Skip to main content

The Black Panther is not someone to mess with.

Gringo
(2018)

(SPOILERS) Gringo's problems stem from it trying too hard to be the kind of movie its makers have seen done better. It's doing its best to give off a studiously crazy/ frenetic tone, something accentuated by Christophe Beck's self-consciously quirky score. Throwing David Oyelowo's straight-edged pharmaceutical rep into the path of Mexican cartels and hitmen, Nash Edgerton's second feature is "one of those", the latest in a seemingly unremitting stream of low-budget hit-and-miss crime affairs, peppy enough to attract a supporting cast working for scale, but lacking the personality to stick in the mind for very long.


I suspect Gringo came to Edgerton's attention via brother Joel (who also appears, naturally); the latter first worked with writer/producer Anthony Tambakis on Warrior (Tambakis and Edgerton also rewrote the Jane Got a Gun screenplay), although the idea for the movie came from Matthew Stone (Big TroubleIntolerable Cruelty and Destiny Turns on the Radio, a movie with the dubious and rarely repeated distinction of featuring Quentin Tarantino as the lead character). From the poster, you'd think this was a lame pot comedy, but the marijuana element (an attempt to get the drop on an increasingly legal market via patented pill Cannabax) is mercifully restrained; it's merely the spark for the plot.


Which takes in the cartel that Promethium Pharmaceuticals presidents Richard Rusk (Joel-E) and Elain Markinson (Charlize Theron) have been selling to in order to improve their cashflow (with a prospective merger, they now intend to cut them off), the drug mule (Harry Treadaway) charged with bringing the product back to synthesise, accompanied by his girlfriend Sunny (Amanda Seyfried), and most importantly Harold Soyinka (Oyelowo), oblivious to his firm’s duplicitous dealings, as well as the affair his wife (Thandie Newton) is having with presumed pal Richard. Throw in a DEA agent (Yul Vazquez) and Richard’s brother Mitch (Sharlto Copley), a mercenary nominally turned aid worker called upon to retrieve Harold when he is kidnapped (actually by himself, but also by the emissaries of the cartel, who think he’s the man in charge), and you have the makings of a suitably spicy stew.


Oyelowo is undoubtedly the picture's most enormous boon, showing off a hitherto rarely tapped flair for comedy as event after event piles on top of poor Harold. Potentially, there's a worm-has-turned element here of the like of A Fish Called Wanda, but his resourcefulness also comes too easily in places, such as his ability to fend off kidnappers and surprisingly deadly skill with firearms. Nevertheless, his aptitude for emasculating histrionics is both very funny and admirably self-effacing, in particular his high-pitched screams in response to the injection of a tracking chip ("I don’t like needles!"). I do wonder if Harold's belief in God wasn't Oyelowo's own addition, however.


Most of the characters are recognisable types, relying on the players to lift them. Elaine's a brittle sociopath intent on offending everyone (especially Mexicans) she comes into contact with, but Theron adds an almost Ab Fab Patsy-ish quality to her complete disdain for basic social niceties (of the speechless Newton, she comments "It's a deaf girl. She's adorable", before indulging some fake signing). Copley has done this before, but he's an agreeable presence, while Alan Ruck scores as a prospective merger party interested mainly in merging with Elaine. The Miles/ Seyfried subplot is largely superfluous, though, and the suggestion she might end up with Harold is left curiously stranded.


You can't help feeling Tambakis and Stone missed a trick by featuring very little interaction abduction), particularly since Carlos Corona (as its head Villegas, also known as the Black Panther – I know) plays his eccentricities without winking. Indeed, if some of the self-consciously oddball content rather falls flat, the running gag of Villegas obsession with The Beatles ("And to be clear, the best album from The Beatles is Let it Be"), to the extent that he shoots someone who comments "Yeah, I did like them. But then I grew up", roundly lands. 


Gringo also ends a little too neatly, Harold enabled to vanish off the map while Richard gets his comeuppance (Elaine is allowed to prosper, though). While I don't think the picture needed to be longer than it is (heaven forfend), it doesn’t seem to know quite how to resolve its various threads in a satisfying manner. They feel either pat or rushed. Edgerton directs efficiently, although I'm not sure he has a particular flair for comedy, patchy as this one is; he's lucky to have Olewyo to make the bright spots look easy. This one got largely trampled by the critics, but it's an agreeably inoffensive time-passer.


