Skip to main content

And tell me, how would you feel if you'd been dead a day and a half, and somebody brought you more bad news?

Freejack

(1992)

(SPOILERS) No, I won’t be making out that Freejack is an unfairly maligned, hidden classic or that it deserves cult status. It’s a movie I’d hazard got a greenlight off the back of the promise of sci-fi action with a dash of the cerebral, à la Total Recall (right down to a co-screenplay credit for Ronald Shusett) but stumbles resoundingly in both areas. Indeed, even its premise is only one-part good, such that Netflix’s forthcoming Altered Carbon, boasting a not dissimilar mind transfer conceit, is wisely not going with the daftly depicted time-travel element. Consequently, Freejack was rightly trashed on its release. Does it have anything to recommend it, then? Well…


I recall thinking the picture might have potential at the time, principally because I knew Geoff Murphy’s The Quiet Earth (a great little movie) and because I’d enjoyed his previous picture, Young Guns II: Blaze of Glory, a rare sequel that was superior to the original. And also, because Emilio Estevez was still making the occasional entertaining movie, although I’d admittedly given him perhaps too much of a free pass as a result of Repo Man. Neither comes away from Freejack with much credit (nor Anthony Hopkins, who was also a reason-to-see at that point).


Estevez tended to be at his best laughing along bemusedly with or at events that befell him, but attempting the straight action hero finds him woefully out of his depth (he gets to unpack his laugh occasionally, but it seems out of place). This needed someone who could fill the empty space Murphy leaves, rather than drawing attention to it. He also has zero chemistry with Rene Russo, or much with anyone come to that (still, Russo met co-writer Dan Gilroy on set, so she at least got something out of the experience).


Presumably Estevez and Murphy had built a rapport on Young Guns II, which might be why the former reportedly felt particularly let down by the director’s cut of the movie, which emphasised action over plot and was greeted disastrously at test screenings. This led to the reshooting of up to 40% of the picture, adding more character and humour… supervised by writer-producer Shusett, who has no bona fide directing credits at all. Once can only assume Morgan Creek (who produced Young Guns II but also got the scissors out for the likes of Nightbreed and The Exorcist III over the same period) thought it was a lost cause and hardly worth shelling out for a director with actual chops.


Freejack is cited as costing $30m, and as is invariably the case when a fix-it occurred, no one was any more interested after the Band-Aids were applied (it grossed just over half its budget). It isn’t hard to see where things went wrong on a very basic level; Murphy simply didn’t have the funds to make his future remotely convincing; it cost half as much as Total Recall, with which it wanted to compete, and lacked the kind of director who could be creative with what he had (ironic, since The Quiet Earth’s particular strain of sci-fi made a virtue of its no-budget).

 

Because Freejack looks thoroughly cheap and tacky, not so far from straight-to-video fare, the kind of budget-divested, technically hamstrung picture that led to the similarly disastrous Highlander II: The Quickening from fellow antipodean Russell Mulcahy the previous year. There are futuristic fashions (polo necks are in, as are oversized jackets and hats – although that all might just be how they hang off Estevez), but they make the ones in Predator 2 look convincing. There are futuristic cars, but mostly they comprise military vehicles painted red or are rather twee and insubstantial. There are crowd scenes featuring a poverty-stricken underclass, but they’re lacklustre and underpopulated. Jesus Jones are back in style in 2009 too, which I must have missed.


The aesthetic issues mightn’t have been such a problem if there was a meaty plot to sustain them. Whatever Shusett did with those reshoots, it definitely didn’t include beefing up the story, which is essentially all chase after the initial setup. Total Recall, despite being nominally an Arnie action vehicle, managed to balance its brawn with thornier existential dilemmas (not wholly successfully, but that was inevitable once Arnie signed on and Verhoeven’s more tactile mind re-sculpted the material; it’s really the ideal Cronenberg plot, and a shame his version didn’t come to pass). 


