Skip to main content

Big bada boom.

The Fifth Element
(1997)

(SPOILERS) Goofy movies that don’t announce their intent or stick to clearly-defined genre templates can get a rough ride. Ones that exhibit a “European” sense of humour even more so. Luc Besson’s long-gestating science fiction fantasy action comedy (he had the idea when he was 15, which critics would surely claim tells you everything) is underpinned by the simplest – some would say trite and hackneyed – of concepts, but unlike, say, Ridley Scott’s Legend, which also paints on the most unsophisticated of thematic canvasses, The Fifth Element’s core sincerity is diffused by overwhelming irreverence everywhere else. This is a mad, crazy, whacky, indulgent, over the top, immensely likeable rush of a movie, added to which it boasts design work as breath-taking as Blade Runner’s, albeit shooting in completely the opposite direction. Most of all, it is shamelessly, flamboyantly camp, which can be a very difficult sell to more conservative tastes.


If I were to find fault in The Fifth Element, I might point to that freeze-frame ending, which is on the naff side (and much as I like the Roger Moore Bonds, repeating the “He’s busy shagging sir” motif doesn’t quite work here; more in tune is the stewardess climaxing via Ruby as a bomb goes off), and that Leeloo’s reaction to all the hurt that humans inflict, even in such an intentionally unrefined manner as depicted here, is so overdone, it’s difficult not to groan at the faux-naivety. But those are relatively minor shortcomings. I adore the picture’s exuberance, its dedication to being its own thing, kowtowing to no one for pointers on acceptable approaches or genre boundaries. Such individuality, though, can do for a picture if it’s unleashed on unsympathetic critics and audiences. It’s particularly notable that the movie made 75% of its take outside the US (it came in ninth for the year globally), even with the Brucie bonus factor to bolster its appeal.


Ah yes, Bruce Willis. Even at his zenith, Willis’ bankability was patchy, but he still managed a Top 10 movie globally in five years of that decade. The Fifth Element represents something of a transition point, however. This is the last time we will really see fun Bruce Willis, the Bruce Willis who, for all the stories of an unchained ego, delivered something charismatic and relatable, above and beyond the all-purpose steely, impassive gaze masquerading as depth or thoughtfulness (and more commonly an all-purpose steely, impassive gaze on auto-pilot). 


This is just about the last time we’d reap dividends from Willis’ willingness to mock himself or not take himself and his “craft” seriously (he even gets bopped on the head, and doesn’t shoot anyone until the third act). Sure, there are a few comedic exceptions later (Disney’s The Kid, The Whole Nine Yards) but they aren’t ones to be celebrated. Here we get Willis with his Die Hard gun-toting and his whip smart, whacky, mouthing off (Hudson Hawk), and it’s refreshing to recall just why he was a star back then. He has long-since calcified, alas.


He looks like he’s having a ball here, but then again so does Gary Oldman as villain Jean-Baptiste Emanuel Zorg. Oldman later attested that he took the gig merely to return a favour to Besson, commenting “Oh no. I can’t bear it”. Which is a shame, as he’s great, rising to the occasion of cartoonish eccentricity-and-then-some in a role where he doesn’t even share screen time with the protagonist (his arms sale to the incompetent Mangalores – “My favourite”, as he lets off a flamethrower – is a particular delight). Of course, Willis’ villains have a habit of blanking all notion of the merit in his more madcap vehicles, with Richard E Grant failing to register the appeal of Hudson Hawk (“What drugs do you take, young man?”), a similarly curate’s egg of a movie.


Almost everyone here could be said to elicit mixed responses from audiences, none more so than Chris Tucker’s Ruby Rhod. I’m generally quite cool on Tucker’s schtick (not that there’s much of it to assess, outside of Rush Hour sequels), but he slays it as the motor-mouthed pan-sexual Prince clone (the role was originally intended for the recently deceased purple pop star), and somehow gets away with implied cunnilingus in PG-rated fare. 


