Skip to main content

What lit the fire that set off our Mr Reaper?

Death Wish
(2018)

(SPOILERS) I haven’t seen the original Death Wish, the odd clip aside, and I don’t especially plan to remedy that, owing to an aversion to Charles Bronson when he isn’t in Once Upon a Time in the West and an aversion to Michael Winner when he wasn’t making ‘60s comedies or Peter Ustinov Hercule Poirots. I also have an aversion to Eli Roth, though (this is the first of his oeuvre I’ve seen, again the odd clip aside, as I have a general distaste for his oeuvre), and mildly to Bruce when he’s on autopilot (most of the last twenty years), so really, I probably shouldn’t have checked this one out. It was duly slated as a fascistic, right-wing rallying cry, even though the same slaters consider such behaviour mostly okay if the protagonist is super-powered and wearing a mask when taking justice into his (or her) own hands, but the truth is this remake is a quite serviceable, occasionally amusing little revenger, one that even has sufficient courage in its skewed convictions that it allows Bruce to get off scot free.

There were various points when the mild whiff of expectation was attached to the Death Wish remake, back when Joe Carnahan – a writer-director forever seeming to promise more than he actually delivers – was masterminding it. He still gets a screenplay credit, but fell out of the project over disputes with Bruce on the direction it should take. You can argue there’s no need for this movie ever, of course, but that never stopped anyone who saw dollar signs hanging over a dormant property, and it isn’t exactly like it’s Straw Dogs, where someone’s remaking something with a controversial but positive reputation.

Bruce is Dr Paul Kersey, a trauma surgeon busy in the ER when a home invasion leaves his wife (Elizabeth Shue) dead and his daughter (Camila Morrone) in a coma. Kersey’s quite passive and unemotional at first – very Bruce, then – until detectives Dean Norris and Kimberly Elise continually fail to get their men, and the doc happens up a handy piece dropped by a trauma victim in the ER one night. From there, the decisive justice of the Grim Reaper is unleashed, taking out carjackers and drug dealers and having his actions debated on the radio (attempting to pre-empt critiques by tackling the racial connotations head-on: “You got a white guy in a hoodie killing black people. You don’t have a problem with that?”)

Roth directs competently, but it’s clear his heart is much more in the horror and splatter elements – the home invasion, Bruce torturing Joe (Ronnie Gene Blevins) with brake fluid and crushing his brains beneath a pickup, performing home surgery on gunshot wound – than the police procedural side. Bruce’s first appearance suggests the absurdity of casting of Bruce Campbell as a doctor in Intolerable Cruelty, but once you get past that, he’s having, by his eternally bored standards, a mildly good time.

Indeed, I have no idea what the Carnahan version would have been like, but at least Roth makes no pretence that this is a serious-minded analysis of vigilante justice. Nor does he care that it may be feeding into gun lobby sentiments concerning self-protection, or fuelling fear-inducing stereotypes concerning personal safety. There’s a very evident streak of humour shot through the movie; it could have done with more of that, even. Bruce finds a friend of his comatose daughter reading her Essays in Positive Economics by Milton Friedman (“I’m not sure that’s gonna help her wake up”), and fellow baldie Norris contributes his share of wisecracks (“Run ‘em over. Doesn’t count as a crime” he says of a windscreen washer; a note on a wall of open cases says “We’re gonna need a bigger board”). Kersey’s shrink (Wendy Crewson) advises his improvement (“Well, whatever you’re doing, keep it up”; “Okay. I will” chuckles Bruce in reply). At one point, Kersey is at the mercy of The Fish (Jack Kesy) when a friendly bowling ball rolls off a top shelf and cracks his assailant on the head; it’s Three Stooges time. Such moments are surely evidence of the rewrite fingerprints of comedy maestros Scott Alexander and Larry Karaszewski.

Naturally, the villains are entirely repugnant and irredeemable, making their conscience-free murders all that much less unpalatable. Vincent D’Onofrio is entirely wasted in a nothing part as Kersey’s brother, so much so, I felt sure at one point he would turn out to have been involved with the home invasion creeps. Proceedings climax in Bruce killing the most irredeemable of the irredeemable bad guys (Beau Knapp) with a VERY big gun while his daughter cowers under the stairs; perhaps unsurprisingly, this was a Liam Neeson movie at one point (imagine how well it would have gone down in light of his recent remarks).

Entirely irresponsible filmmaking? Quite possibly. But there’s a hypocrisy in singling this kind of material out for condemnation for not fitting an agenda when it suits. Either the argument is that movies don’t influence people or it isn’t; you can’t have it both ways. Really, Death Wish’s problem is that it’s merely serviceable. Perhaps if Alexander and Karaszweski had administered a page-one rewrite, we’d really have something to talk about. Oh, and how about they write a movie for Willis and Norris as jocular brothers? That might raise a few laughs.


