Skip to main content

You may not wanna wake up tomorrow, but the day after that might just be great.

Blood Father
(2016)

(SPOILERS) There are points during Blood Father where it feels like Mel is publically and directly addressing his troubled personal life. Through ultra-violence. I’m not really sure if that’s a good idea or not, but the movie itself is finely-crafted slice of B-hokum, a picture that knows its particular sandpit and how to play most effectively in it.

Jean François-Richet has put a toe in English language movies before, in the form of the okay-but-unnecessary Assault on Precinct 13 remake. Since then, he made the pretty good two part Mesrine. As expansive as that was, Blood Father is contrastingly tight and trim, cutting to the chase and not stopping until it has said what it has to say. 


John Link’s a character made for the current persona of Mel, awash with regret, addictions (he’s attending AA), a past full of dark characters and, naturally, simmering irrepressible rage (Mel exploding righteously is one of the main reasons you check out a Gibson film, something in the ballpark of “I’ll see you on the inside, you chickenshit motherfuckers!”). He also like his tats (in itself, this seems like a subconscious reference to the cameo Gibson lost in favour of the less controversial Nick Cassavettes in The Hangover Part II. Or it might just be a call back to Father’s Day). 


As a result, Link’s given to near-the-mark advice and recriminations, telling his daughter, who blames herself for the manner in which psycho Jonah (Diego Luna) has invested in her, and from whose destructive influence she has fled, “Kid, you’ve got the mind-set of a battered housewife”. Gibson’s religious crutches come in for stick too. Hitching a ride with some illegal Mexicans, Lydia defends their presence against Link suggesting they’re stealing jobs: “I bet no white person has ever picked a piece of fruit off a tree ever”. “What about Eve?” responds Dad. “Eve was not white” she retorts, before asking if he thinks the Garden of Eden was in “fucking Norway” And lo and behold: Link/Mel shows off a sense of humour at such bating. Later, hooking up with old biker cohorts (Michael Parks and Dale Dickey) who are making a living from selling fascist memorabilia (“All the losers make the money. Nazis and confederates”), Link rebukes their “Nazi bullshit!” It comes across as an unsubtle attempt to address his own family history. 


But mainly, there’s Mel going apeshit and getting desperate, which he does repeatedly, be it his response to a crime gang turning up at his trailer, fleeing the bad guys hot on their trail or boldly telling Jonah how it is (“Yeah, I know all about you, and that’s why you’re going to stay on the phone”). The final confrontation is the only point where Blood Father enters slightly plodding territory, and while I’ve no problem with heroes pegging it in movies, it doesn’t quite feel earned in this case. I suspect part of that is down to central pulse of the picture, and its main miss.


Being Link’s unreconstituted, resumed relationship with his daughter. This isn’t down to Mel, rather Erin Moriarty’s merely sufficient performance as Lydia. Blood Father needed someone who could match Gibson tirade for tirade, and Moriarty simply isn’t up to the task. She’s there, but she doesn’t make you care (likewise, her scenes with Luna: he does all the heavy lifting, not that he’s backwards in revelling in bug-eyed sociopath mode).


William H Macy has little more than a cameo as Link’s best AA bud with a line in very-Mel ribaldry (“You know the difference between fitting and proper? ... I could shove my thumb up your arse right now and it would probably fit… but it wouldn’t be proper”) and hanging tough ("You boys picked the wrong rednecks"). Occasionally, Link too spits out the barbed, pithy comeback; a motel clerk asks of Lydia, “Hey man, where’d you find her?” “In the fucking delivery room” Link growls back, refraining from giving him a beating to boot. When they steal a station wagon and it becomes a known property, he comments “Our first family car, and now we’ve got to dump it”.


There’s an attempt at commentary on a clueless current generation, for whom the rebels of yesteryear have been turned into fashion items, but really, ‘twas ever thus. Blood Father’s mostly sensible enough to steer clear of such pitfalls, though, understanding its best footing is to show up, get the job done, and get out. If not for the slightly lacking father-daughter relationship, it would be up there with the first tier of such pictures; it’s certainly a damn sight more vital than the superficially-similar father-rescues-daughter-in-trouble Taken series.