And where else could you gather such an eclectic cast? Willis sharing screen time with Lee Evans?! Gary Oldman accompanied by henchman Tricky (and the latter quite funny at that)? Tiny Lister as the President of Earth? Brion James as a good guy? Ian Holm doing comedy Ian Holm (and stealing whole scenes; he completely gets Besson’s tone)? Luke Perry…


There’s also John Bennett showing up as an Egyptian, continuing his status as a go-to for various ethnicities, and two decades after donning yellow face in Doctor Who’s The Talons of Weng-Chiang. Not that I think Besson would have seen it, but the casting here generally does suggest jackdaw appreciation of genre fare, from Gilliam (Holm in Brazil rather than Holm in Alien, John Neville in The Adventures of Baron Munchausen), to the aforementioned James (more in Crimewave mode than Blade Runner).


And Milla Jovovich as the supreme being of the universe showing a flair for comedy that’s been too-little tapped (see the Zoolanders) along with a beguiling innocence suggestive of a sexually precocious Starman (Bridges), in designer Gaultier threads (and they are mere threads, at least at the start).


Jovovich married Besson for a spell, of course, before getting hitched to Paul W Anderson and becoming most identified in the less than sterling, but financial robust, Resident Evil franchise. She’s every bit as vital to The Fifth Element’s success as Willis and Oldman, with her pigeon English and Neo-like capacity for learning Kung Fu from watching TV (I wonder where the Wachowskis got their idea from?) What exactly is the nature of Leeloo’s supreme being-ness that she goes on to have a normal relationship with a human? Besson is really unconcerned by such things; it’s a “love conquers all” scenario, not one to be analysed for literal sense, since the premise doesn’t support any kind of literal sense.


Much as I wish Besson well with his return to the lavish sci-fi well in next year’s Valerian and the City of a Thousand Planets, I’m given pause by the lead casting; Dane DeHaan, Cara Delevingne, Ethan Hawke?  DeHaan in particular is a fine actor, but there’s a distinct danger that, whatever the merits of the movie, the performers will slide indistinctly into the bold, captivating spectacle Besson is fashioning. Look what happened with the similarly star-deficient Jupiter Ascending, Godzilla, and recent Ben-Hur.


Valerian is sure to look amazing, at any rate, since Besson’s facility for science fiction world building (putting Lucy to one side) is up there with the greats. Here he eschews the darkness and gloom of dystopian sci-fi and instead accomplishes the impossible feat of something equally arresting. An over-populated, cramped, industrialised Earth that manages not to be depressing (there’s no greenery here; even the 1914 prologue is all desert), one where even the corporate culpability that is McDonalds is to be perversely celebrated/ripped. 


Mostly because he populates it with bizarre, absurd (those police uniforms), colourful costumes, daft conceits (even the cigarettes are reversed), and awesome design work from Moebius (Jean Giraud) and Valerian artist Jean-Claude Mezieres. The cityscape is amazing, the air cars extraordinary (the effects still look top notch), and the creature designs are just the right side of silly.


Dallas: Urgh, just found a picture of you.
Munro: How do I look?
Dallas: Like shit.
Munro: Must be an old picture.

The movie is full of lovely little asides and irresistible details, from the prologue onwards (“Ah-ah, are you German?” asks John Bluthal’s Professor Pacoli of the Mondoshawans) to the ever-present voice of Korben Dallas’ mum (“You miserable bastard, I should never have pushed you out”) and the banter with James’ General Munro, to Mathieu Kassovitz’s incompetent, drugged-up mugger (“That’s a nice hat”: “You like it?”), all staged and framed by Besson with an eye for the bold, clean, and caricatured, ready to bust right out of the frame. 


