Skip to main content

Dude. You’re my hero and shit.

El Camino: A Breaking Bad Movie
(2019)

(SPOILERS) I was going to say I’d really like to see what Vince Gilligan has up his sleeve besides Breaking Bad spinoffs. But then I saw that he had a short-lived series on CBS a few years back (Battle Creek). I guess things Breaking Bad-related ensure an easy greenlight, particularly from Netflix, for whom the original show was bread and butter in its take up as a streaming platform. There’s something slightly dispiriting about El Camino: A Breaking Bad Movie, though. Not that Gilligan felt the need to return to Jesse Pinkman – although the legitimacy of that motive is debatable – but the desire to re-enter and re-inhabit the period of the show itself, as if he’s unable to move on from a near-universally feted achievement and has to continually exhume it and pick it apart.

And maybe there’s a bit of fear in there too. I doubt anyone stipulated that, if he was returning to the well, Walter White had to be in there – I mean, this is Netflix, laissez-faire is how it is, until they cancel you – but he includes a flashback nevertheless, in a movie that is so predicated on the same, it barely has a chance to breathe or find anything approaching an identity of its own. These are the things you loved about the series, Gilligan seems to be saying. Oh, and here’s a bone of some other stuff that’s happened to Jesse since. Which is basically his escape to Alaska. I think I’d rather have re-joined him somewhere down the line, rather than Gilligan meticulously documenting the hours and days subsequent to his taking off. But that’s what we’ve got, so…

Jesse’s quest to secure some escape money requires Gilligan to fashion a backstory showing where Todd (Jesse Plemons) stashed his cash. At least, before he stashed it somewhere else. If this is slightly inelegant – Gilligan isn’t able to pull existing threads from the original but has to weave in new ones – if feels less so because he does create a series of engrossing scenarios. While on the one hand you have the return of Robert Forster (RIP) as a character he played right near the end of the series’ run, a fugitive relocation specialist, you also have Gilligan coming up with two new characters (the always great Scott Shepherd as Casey and Scott MacArthur as Neil), who require a flashback to establish that Jesse has previously met them. Again, it isn’t the most elegant of manoeuvres.

The Neil and Casey plotline nevertheless provides the dramatic meat of El Camino, including a fine sustained sequence in which Jesse first breaks into Todd’s apartment and spends the night searching for his money; when he finally finds it, he’s inevitably interrupted, by the duo posing as cops. The following confrontation allows that Jesse is still something of a resourceful idiot, failing to recognise them as impostors, but then compelled to revisit them to ask of them the shortfall he needs for Forster to deliver him from peril. The subsequent “hero” scene has Jesse despatch both antagonists in a duel, providing a highly unlikely – on all sides of the equation – if satisfyingly cathartic resolution to his trials.

Flashbacks wise, we naturally get all the favourites – Krysten Ritter, Jonathan Banks, Bryan Cranston in a rather obvious bald wig – but such fan-service feels inessential in all cases, and while they’re nice enough to see, they’re ultimately a disservice to Jesse’s tale, even cumulatively suggesting Gilligan might be concerned that Paul can’t carry the story himself. Which he more than can. I don’t think Paul is necessarily a great all-rounder – of the various sore thumbs in Exodus: Gods and Kings, he stuck out by far the most – but in a role like this, he’s riveting. The flashback scenes that work best are all ones between Jesse and Todd, showcasing the captive, oppressed Pinkman; Paul gets to follow this up with convincingly disoriented PTSD. And as a director, Gilligan is particularly assured in characterising his protagonist’s mental state, while in general embracing the opportunity to go more cinematic.

Gilligan leaves Jesse much where he left him before: free. More emphatically so, perhaps, but enough to justify El Camino? I’d say probably not. He hasn’t convinced me he really needed to tell this story, and the dominance of flashbacks serve to underline that. As for further revisits? It might be inherent to the character that he needs a foil, or to be a foil, in which case Gilligan would really need a proper idea. But then, if he has a proper idea, it should really be in the service of a whole new original series (or film).


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

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Who’s got the Figgy Port?

Loki (2021) (SPOILERS) Can something be of redeemable value and shot through with woke (the answer is: Mad Max: Fury Road )? The two attributes certainly sound essentially irreconcilable, and Loki ’s tendencies – obviously, with new improved super-progressive Kevin Feige touting Disney’s uber-agenda – undeniably get in the way of what might have been a top-tier MCU entry from realising its full potential. But there are nevertheless solid bursts of highly engaging storytelling in the mix here, for all its less cherishable motivations. It also boasts an effortlessly commanding lead performance from Tom Hiddleston; that alone puts Loki head and shoulders above the other limited series thus far.

Here’s Bloody Justice for you.

Laughter in Paradise (1951) (SPOILERS) The beginning of a comedic run for director-producer Mario Zampa that spanned much of the 1950s, invariably aided by writers Michael Pertwee and Jack Davies (the latter went on to pen a spate of Norman Wisdom pictures including The Early Bird , and also comedy rally classic Monte Carlo or Bust! ) As usual with these Pertwee jaunts, Laughter in Paradise boasts a sparky premise – renowned practical joker bequeaths a fortune to four relatives, on condition they complete selected tasks that tickle him – and more than enough resultant situational humour.

Damn prairie dog burrow!