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

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

I added sixty on, and now you’re a genius.

The Avengers 4.3: The Master Minds
The Master Minds hitches its wagon to the not uncommon Avengers trope of dark deeds done under the veil of night. We previously encountered it in The Town of No Return, but Robert Banks Stewart (best known for Bergerac, but best known genre-wise for his two Tom Baker Doctor Who stories; likewise, he also penned only two teleplays for The Avengers) makes this episode more distinctive, with its mind control and spycraft, while Peter Graham Scott, in his third contribution to the show on the trot, pulls out all the stops, particularly with a highly creative climactic fight sequence that avoids the usual issue of overly-evident stunt doubles.

Exit bear, pursued by an actor.

Paddington 2 (2017)
(SPOILERS) Paddington 2 is every bit as upbeat and well-meaning as its predecessor. It also has more money thrown at it, a much better villain (an infinitely better villain) and, in terms of plotting, is more developed, offering greater variety and a more satisfying structure. Additionally, crucially, it succeeds in offering continued emotional heft and heart to the Peruvian bear’s further adventures. It isn’t, however, quite as funny.

Even suggesting such a thing sounds curmudgeonly, given the universal applause greeting the movie, but I say that having revisited the original a couple of days prior and found myself enjoying it even more than on first viewing. Writer-director Paul King and co-writer Simon Farnaby introduce a highly impressive array of set-ups with huge potential to milk their absurdity to comic ends, but don’t so much squander as frequently leave them undertapped.

Paddington’s succession of odd jobs don’t quite escalate as uproariously as they migh…

She writes Twilight fan fiction.

Vampire Academy (2014)
My willingness to give writer Daniel Waters some slack on the grounds of early glories sometimes pays off (Sex and Death 101) and sometimes, as with this messy and indistinct Young Adult adaptation, it doesn’t. If Vampire Academy plods along as a less than innovative smart-mouthed Buffy rip-off that might be because, if you added vampires to Heathers, you would probably get something not so far from the world of Joss Whedon. Unfortunately inspiration is a low ebb throughout, not helped any by tepid direction from Daniel’s sometimes-reliable brother Mark and a couple of hopelessly plankish leads who do their best to dampen down any wit that occasionally attempts to surface.

I can only presume there’s a never-ending pile of Young Adult fiction poised for big screen failure, all of it comprising multi-novel storylines just begging for a moment in the Sun. Every time an adaptation crashes and burns (and the odds are that they will) another one rises, hydra-like, hoping…

Where is the voice that said altered carbon would free us from the cells of our flesh?

Altered Carbon Season One
(SPOILERS) Well, it looks good, even if the visuals are absurdly indebted to Blade Runner. Ultimately, though, Altered Carbon is a disappointment. The adaption of Richard Morgan’s novel comes armed with a string of well-packaged concepts and futuristic vernacular (sleeves, stacks, cross-sleeves, slagged stacks, Neo-Cs), but there’s a void at its core. It singularly fails use the dependable detective story framework to explore the philosophical ramifications of its universe – except in lip service – a future where death is impermanent, and even botches the essential goal of creating interesting lead characters (the peripheral ones, however, are at least more fortunate).

He mobilised the English language and sent it into battle.

Darkest Hour (2017)
(SPOILERS) Watching Joe Wright’s return to the rarefied plane of prestige – and heritage to boot – filmmaking following the execrable folly of the panned Pan, I was struck by the difference an engaged director, one who cares about his characters, makes to material. Only last week, Ridley Scott’s serviceable All the Money in the World made for a pointed illustration of strong material in the hands of someone with no such investment, unless they’re androids. Wright’s dedication to a relatable Winston Churchill ensures that, for the first hour-plus, Darkest Hour is a first-rate affair, a piece of myth-making that barely puts a foot wrong. It has that much in common with Wright’s earlier Word War II tale, Atonement. But then, like Atonement, it comes unstuck.

You’re never the same man twice.

