watchable affair, even if Hitch does nothing to disguise its stage origins.

James Bond. You appear with the tedious inevitability of an unloved season.

Moonraker (1979)
Depending upon your disposition, and quite possibly age, Moonraker is either the Bond film that finally jumped the shark or the one that is most gloriously redolent of Roger Moore’s knowing take on the character. Many Bond aficionados will no doubt utter its name with thinly disguised contempt, just as they will extol with gravity how Timothy Dalton represented a masterful return to the core values of the series. If you regard For Your Eyes Only as a refreshing return to basics after the excesses of the previous two entries, and particularly the space opera grandstanding of this one, it’s probably fair to say you don’t much like Roger Moore’s take on Bond.

My name is Dr. King Schultz, this is my valet, Django, and these are our horses, Fritz, and Tony.

Django Unchained (2012)
(MINOR SPOILERS) Since the painful misstep of Grindhouse/Death Proof, Quentin Tarantino has regained the higher ground like never before. Pulp Fiction, his previous commercial and critical peak, has been at very least equalled by the back-to-back hits of Inglourious Basterds and Django Unchained. Having been underwhelmed by his post Pulp Fiction efforts (albeit, I admired his technical advances as a director in Kill Bill), I was pleasantly surprised by Inglourious Basterds. It was no work of genius (so not Pulp Fiction) by any means, but there was a gleeful irreverence in its treatment of history and even to the nominal heroic status of its titular protagonists. Tonally, it was a good fit for the director’s “cool” aesthetic. As a purveyor of postmodern pastiche, where the surface level is the subtext, in some ways he was operating at his zenith. Django Unchained is a retreat from that position, the director caught in the tug between his all-important aesthetic pr…

Anything can happen in Little Storping. Anything at all.

The Avengers 2.22: Murdersville
Brian Clemens' witty take on village life gone bad is one of the highlights of the fifth season. Inspired by Bad Day at Black Rock, one wonders how much Murdersville's premise of unsettling impulses lurking beneath an idyllic surface were set to influence both Straw Dogs and The Wicker Mana few years later (one could also suggest it premeditates the brand of backwoods horrors soon to be found in American cinema from the likes of Wes Craven and Tobe Hooper).

I mean, I am just a dumb bunny, but, we are good at multiplying.

Zootropolis (2016)
(SPOILERS) The key to Zootropolis’ creative success isn’t so much the conceit of its much-vaunted allegory regarding prejudice and equality, or – conversely – the fun to be had riffing on animal stereotypes (simultaneously clever and obvious), or even the appealing central duo voiced by Ginnifier Goodwin (as first rabbit cop Judy Hopps) and Jason Bateman (fox hustler Nick Wilde). Rather, it’s coming armed with that rarity for an animation; a well-sustained plot that doesn’t devolve into overblown set pieces or rest on the easy laurels of musical numbers and montages.

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.

He tasks me. He tasks me, and I shall have him.

Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan
(1982)
(SPOILERS) I don’t love Star Trek, but I do love Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan. That probably isn’t just me, but a common refrain of many a non-devotee of the series. Although, it used to apply to The Voyage Home (the funny one, with the whales, the Star Trek even the target audience for Three Men and a Baby could enjoy). Unfortunately, its high regard has also become the desperate, self-destructive, song-and-verse, be-all-and-end-all of the overlords of the franchise itself, in whichever iteration, it seems. This is understandable to an extent, as Khan is that rare movie sequel made to transcendent effect on almost every level, and one that stands the test of time every bit as well (better, even) as when it was first unveiled.

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 system when Burton did it (even…