Tremors (1990) (SPOILERS) I suspect the reason the horror comedy – or the sci-fi comedy, come to that – doesn’t tend to be the slam-dunk goldmine many assume it must be, is because it takes a certain sensibility to do it right. Everyone isn’t a Joe Dante or Sam Raimi, or a John Landis, John Carpenter, Edgar Wright, Christopher Landon or even a Peter Jackson or Tim Burton, and the genre is littered with financial failures, some of them very good failures (and a good number of them from the names mentioned). Tremors was one, only proving a hit on video (hence six sequels at last count). It also failed to make Ron Underwood a directing legend.

You nicknamed my daughter after the Loch Ness Monster?

The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn Part 2 (2012) The final finale of the Twilight saga, in which pig-boy Jacob tells Bella that, “No, it's not like that at all!” after she accuses him of being a paedo. But then she comes around to his viewpoint, doubtless displaying the kind of denial many parents did who let their kids spend time with Jimmy Savile or Gary Glitter during the ‘70s. It's lucky little Renesmee will be an adult by the age of seven, right? Right... Jacob even jokes that he should start calling Edward, “Dad”. And all the while they smile and smile.

I’m just glad Will Smith isn’t alive to see this.

The Tomorrow War (2021) (SPOILERS). Not so much tomorrow as yesterday. There’s a strong sense of déjà vu watching The Tomorrow War , so doggedly derivative is it of every time-travel/alien war/apocalyptic sci-fi movie of the past forty years. Not helping it stand out from the pack are doughy lead Chris Pratt, damned to look forever on the beefy side no matter how ripped he is and lacking the chops or gravitas for straight roles, and debut live-action director Chris McKay, who manages to deliver the goods in a serviceably anonymous fashion.

Why don't we go on a picnic, up the hill?

Invaders from Mars (1986) (SPOILERS) One can wax thematical over the number of remakes of ’50s movies in the ’80s – and ’50s SF movies in particular – and of how they represent ever-present Cold War and nuclear threats, and steadily increasing social and familial paranoias and disintegrating values. Really, though, it’s mostly down to the nostalgia of filmmakers for whom such pictures were formative influences (and studios hoping to make an easy buck on a library property). Tobe Hooper’s version of nostalgia, however, is not so readily discernible as a John Carpenter or a David Cronenberg (not that Cronenberg could foment such vibes, any more than a trip to the dental hygienist). Because his directorial qualities are not so readily discernible. Tobe Hooper movies tend to be a bit shit. Which makes it unsurprising that Invaders from Mars is a bit shit.

What's a movie star need a rocket for anyway?

The Rocketeer (1991) (SPOILERS) The Rocketeer has a fantastic poster. One of the best of the last thirty years (and while that may seem like faint praise, what with poster design being a dying art – I’m looking at you Marvel, or Amazon and the recent The Tomorrow War – it isn’t meant to be). The movie itself, however, tends towards stodge. Unremarkable pictures with a wide/cult fanbase, conditioned by childhood nostalgia, are ten-a-penny – Willow for example – and in this case, there was also a reasonably warm critical reception. But such an embrace can’t alter that Joe Johnston makes an inveterately bland, tepid movie director. His “feel” for period here got him The First Avenger: Captain America gig, a bland, tepid movie tending towards stodge. So at least he’s consistent.

I'm offering you a half-share in the universe.

Doctor Who Season 8 – Worst to Best I’m not sure I’d watched Season Eight chronologically before. While I have no hesitation in placing it as the second-best Pertwee season, based on its stories, I’m not sure it pays the same dividends watched as a unit. Simply, there’s too much Master, even as Roger Delgado never gets boring to watch and the stories themselves offer sufficient variety. His presence, turning up like clockwork, is inevitably repetitive. There were no particular revelatory reassessments resulting from this visit, then, except that, taken together – and as The Directing Route extra on the Blu-ray set highlights – it’s often much more visually inventive than what would follow. And that Michael Ferguson should probably have been on permanent attachment throughout this era.

As in the hokey kids’ show guy?

A Beautiful Day in the Neighbourhood (2019) (SPOILERS) I don’t think Mr Rogers could have been any creepier had Kevin Spacey played him. It isn’t just the baggage Tom Hanks brings, and whether or not he’s the adrenochrome lord to the stars and/or in Guantanamo and/or dead and/or going to make a perfectly dreadful Colonel Tom Parker and an equally awful Geppetto; it’s that his performance is so constipated and mannered an imitation of Mr Rogers’ genuineness that this “biopic” takes on a fundamentally sinister turn. His every scene with a youngster isn’t so much exuding benevolent empathy as suggestive of Chitty Chitty Bang Bang ’s Child Catcher let loose in a TV studio (and again, this bodes well for Geppetto). Extend that to A Beautiful Day in the Neighbourhood ’s conceit, that Mr Rogers’ life is one of a sociopathic shrink milking angst from his victims/patients in order to get some kind of satiating high – a bit like a rejuvenating drug, on that score – and you have a deeply unsettli

Somewhere out there is a lady who I think will never be a nun.

The Sound of Music (1965) (SPOILERS) One of the most successful movies ever made – and the most successful musical – The Sound of Music has earned probably quite enough unfiltered adulation over the years to drown out the dissenting voices, those that denounce it as an inveterately saccharine, hollow confection warranting no truck. It’s certainly true that there are impossibly nice and wholesome elements here, from Julie Andrews’ career-dooming stereotype governess to the seven sonorous children more than willing to dress up in old curtains and join her gallivanting troupe. Whether the consequence is something insidious in its infectious spirit is debatable, but I’ll admit that it manages to ensnare me. I don’t think I’d seen the movie in its entirety since I was a kid, and maybe that formativeness is a key brainwashing facet of its appeal, but it retains its essential lustre just the same.