Skip to main content

You're the best driver in the entire universe.

Valerian and the City of a Thousand Planets
(2017)

(SPOILERS) In the aftermath of Valerian and the City of a Thousand Planet’s floundering US debut (unlike The Fifth Element, it seems doubtful that an international bonanza will compensate) and (mostly) critical mauling, there have been numerous post-mortems, ranging from the reasonable to the desperately lazy (audiences didn’t know the property; it wasn’t a sequel; it didn’t have stars; it had a weird title – none of which are an issue when something is a hit, Baby Driver, for example). Valerian was one of my most anticipated pictures of the year, in spite of what was evidently – as much as trailers provide evidence – dubious lead casting, on the basis that The Fifth Element is a profoundly wonderful, idiosyncratic science fiction movie, shot through with giddy Gallic humour, and this was Luc Besson returning to that genre. And it does have profoundly wonderful, idiosyncratic and giddy Gallic moments. As such, it’s much more interesting than most homogenous Hollywood product. Its fatal flaw, even more so than the charisma deficit of the principals, is one the director is usually on pretty solid ground with: pace.


Because Valerian barely musters any, even during its nominal actions sequences. It comes equipped with spectacle by the shedload, but Besson seems actively disinterested in maintaining a narrative through line or anything to keep his audience on the hook. There’s a mystery to solve, but when he’s not going off at tangents, such that you wonder if there’s any point to what you’re seeing, he’s labouring the explanations; Clive Owen is obviously a bad guy from the moment we set eyes on him (and five minutes after that he’s torturing one of the impossibly angelic alien race whose planet he decimated, just to make it abundantly clear), and there seems to be a need for Valerian and Laureline to explain who did what and why at least several times in case you didn’t get it, or weren’t paying attention. Or had nodded off (someone I attended the screening with did exactly that, but unfortunately missed both explanations).


Besson has been a master of ratchetting up the tension in the past (Nikita, Leon), and even the more recent and underrated The Family has that kind of flair going for it. Here, elements you suspect might be McGuffins (the converter) are put in Laureline’s pocket and forgotten about until needed, rather than, say, stolen and pursued until the vital moment they called upon to engineer the climax. The villain is incapacitated for much of the running time, and when his (very cool-y designed) robot soldiers are finally utilised, Valerian disposes of them in dismayingly easy fashion. If Besson always has a keen visual sense (one of the best), his storytelling nouse is thoroughly dislocated this time, odd for someone whose production house has made a hallmark of linear, stripped-down action movie models.


The consequence of this, particularly as there’s little entertainment value in kicking about with the leads, is that the picture relies almost entirely on vignettes or asides to maintain interest. As such, it starts off quite beautifully with the kind of visual and aural accompaniment you’d expect from The Fifth Element director, 20 years on; the development of the central space station Alpha is charted over the course of eight centuries to the soundtrack of Space Oddity (seriously, for such an over-used – but ever-brilliant – song, Besson makes it fresh again). It’s funny, clever, spry and deceptively simple. And then the picture proper starts.


But the establishing sequence, as Valerian and Laureline, mystifyingly experienced police special agents, intercept a black-market deal selling a converter (a cute little creature that replicates anything it ingests, including reproducing a planetary expanse at the climax), may lack breathless thrills or tension, but it is consistently visually intriguing, juggling as it does two simultaneous dimensional realities that Valerian must navigate his way through, particularly problematic when his hand is trapped in the more dangerous one. Indeed, Besson’s fluid sense of the “real” is one of the more engaging but undeveloped parts of the Valerian, playing with notions of holographic universes that run the gamut of dream states, actual events, and 3D-printed matter issuing forth from the coat of said snuffle creature.


There are other moments, such as Valerian crashing through a succession of alien zones in the station, that find Besson galvanised in terms of the mostly listless pace, and the countdown ending is reasonably effective, but in the main it’s with whacky Besson that the golden nuggets are to be found. In The Fifth Element, he assembled leads who were sympathetic to such shenanigans, but here there’s no such luck. Owen doesn’t seem remotely in tune with the picture in any way that makes him a remotely appealing or memorable antagonist (Gary Oldman may loathe The Fifth Element, but his loony turn is one of its highlights).


Dane DeHaan, a decent actor when cast well (some have cited his vocal similarities here to Keanu Reeves, the takeaway being that they are very different thesps who both clearly need sympathetic casting), be it in Chronicle or Life, is completely out of his depth when asked to play cocky, heroic, flippant, confident, playful and macho. There’s no point where you believe he’s one of the premier galactic agents around, and one can only reel at Besson’s choice.


If he picked DeHaan and Cara Delevingne to make everything else “pop”, well, that kind of worked, I guess, but why you’d be comfortable with a void at the centre of your movie is beyond me. Every time they fling romantic barbs/deflections at each other (I’m guessing a Han-Leia vibe is being aimed for), the picture assumes a state of abject lifelessness. They have no chemistry and inspire no desire to accompany them on their mission. I’m loathe to compare this to the Wachowski sisters’ Jupiter Ascending, as Valerian at least maintains a sense of fun amid the stodge, but both go fundamentally wrong in picking performers who disappear into the material, never to be seen again.


Develingne fares better than DeHaan, such that when Valerian absents himself for a stretch and Laureline embarks to find him, you entirely don’t miss him (added to which, there’s never a point where you have the remotest idea what she sees in him, or even what kind of relationship they’re supposed to have – the marriage proposal looks like a joke, until it isn’t, and even then, you’re left waiting for the punchline). But she still ends up impassive much of the time and lacks a discernible sense of humour – she ought to have one, with those eyebrows – so the scene where she sticks her head in a jellyfish’s bottom is never quite as amusing as it ought to be.