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

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

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…

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…

Everyone wants a happy ending and everyone wants closure but that's not the way life works out.

It Chapter Two (2019)
(SPOILERS) An exercise in stultifying repetitiveness, It Chapter Two does its very best to undo all the goodwill engendered by the previous instalment. It may simply be that adopting a linear approach to the novel’s interweaving timelines has scuppered the sequel’s chances of doing anything the first film hasn’t. Oh, except getting rid of Pennywise for good, which you’d be hard-pressed to discern as substantially different to the CGI-infused confrontation in the first part, Native American ritual aside.

Check it out. I wonder if BJ brought the Bear with him.

Death Proof (2007)
(SPOILERS) In a way, I’m slightly surprised Tarantino didn’t take the opportunity to disown Death Proof, to claim that, as part of Grindhouse, it was no more one of his ten-official-films-and-out than his Four Rooms segment. But that would be to spurn the exploitation genre affectation that has informed everything he’s put his name to since Kill Bill, to a greater or less extent, and also require him to admit that he was wrong, and you won’t find him doing that for anything bar My Best Friend’s Birthday.

That woman, deserves her revenge and… we deserve to die. But then again, so does she.

Kill Bill: Vol. 2  (2004)
(SPOILERS) I’m not sure I can really conclude whether one Kill Bill is better than the other, since I’m essentially with Quentin in his assertion that they’re one film, just cut into two for the purposes of a selling point. I do think Kill Bill: Vol. 2 has the movie’s one actually interesting character, though, and I’m not talking David Carradine’s title role.

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.

Do you read Sutter Cane?

In the Mouth of Madness (1994)
(SPOILERS) The concluding chapter of John Carpenter’s unofficial Apocalypse Trilogy (preceded by The Thing and Prince of Darkness) is also, sadly, his last great movie. Indeed, it stands apart in the qualitative wilderness that beset him during the ‘90s (not for want of output). Michael De Luca’s screenplay had been doing the rounds since the ‘80s, even turned down by Carpenter at one point, and it proves ideal fodder for the director, bringing out the best in him. Even cinematographer Gary K Kibbe seems inspired enough to rise to the occasion. It could do without the chugging rawk soundtrack, perhaps, but then, that was increasingly where Carpenter’s interests resided (as opposed to making decent movies).

I don’t think you will see President Pierce again.

The Ballad of Buster Scruggs (2018)
(SPOILERS) The Ballad of Buster Scruggs and other tall tales of the American frontier is the title of "the book" from which the Coen brothers' latest derives, and so announces itself as fiction up front as heavily as Fargo purported to be based on a true story. In the world of the portmanteau western – has there even been one before? – theme and content aren't really all that distinct from the more familiar horror collection, and as such, these six tales rely on sudden twists or reveals, most of them revolving around death. And inevitably with the anthology, some tall tales are stronger than other tall tales, the former dutifully taking up the slack.

When you grow up, if you still feel raw about it, I’ll be waiting.

Kill Bill: Vol. 1 (2003)
(SPOILERS) It sometimes seems as if Quentin Tarantino – in terms of his actual movies, rather than nearly getting Uma killed in an auto stunt – is the last bastion of can-do-no-wrong on the Internet. Or at very least has the preponderance of its vocal weight behind him. Back when his first two movies proper were coming out, so before online was really a thing, I’d likely have agreed, but by about the time the Kill Bills arrived, I’d have admitted I was having serious pause about him being all he was cracked up to be. Because the Kill Bills aren’t very good, and they’ve rather characterised his hermetically sealed wallowing in obscure media trash and genre cul-de-sacs approach to his art ever since. Sometimes to entertaining effect, sometimes less so, but always ever more entrenching his furrow; as Neil Norman note in his Evening Standard review, “Tarantino has attempted (and largely succeeded) in making a movie whose only reality is that of celluloid”. Extend t…

Just because you are a character doesn't mean that you have character.

Pulp Fiction (1994)
(SPOILERS) From a UK perspective, Pulp Fiction’s success seemed like a fait accompli; Reservoir Dogs had gone beyond the mere cult item it was Stateside and impacted mainstream culture itself (hard to believe now that it was once banned on home video); it was a case of Tarantino filling a gap in the market no one knew was there until he drew attention to it (and which quickly became over-saturated with pale imitators subsequently). Where his debut was a grower, Pulp Fiction hit the ground running, an instant critical and commercial success (it won the Palme d’Or four months before its release), only made cooler by being robbed of the Best Picture Oscar by Forrest Gump. And unlike some famously-cited should-have-beens, Tarantino’s masterpiece really did deserve it.