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

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Nanobots aren’t just for Christmas.

No Time to Die (2021) (SPOILERS) You know a Bond movie is in trouble when it resorts to wholesale appropriation of lines and even the theme song from another in order to “boost” its emotional heft. That No Time to Die – which previewed its own title song a year and a half before its release to resoundingly underwhelmed response, Grammys aside – goes there is a damning indictment of its ability to eke out such audience investment in Daniel Craig’s final outing as James (less so as 007). As with Spectre , the first half of No Time to Die is, on the whole, more than decent Bond fare, before it once again gets bogged down in the quest for substance and depth from a character who, regardless of how dapper his gear is, resolutely resists such outfitting.

Maybe the dingo ate your baby.

Seinfeld 2.9: The Stranded The Premise George and Elaine are stranded at a party in Long Island, with a disgruntled hostess.

Big things have small beginnings.

Prometheus (2012) Post- Gladiator , Ridley Scott opted for an “All work and no pondering” approach to film making. The result has been the completion of as many movies since the turn of the Millennium as he directed in the previous twenty years. Now well into his seventies, he has experienced the most sustained period of success of his career.  For me, it’s also been easily the least-interesting period. All of them entirely competently made, but all displaying the machine-tooled approach that was previously more associated with his brother.

Isn’t sugar better than vinegar?

Femme Fatale (2002) (SPOILERS) Some have attempted to rescue Femme Fatale from the dumpster of critical rejection and audience indifference with the claim that it’s De Palma’s last great movie. It isn’t that by a long shot, but it might rank as the last truly unfettered display of his obsessions and sensibilities, complete with a ludicrous twist – so ludicrous, it’s either a stroke of genius or mile-long pile up.

Beer is for breakfast around here. Drink or begone.

Cocktail (1988) (SPOILERS) When Tarantino claims the 1980s (and 1950s) as the worst movie decade, I’m inclined to invite him to shut his butt down. But should he then flourish Cocktail as Exhibit A, I’d be forced to admit he has a point. Cocktail is a horrifying, malignant piece of dreck, a testament to the efficacy of persuasive star power on a blithely rapt and undiscerning audience. Not only is it morally vacuous, it’s dramatically inert. And it relies on Tom’s toothy charms to a degree that would have any sensitive soul rushed to the A&E suffering from toxic shock (Tom’s most recently displayed toothy charms will likely have even his staunchest devotees less than sure of themselves, however, as he metamorphoses into your favourite grandma). And it was a huge box office hit.

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.

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.

It's something trying to get out.

The Owl Service (1969-70) I may have caught a glimpse of Channel 4’s repeat of  The Owl Service  in 1987, but not enough to stick in the mind. My formative experience was Alan Garner’s novel, which was read several years earlier during English lessons. Garner’s tapestry of magical-mythical storytelling had an impact, with its possession theme and blending of legend with the here and now. Garner depicts a Britain where past and present are mutable, and where there is no safety net of objective reality; life becomes a strange waking dream. His fantasy landscapes are both attractive and disturbing; the uncanny reaching out from the corners of the attic.  But I have to admit that the themes of class and discrimination went virtually unnoticed in the wake of such high weirdness. The other Garner books I read saw young protagonists transported to fantasy realms. The resonance of  The Owl Service  came from the fragmenting of the rural normal. When the author notes that he neve

These are not soda cans you asked me to get for you.

The Devil’s Own (1997) (SPOILERS) Naturally, a Hollywood movie taking the Troubles as a backdrop is sure to encounter difficulties. It’s the push-pull of wanting to make a big meaningful statement about something weighty, sobering and significant in the real world and bottling it when it comes to the messy intricacies of the same. So inevitably, the results invariably tend to the facile and trite. I’m entirely sure The Devil’s Own would have floundered even if Harrison Ford hadn’t come on board and demanded rewrites, but as it is, the finished movie packs a lot of talent to largely redundant end.