Skip to main content

I said undercover. Not coked-up Borg and McEnroe.

6 Underground 
(2019)

(SPOILERS) 6 Underground’s opening sequence is as pure – if that’s remotely an appropriate word, given the content – and unexpurgated a slice of Bayhem as you ever did see, a visual tour de force of colours, sound, insane stunts, pulverised pedestrians and exploding entrails up there with anything in Bad Boys II. One can go back and forth on whether or not that’s a good or bad thing – at his best, which is increasingly rarely, I think Michael Bay’s a purveyor of “big” cinema par excellence – but the director’s undeniably in his element. Unfortunately, much of the rest of the movie is pretty unpersuasive.

Which is largely the case for Bay’s oeuvre. He is not the connoisseur of a well-honed screenplay. The best he’s given us came early on, with The Rock, while the more recent Pain & Gain found him bludgeoning, battering and beating any satirical elements to death via his typically hyperbolic treatment of the material. Because Bay wouldn’t be Bay if he engaged in moderation or subtlety. He spent a decade in the Transformers-verse, making five movies about a toy range beating the shit out of each other you can barely tell apart (the robots and the movies), and in Bad Boys II boasted extreme bad taste a badge of honour.

Also to be found in Bay’s resumé are a couple of paeans to brave heroes in the armed services, notably the risible Pearl Harbor and more recently 13 Hours: The Secret Soldiers of Benghazi. The latter was an impressively executed but predictably politically vacuous exercise in its depiction of private military contractors saving the asses of CIA guys operating in Libya to unspecified ends. Maybe Bay’s yen to make 6 Underground came from a similar philosophical place. Scripted by Paul Wenick and Rhett Reese – the Zombielands, the Deadpools, Life; actually nothing with their name on it hitherto suggests this would be quite so… so-so – it essentially posits a private sector CIA, unhindered by pesky government red tape, by way of irreverent quips and superhero secret identities (but no spandex).

Ryan Reynold’s billionaire magnet-guy – neodymium micro-magnets, to be precise – One has assembled the titular team to pull off jobs no one else can. Read: coups in Middle Eastern countries to depose dictators he unilaterally decides are no good (“You could take out some truly evil people. Truly world-class evil motherfuckers” he tells prospective Seven, Corey Hawkins of 24: Legacy). One made his fortune selling patents (including to the CIA) and decided he wanted to use his loot to do good: “Governments don’t really help people in need” he explains insightfully.

Later, One refutes the idea that the President sent them to their chosen country (“He can’t even spell Turgistan” which may be partly due to it being fictional, at least in the current era). The evil dictator they plan on taking down has been instigating chemical attacks on his people and observes in passing, as would any self-aware Middle Eastern dictator, “The US? They made me. Russia? They armed me”. So Turgistan is evidently intended as a grab bag of Libya and Syria, particularly the former, with the twisted justice One reserves for Rovach Alimov (Lior Raz); he refrains from killing him outright in order to drop him obligingly from a helicopter, so he can be torn apart by his fellow countrymen. Just the kind of compassionate guy you want on your side.

Bay has always refrained from explicitly stating his political preferences, but you’d be hard-pressed to see this simplistic story of evil dictators and democracy-enforcing vigilantes being other than shot through with right-wing idealism. The problem with all this, besides morally and ethically that is, is that 6 Underground takes a dramatic nosedive whenever we aren’t involved in the team pulling off daring operations. And since these operations constitute three extended action sequences over the span of a two-hour-plus movie, there’s a lot of dead weight here. Dead weight characterised by that evil Middle Eastern dictator, of the type Hollywood has been churning out for forty years now (with a moderate brother played by Patman Maadi to take his place).

The other problem is that the team aren’t especially appealing. Mission: Impossible is all about Tom Cruise doing stunts, so the supporting cast are lucky to get a look in. Fast & Furious is all about family. “We’re not family” instructs One at one point, meaning that events will inevitably prove him wrong (mostly swayed by Seven’s ex-Delta Force “leave no one behind” mantra).

The opening sequence effectively and often hilariously introduces the line-up, including Mélanie Laurent’s ex-CIA agent Two, Manuel Garcia-Rulfo’s hit man Three (not remotely funny as Bay clearly thinks he is), Ben Hardy’s parkour guy robber Four, Adrian Arjona’s doctor Five and Dave Franco’s doomed driver Six (Franco is usually less irritating than his brother by dint of getting less screen time, and mercifully, he’s done and dusted by the end of this chase). Fast-talking Reynolds aside, who doesn’t so much have a remotely plausible character as he’s played by fast-talking Reynolds, the only impressions made come via strained and unconvincing interplay; Two and Three embark on an unromantic Michael Bay romance, while Seven’s integrity rubs off on One when he saves Four.