There’s Korben’s boss-eyed cat, the priests’ coyness over Leeloo and Munro’s lack thereof (“I’d like to take a few pictures – for the archives”; such invasiveness is counterpointed when Dallas is told at gunpoint “Never without my permission” after he kisses her sleeping), Zorg choking as a desktop elephant gets popped with a cherry, Dallas asking Cornelius “But you must drink a lot of coffee being a priest, huh?”, and the Marx Brothers-esque hiding of various parties in Corbin’s cramped apartment.


Cornelius: You are a monster, Zorg.
Zorg: I know.

And accompanying the proceedings is a magnificently rambunctious electronic score from Eric Serra. Serra copped a lot of flak for his contribution to Goldeneye two years earlier (I mostly really liked it), and his work has generally been confined to servicing Besson, for whom he is the perfect accompaniment, offering bold rhythmic beats that synchronise dramatically or humorously with the precisely edited images. For all the wackiness, he can also provoke awe, such as the operatic performance by Diva Plavalaguna (Inva Mula did the singing, while Maiwenn Le Besco, who was married to Luc Besson, personified her; the liaison between Besson and Maiwenn is a whole can of worms, particularly if it leads you to read strong elements of autobiography into Léon).


What of the thematic core then, that of the fifth element being love (in concert with “Evil begets evil, Mr President”)? I mean, it’s childlike and artless, but while I’m usually one to scowl at such obviousness in a movie, I find it very easy to be pulled along here, the aforementioned “What’s the use of saving life when you see what you do to it” aside (also rather clunkily called upon in Cameron’s The Abyss eight years earlier). It’s not as if the almighty force threatening to destroy the universe isn’t a tried and tested trope (at least two Star Trek movies have employed it), and the verve and panache of the telling, and chemistry between Willis and Jovovich, leave me with little to grumble about.


I don’t think The Fifth Element is a particularly deep film (and its self-awareness and high camp make it resistant to the kind of analyses that would ascribe serious layering, be it in terms of gender stereotyping or profound commentary on our capacity for self-destruction), but it’s a tremendously good-spirited one, encapsulating a joie de vivre and infectious knockabout anarchy, combined with its director at his unfettered best.








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

Popular posts from this blog

You were this amazing occidental samurai.

Ricochet (1991) (SPOILERS) You have to wonder at Denzel Washington’s agent at this point in the actor’s career. He’d recently won his first Oscar for Glory , yet followed it with less-than-glorious heart-transplant ghost comedy Heart Condition (Bob Hoskins’ racist cop receives Washington’s dead lawyer’s ticker; a recipe for hijinks!) Not long after, he dipped his tentative toe in the action arena with this Joel Silver production; Denzel has made his share of action fare since, of course, most of it serviceable if unremarkable, but none of it comes near to delivering the schlocky excesses of Ricochet , a movie at once ingenious and risible in its plot permutations, performances and production profligacy.

Well, something’s broke on your daddy’s spaceship.

Apollo 13 (1995) (SPOILERS) The NASA propaganda movie to end all NASA propaganda movies. Their original conception of the perilous Apollo 13 mission deserves due credit in itself; what better way to bolster waning interest in slightly naff perambulations around a TV studio than to manufacture a crisis event, one emphasising the absurd fragility of the alleged non-terrestrial excursions and the indomitable force that is “science” in achieving them? Apollo 13 the lunar mission was tailor made for Apollo 13 the movie version – make believe the make-believe – and who could have been better to lead this fantasy ride than Guantanamo Hanks at his all-American popularity peak?

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.

He’ll regret it to his dying day, if ever he lives that long.

The Quiet Man (1952) (SPOILERS) The John Wayne & John Ford film for those who don’t like John Wayne & John Ford films? The Quiet Man takes its cues from Ford’s earlier How Green Was My Valley in terms of, well less Anglophile and Hibernophile and Cambrophile nostalgia respectively for past times, climes and heritage, as Wayne’s pugilist returns to his family seat and stirs up a hot bed of emotions, not least with Maureen O’Hara’s red-headed hothead. The result is a very likeable movie, for all its inculcated Oirishness and studied eccentricity.