Freejack had the potential for its own ruminations over the nature of self and identity, finding as it does Estevez’ Alex Furlong, a Formula One driver from 1991, abducted seconds before his car fatally impacts an underpass. The ensuing ethical equation presumes that, since he ought to be dead, his body is up for grabs as a vessel for the consciousness of any rich, dying fellow in the future; unfortunately, Alex hasn’t been properly lobotomised, and aided by the convenient intervention of an armed gang, goes on the run, causing considerable problems.


The mechanics of this 2009 society are never effectively explained, leaving gaping holes in its fundament. It can only be taken as half-baked, pulpy nonsense; those who abduct Alex are known as bonejackers, mercenaries of whom Mick Jagger’s Victor Vacendak is one (more from him in a bit). And those who escape are known as freejacks – making you wonder how organised these mercenaries aren’t, that fugitives are frequent enough they merit a name. The consequences and capabilities of this time-travel tech are left completely undiscussed, because it’s a plot device getting us from point A to point B rather than having any thought put into it. How come mercenaries have the tech? And, if they have it, presumably what government there is has it too? In which case what are they or aren’t they using it for? What capabilities does time travel have in this world? What are the rules?


If you’re wondering why time travel is there at all, it’s Robert Sheckley’s fault, whose Immortality, Inc, upon which this is based, features consciousness transference for a price (courtesy of The Hereafter Corporation), it’s main character being the first such success story, brought to 2110. Freejack boils the device down to a fish-out-of-water with a contemporary reference point (works for Demolition Man) and the culture shock of a reverse Back to the Future; Estevez meets his older girlfriend, Russo’s Julie Redlund, eighteen years later and curiously, one might say positively, there’s no mention of this age gap as a negative (perhaps because they don’t even try to age Russo up/down, and she’s eight years older than Estevez – she seems much too mature for him in 1991, and I don’t mean old, let alone in 2009).


This time-travel element requires a reason for those wanting new bodies passing when it comes to picking them from unsuspecting members of the present populace, which we’re told, is because they’ve lived half their lives with no ozone layer, with drug dependencies and radiation (not really that convincing, if you have the resources to hop bodies whenever the crappy ones run out). At the abject ened, it’s the kind of society crying out for suicide booths as a source of relief, but they didn’t include this aspect from Sheckley’s novel (Futurama put them in its first episode, but I suspect Morgan Creek were squeamish, or writers Shusset, Steven Pressfield and Gilroy simply didn’t recognise the genius of idea). 


This future corporatopia has intimations of gradual takeover by the Japanese (the US lost a trade war, we are told) and needless to say, doesn’t look anything like our 2009 past; while there’s reference to the topical erosion of the middle class (“There’s people at the top. There’s people at the bottom. There’s no one in between”), there’s nothing more to tell us how this society functions, or doesn’t.


McCandless: Welcome to my mind.

Also present in this hotchpotch future is a super computer called the Spiritual Switchboard, the closest we come to anything vaguely taking in a technological revolution since (sure, there are video screens, and Big Brother bulletins for wanted persons – these bounty hunters are evidently entirely legit, as the $10m reward for Alex is flashed everywhere – and laser and electric stun guns, but that’s about it), but it’s reserved as a tool of the elite, a means to upload their consciousnesses, visualised as very creaky but kind of retro-cool now rear video projection of Anthony Hopkins promenading across different landscapes and lightshows, all a bit Dreamscape or Altered States).


We spend a long time – the movie’s under two hours but seems longer thanks to severe pacing problems – getting to the showdown with Ant’s richer-than-rich McCandless, but it is actually worth it and easily the highlight. Hopkins doesn’t need to put effort in to be good (apparently, he labelled it a “terrible film”), and he entirely lifts his scenes, almost making you swallow that McCandless, now dead and existing in a solely virtual mind state, is sorry for the imposition upon Alex, having observed his love for Julie (who works for McCandless), and that he, also loving her, cannot have her (“Of course, I was mad. I was quite mad... For these crimes, I sentence myself to death”). He is, of course, stalling, quite stalling, for Vacendak’s arrival.