The Man Who Haunted Himself (1970)
(SPOILERS) Roger Moore playing dual roles? It sounds like an unintentionally amusing prospect for audiences accustomed to the actor’s “Raise an eyebrow” method of acting. Consequently, this post-Saint pre-Bond role (in which he does offer some notable eyebrow acting) is more of a curiosity for the quality of Sir Rog’s performance than the out-there premise that can’t quite sustain the picture’s running time. It is telling that the same story was adapted for an episode of Alfred Hitchcock Presents 15 years earlier, since the uncanny idea at its core feels like a much better fit for a trim 50 minute anthology series.

Basil Dearden directs, and co-adapted the screenplay from Anthony Armstrong’s novel The Strange Case of Mr Pelham. Dearden started out with Ealing, helming several Will Hay pictures and a segment of Dead of Night (one might imagine a shortened version of this tale ending up there, or in any of the portmanteau horrors that arrived in the year…

Like an antelope in the headlights.

Black Panther (2018)
(SPOILERS) Like last year’s Wonder Woman, the hype for what it represents has quickly become conflated with Black Panther’s perceived quality. Can 92% and 97% of critics respectively really not be wrong, per Rotten Tomatoes, or are they – Armond White aside – afraid that finding fault in either will make open them to charges of being politically regressive, insufficiently woke or all-round, ever-so-slightly objectionable? As with Wonder Woman, Black Panther’s very existence means something special, but little about the movie itself actually is. Not the acting, not the directing, and definitely not the over-emphatic, laboured screenplay. As such, the picture is a passable two-plus hours’ entertainment, but under-finessed enough that one could easily mistake it for an early entry in the Marvel cycle, rather than arriving when they’re hard-pressed to put a serious foot wrong.

Rejoice! The broken are the more evolved. Rejoice.

Split (2016)
(SPOILERS) M Night Shyamalan went from the toast of twist-based filmmaking to a one-trick pony to the object of abject ridicule in the space of only a couple of pictures: quite a feat. Along the way, I’ve managed to miss several of his pictures, including his last, The Visit, regarded as something of a re-locating of his footing in the low budget horror arena. Split continues that genre readjustment, another Blumhouse production, one that also manages to bridge the gap with the fare that made him famous. But it’s a thematically uneasy film, marrying shlock and serious subject matter in ways that don’t always quite gel.

Shyamalan has seized on a horror staple – nubile teenage girls in peril, prey to a psychotic antagonist – and, no doubt with the best intentions, attempted to warp it. But, in so doing, he has dragged in themes and threads from other, more meritable fare, with the consequence that, in the end, the conflicting positions rather subvert his attempts at subversion…

You think I contaminated myself, you think I did that?

Silkwood (1983)
Mike Nichol’s film about union activist Karen Silkwood, who died under suspicious circumstances in a car accident in 1974, remains a powerful piece of work; even more so in the wake of Fukushima. If we transpose the microcosm of employees of a nuclear plant, who would rather look the other way in favour of a pay cheque, to the macrocosm of a world dependent on an energy source that could spell our destruction (just don’t think about it and, if you do, be reassured by the pronouncements of “experts” on how safe it all is; and if that doesn’t persuade you be under no illusion that we need this power now, future generations be damned!) it is just as relevant.

We’re going to find that creature they call the Yeti.

The Abominable Snowman (1957)
The Abominable Snowman follows the first two Quatermass serials as the third Hammer adaptation of a Nigel Kneale BBC work. As with those films, Val Guest takes the directorial reins, to mixed results. Hammer staple Peter Cushing repeats his role from The Creature (the title of the original teleplay). The result is worthy in sentiment but unexceptional in dramatic heft. Guest fails to balance Kneale’s idea of essentially sympathetic creatures with the disintegration of the group bent on finding them.

Nevertheless, Kneale’s premise still stands out. The idea that the Yeti is an essentially shy, peaceful, cryptozoological beastie is now commonplace, but Kneale adds a further twist by suggesting that they are a distinct and in some respects more advance parallel branch in the evolution of hominids (the more extravagant notion that they are in some way extra-dimensional is absent, but with the powers thy sport here wouldn’t be such a leap). Cushing’s Rollason is…