The Krishna died of a broken finger? I mean, is that a homicide?

Miami Blues (1990) (SPOILERS) If the ‘90s crime movie formally set out its stall in 1992 with Quentin Tarantino’s Reservoir Dogs , another movie very quietly got in there first at the beginning of the decade. Miami Blues picked up admiring reviews but went otherwise unnoticed on release, and even now remains under-recognised. The tale of “blithe psychopath” Federick J. Frenger, Jr., the girl whose heart he breaks and the detetive sergeant on his trail, director George Armitage’s adaptation of Charles Willeford’s novel wears a pitch black sense of humour and manages the difficult juggling act of being genuinely touching with it. It’s a little gem of a movie, perfectly formed and concisely told, one that more than deserves to rub shoulders with the better-known entries in its genre. One of the defining characteristics of Willeford’s work, it has been suggested , is that it doesn’t really fit into the crime genre; he comes from an angle of character rather than plot or h

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

You think a monkey knows he’s sitting on top of a rocket that might explode?

The Right Stuff (1983) (SPOILERS) While it certainly more than fulfils the function of a NASA-propaganda picture – as in, it affirms the legitimacy of their activities – The Right Stuff escapes the designation of rote testament reserved for Ron Howard’s later Apollo 13 . Partly because it has such a distinctive personality and attitude. Partly too because of the way it has found its through line, which isn’t so much the “wow” of the Space Race and those picked to be a part of it as it is the personification of that titular quality in someone who wasn’t even in the Mercury programme: Chuck Yaeger (Sam Shephard). I was captivated by The Right Stuff when I first saw it, and even now, with the benefit of knowing-NASA-better – not that the movie is exactly extolling its virtues from the rooftops anyway – I consider it something of a masterpiece, an interrogation of legends that both builds them and tears them down. The latter aspect doubtless not NASA approved.

You tampered with the universe, my friend.

The Music of Chance (1993) (SPOILERS) You won’t find many adaptations of Paul Auster’s novels. Original screenplays, yes, a couple of which he has directed himself. Terry Gilliam has occasionally mentioned Mr. Vertigo as in development. It was in development in 1995 too, when Philip Haas and Auster intended to bring it to the screen. Which means Auster presumably approved of Haas’ work on The Music of Chance (he also cameos). That would be understandable, as it makes for a fine, ambiguous movie, pregnant with meaning yet offering no unequivocal answers, and one that makes several key departures from the book yet crucially maintains a mesmerising, slow-burn lure.

Drank the red. Good for you.

Morbius (2022) (SPOILERS) Generic isn’t necessarily a slur. Not if, by implication, it’s suggestive of the kind of movie made twenty years ago, when the alternative is the kind of super-woke content Disney currently prioritises. Unfortunately, after a reasonable first hour, Morbius descends so resignedly into such unmoderated formula that you’re left with a too-clear image of Sony’s Spider-Verse when it lacks a larger-than-life performer (Tom Hardy, for example) at the centre of any given vehicle.

People still talk about Pandapocalypse 2002.

Turning Red (2022) (SPOILERS) Those wags at Pixar, eh? Yes, the most – actually, the only – impressive thing about Turning Red is the four-tiered wordplay of its title. Thirteen-year-old Mei (Rosalie Chiang) finds herself turning into a large red panda at emotive moments. She is also, simultaneously, riding the crimson wave for the first time. Further, as a teenager, she characteristically suffers from acute embarrassment (mostly due to the actions of her domineering mother Ming Lee, voiced by Sandra Oh). And finally, of course, Turning Red can be seen diligently spreading communist doctrine left, right and centre. To any political sensibility tuning in to Disney+, basically (so ones with either considerable or zero resistance to woke). Take a guess which of these isn’t getting press in reference to the movie? And by a process of elimination is probably what it it’s really about (you know in the same way most Pixars, as far back as Toy Story and Monsters, Inc . can be given an insi