Nun: Don’t sister me.

If Hopkins is relatively good value, then (this was his first movie to come out after The Silence of the Lambs, but the first role to really capitalise on his new-found box office clout would be Francis Ford Coppola’s Bram Stoker’s Dracula later that year), so are most of the incidental cast. David Johansen shows up as Alex’s former agent, the New York Dolls frontman’s most notable movie role since playing the Ghost of Christmas Past in Scrooged. The magnificent Jonathan Banks, when he had hair (see also Gremlins, Beverly Hills Cop and Otherworld; I’d add Wiseguy, but I only ever caught the odd episode) is McCandless’ unscrupulous subordinate Michelette, who doesn’t want his boss revived. Amanda Plummer had just gained notice for her loopy turn in The Fisher King, but her trash-talking psycho nun (“The good Lord always says to turn the other cheek. But he never had to deal with dickheads like you” she says, kicking Michelette in the nuts after he has hit her – Banks does great groin-kicked).


Alex: How the hell do you eat river rat?
Eagle Man: Well, first you gotta cut off the head and the tail…

Frankie Faison shows up as Eagle Man, sitting by the river talking about eating rats when Alex washes up. Jerry Hall cameos as a newswoman. Grand L Bush (Special Agent Johnson, no not the other one, in Die Hard) sacrifices himself for Emilio. John Shea plays Julie’s gay friend, who Estevez is clearly itching to tell a homophobic joke but somehow resists. And then there’s Mick.


Alex: How am I doing?
Vacendak: Not ba-ad.

Mick can’t act – he makes Leee John look like Olivier –  and Mick is not butch. There’s no way he remotely looks the part of a bounty hunter in that over-sized helmet, and that’s before one takes into consideration his camp delivery (“Oh no, I hate the dark!”) and complete indifference to any notion of inhabiting a role. But Mick being Mick (and this was his first movie since the back-to-back Performance and Ned Kelly 22 years earlier), he is entertainingly rubbish, whether it’s observing Alex dropping in a river (“If you drink any of that, I’m out of a job”) sportlingly offering to let him go on the run again (“I’ll give you a five-minute start”) or allowing him to win at the end (Alex has to guess McCandless private code, which he apparently does: “I lied, he wasn’t even close” announces Vacendak, the old rogue; who’d have guessed Mick would turn out to be a good guy deep down?)


Almost everyone involved went on to better things in Freejack, except for its two leading figures. Estevez was getting more of a hankering for directing anyway (the results, shall we charitably say, have been mixed), while Murphy’s directorial career seemed to crumble subsequently, scraping together a couple more sequels (Under Siege 2, Fortress 2) before submitting to second unit duties for Peter Jackson on The Lord of the Rings trilogy.


And Freejack itself would attain a certain inane glory, immortalised by True Romance when Patricia Arquette exclaims “Hey, we got cable” as she witnesses Russo’s gloriously awful crash zoomed scream of horror as Alex crash zooms his car. She wisely gives up in favour of alcohol. Brad Pitt, through his stoner haze, perseveres longer, reaching the Alex-McCandless mind transfer before James Gandolfini interrupts him. Probably the only state to successfully navigate the movie, and even then…






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

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

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're not only wrong. You're wrong at the top of your voice.

Bad Day at Black Rock (1955)
I’ve seen comments suggesting that John Sturges’ thriller hasn’t aged well, which I find rather mystifying. Sure, some of the characterisations border on the cardboard, but the director imbues the story with a taut, economical backbone. 

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…

It looks like we’ve got another schizoid embolism!