I’m a big fan of Europudding casting (see The Adventures of Gerard for a tip-top example), where stylistically mismatched performers of various nations are thrown at each other on screen, but you tend to need big performances to make that kind of thing work, and here Besson is too often in error (Ethan Hawke, really?), or wastes an opportunity (we see Rutger Hauer for about a minute, which is a crime). As a consequence, you remember smaller parts, such as Eric Lampaert’s guide Thaziit (camping it up like Russell Brand back on drugs) or Bob the Pirate (Alain Chabat), appearing popping a champagne cork, or the Howard the Duck-like (that’s the ‘80s movie version) trio of Doghan-Dagui, like diminutive Ferengi only endearing.


There’s also a rather wonderful sequence, illustrative of Besson at his lunatic best, in which Laureline is captured by the Boulan Bathor and required to try on various dresses before being taken before their emperor to “serve” dinner. The emperor has been studiously showing his distaste for the endless procession of menu choices, but Laureline arrives wearing a ridiculous, monstrously-brimmed hat (so large, it reminded me of a sequence in The Adventures of Gerard in which the base of Jack Hawkin’s dinner table is one of his men with his head poking through a hole in the middle) with the top of her head displayed so as to be nicely snipped off. It’s the kind of thing twisted idea that brings out the best in Besson (the ensuing fight, in which Valerian dispatches numerous Boulan Bathor, including the emperor, is appropriately unrestrained).


I was a fan of the juxtaposition of almost childlike sincerity and utmost goofiness in The Fifth Element, but it doesn’t really land in Valerian, even though there are strong echoes. In both movies, there is a proclamation from the female protagonist that love conquers all (which is when you find out, in this one, that apparently, the male protagonist goes strictly by the book, all evidence previously to the contrary), and in both, an alien singer is sacrificed on the journey to that realisation. Rhianna has an enjoyable, show-stopping cabaret number as shape-shifting Bubble, although the Bubble sequences are the most fun when she’s impersonating one of the Boulan Bathor.


Thematically, though, you’d have to be pretty dense to escape the message in The Fifth Element. In Valerian, there’s little in the way of takeaway. The Mül-ians are nature-lovin’ willowy types straight out of Avatar, only a touch less boss-eyed and a whole lot less blue, so naturally they’re due the restoration of their realm; the ever-variable Alexandre Desplat really lays on the treacly score in this regard, so as to let you know just how serenely heart-breaking their beatific existence is/was.


Design-wise, well the costumes are every bit as good as The Fifth Element’s if not quite as outrageous as you’d get from Jean-Paul Gautier, and the CGI creature work is varied, impressive, and often amusing, albeit you’re constantly wistful for the tangible prosthetics and animatronics of his earlier SF feast. A marriage of the two would have been preferable.


I doubt Valerian and the City of a Thousand Planets will be the undoing of Besson or EuropaCorp, and I’m sure the “auteur hack” (whatever that is), as a typically hacky Guardian piece labelled him, will be moving on to other pictures before long.  Another article in the same rag labelled him “the unsung hero of world cinema”, before dismissing his entire output as “part brilliant, part terrible” (cherry picking like that, you could level the same charge at Coppola, but no one would argue his ‘70s work isn’t that of the bona fide auteur). It’s a shame though, that this picture sags the way it does; a re-edit might solve some of the problems, but, alas, nothing can change the leads.



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

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

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.

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.

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

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'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.

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 .

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.

Sir, I’m the Leonardo of Montana.

The Young and Prodigious T.S. Spivet (2013) (SPOILERS) The title of Jean-Pierre Jeunet’s second English language film and second adaptation announces a fundamentally quirky beast. It is, therefore, right up its director’s oeuvre. His films – even Alien Resurrection , though not so much A Very Long Engagement – are infused with quirk. He has a style and sensibility that is either far too much – all tics and affectations and asides – or delightfully offbeat and distinctive, depending on one’s inclinations. I tend to the latter, but I wasn’t entirely convinced by the trailers for The Young and Prodigious T.S. Spivet ; if there’s one thing I would bank on bringing out the worst in Jeunet, it’s a story focussing on an ultra-precocious child. Yet for the most part the film won me over. Spivet is definitely a minor distraction, but one that marries an eccentric bearing with a sense of heart that veers to the affecting rather than the chokingly sentimental. Appreciation for

I think you’re some kind of deviated prevert.

Dr. Strangelove  or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb (1964) (SPOILERS) Kubrick’s masterpiece satire of mutually-assured destruction. Or is it? Not the masterpiece bit, because that’s a given. Rather, is all it’s really about the threat of nuclear holocaust? While that’s obviously quite sufficient, all the director’s films are suggested to have, in popular alt-readings, something else going on under the hood, be it exposing the ways of Elite paedophilia ( Lolita , Eyes Wide Shut ), MKUltra programming ( A Clockwork Orange, Full Metal Jacket ), transhumanism and the threat of imminent AI overlords ( 2001: A Space Odyssey ), and most of the aforementioned and more besides (the all-purpose smorgasbord that is The Shining ). Even Barry Lyndon has been posited to exist in a post-reset-history world. Could Kubrick be talking about something else as well in Dr. Strangelove ?