Total Recall (1990)
(SPOILERS) Paul Verhoeven offered his post-mortem on the failures of the remakes of Total Recall (2012) and Robocop (2013) when he suggested “They take these absurd stories and make them too serious”. There may be something in this, but I suspect the kernel of their issues is simply filmmakers without either the smarts or vision, or both, to make something distinctive from the material. No one would have suggested the problem with David Cronenberg’s prospective Total Recall was over-seriousness, yet his version would have been far from a quip-heavy Raiders of the Lost Ark Go to Mars (as he attributes screenwriter Ron Shusset’s take on the material). Indeed, I’d go as far as saying not only the star, but also the director of Total Recall (1990) were miscast, making it something of a miracle it works to the extent it does.

How do you like that – Cuddles knew all the time!

The Pleasure Garden (1925)
(SPOILERS) Hitchcock’s first credit as director, and his account of the production difficulties, as related to Francois Truffaut, is by and large more pleasurable than The Pleasure Garden itself. The Italian location shoot in involved the confiscation of undeclared film stock, having to recast a key role and borrowing money from the star when Hitch ran out of the stuff.

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.

I’m not the Jedi I should be.

Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith (2005)
(SPOILERS) Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith is the only series entry (thus far) I haven’t seen at the cinema. After the first two prequels I felt no great urgency, and it isn’t an omission I’d be hugely disposed to redress for (say) a 12-hour movie marathon, were such a thing held in my vicinity. In the bare bones of Revenge of the Sith, however,George Lucas has probably the strongest, most confident of all Star Wars plots to date.

This is, after all, the reason we have the prequels in the first place; the genesis of Darth Vader, and the confrontation between Anakin and Obi Wan. That it ends up as a no more than middling movie is mostly due to Lucas’ gluttonous appetite for CGI (continuing reference to its corruptive influence is, alas, unavoidable here). But Episode III is also Exhibit A in a fundamental failure of casting and character work; this was the last chance to give Anakin Skywalker substance, to reveal his potential …

I take Quaaludes 10-15 times a day for my "back pain", Adderall to stay focused, Xanax to take the edge off, part to mellow me out, cocaine to wake me back up again, and morphine... Well, because it's awesome.

The Wolf of Wall Street (2013)
Along with Pain & Gain and The Great Gatsby, The Wolf of Wall Street might be viewed as the completion of a loose 2013 trilogy on the subject of success and excess; the American Dream gone awry. It’s the superior picture to its fellows, by turns enthralling, absurd, outrageous and hilarious. This is the fieriest, most deliriously vibrant picture from the director since the millennium turned. Nevertheless, stood in the company of Goodfellas, the Martin Scorsese film from which The Wolf of Wall Street consciously takes many of its cues, it is found wanting.

I was vaguely familiar with the title, not because I knew much about Jordan Belfort but because the script had been in development for such a long time (Ridley Scott was attached at one time). So part of the pleasure of the film is discovering how widely the story diverges from the Wall Street template. “The Wolf of Wall Street” suggests one who towers over the city like a behemoth, rather than a guy …

My dear, sweet brother Numsie!

The Golden Child (1986)
Post-Beverly Hills Cop, Eddie Murphy could have filmed himself washing the dishes and it would have been a huge hit. Which might not have been a bad idea, since he chose to make this misconceived stinker.

I think the exorcism made the problem worse.

Exorcist II: The Heretic (1977)
(SPOILERS) While I’ve seen instalments the originaland III a number of times, until now I hadn’t got round to checking out the near-universally reviled first Exorcist sequel. Going in, I had lofty notions Exorcist II: The Heretic would reveal itself as not nearly the travesty everyone said it was, that it would rather be deserving of some degree of praise if only it was approached in the right manner. Well, there is something to that; as a sequel to The Exorcist, it sneers at preconceptions right off the bat by wholly failing to terrify, so making its determined existence within the fabric of that film becomes downright bizarre (the relationship is almost like Back to the Future Part II to Back to the Future, but not). Further still, it warrants a twisted validation for being its own thing, refusing to rehash its predecessor like 90% of sequels, then and now, thus exerting fascination all its own. Unfortunately, John Boorman’s film is also equal parts lis…