But all that aside: the action. The opening Italy-set chase is exhilarating and outrageous, piling up the innocent bystander carnage (“You hit one more person, and I’m walking!” shouts Five), and replete with spurting bullet wounds, blonde Batman Four hanging about on rooftops waiting for the judicious moment to intervene in a car chase by sending scaffolding poles intrusively through windscreens and chest cavities, a dangling eyeball (“Don’t you squash it!”), a slow-motion rocket grenade brushing a bad guy’s nose before exploding, evidence that Bay thinks he’s still in the 90s (Spice Girls used as an inappropriate music choice gag) and best of all “Nooooo the puppies!” as Six attempts to avoid running over a couple of pooches. All this, interjected with freeze frames, title cards and Reynolds’ voice over, and Bojan Bazelli's gorgeous cinematography, makes for a dizzying mix.

Then, however, it’s another hour of twiddling one’s thumbs until Bay mounts the team’s attack on a rooftop pad, complete with breached swimming pool flooding carnage. Sure, there are flashbacks detailing how the team was formed and individual members’ backgrounds, but since the members aren’t very vital – Laurent probably comes off best – no amount of flash from the director can persuade us otherwise. The near-finale finds One using his skills to magnetise an entire yacht along with anyone in the vicinity. It’s big, bold and bug-nuts, and again, Bay’s like a pig in shit showing off just how far he’s willing to go, with a kitchen full of knives having a devastating effect and a hand grenade jammed in a bad guy’s mouth leaving nothing above the shoulders.

So 6 Underground represents another example of Netflix exerting absolutely zero quality control. A positive boon for the directors they’re offering bottomless bags of cash, not so promising for their growing library. This cost $150m, and I can imagine it would have bombed, had it been a studio cinema release (nevertheless, Bay's visuals are tailored for a BIG screen). As it is, it’s sure to do well, viewers-wise, but it’s evidence that Bay really needs material tailored to performers who can keep their heads above water – in the past Will Smith, Nic Cage maybe – while he’s setting destroying everything around them. Reynolds is left operating in a vacuum here, and it goes down as yet another of his iffy lead role choices.


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

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Poor Easy Breezy.

Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood (2019)
(SPOILERS) My initial reaction to Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood was mild disbelief that Tarantino managed to hoodwink studios into coming begging to make it, so wilfully perverse is it in disregarding any standard expectations of narrative or plotting. Then I remembered that studios, or studios that aren’t Disney, are desperate for product, and more especially, product that might guarantee them a hit. Quentin’s latest appears to be that, but whether it’s a sufficient one to justify the expense of his absurd vanity project remains to be seen.

I just hope my death makes more cents than my life.

Joker (2019)
(SPOILERS) So the murder sprees didn’t happen, and a thousand puff pieces desperate to fan the flames of such events and then told-ya-so have fallen flat on their faces. The biggest takeaway from Joker is not that the movie is an event, when once that seemed plausible but not a given, but that any mainstream press perspective on the picture appears unable to divorce its quality from its alleged or actual politics. Joker may be zeitgeisty, but isn’t another Taxi Driver in terms of cultural import, in the sense that Taxi Driver didn’t have a Taxi Driver in mind when Paul Schrader wrote it. It is, if you like, faux-incendiary, and can only ever play out on that level. It might be more accurately described as a grubbier, grimier (but still polished and glossy) The Talented Ripley, the tale of developing psychopathy, only tailored for a cinemagoing audience with few options left outside of comic book fare.

I'm reliable, I'm a very good listener, and I'm extremely funny.

Terminator: Dark Fate (2019)
(SPOILERS) When I wrote my 23 to see in 2019, I speculated that James Cameron might be purposefully giving his hand-me-downs to lesser talents because he hubristically didn’t want anyone making a movie that was within a spit of the proficiency we’ve come to expect from him. Certainly, Robert Rodriguez and Tim Miller are leagues beneath Kathryn Bigelow, Jimbo’s former spouse and director of his Strange Days screenplay. Miller’s no slouch when it comes to action – which is what these movies are all about, let’s face it – but neither is he a craftsman, so all those reviews attesting that Terminator: Dark Fate is the best in the franchise since Terminator 2: Judgment Day may be right, but there’s a considerable gulf between the first sequel (which I’m not that big a fan of) and this retcon sequel to that sequel.

So you want me to be half-monk, half-hitman.

Casino Royale (2006)
(SPOILERS) Despite the doubts and trepidation from devotees (too blonde, uncouth etc.) that greeted Daniel Craig’s casting as Bond, and the highly cynical and low-inspiration route taken by Eon in looking to Jason Bourne's example to reboot a series that had reached a nadir with Die Another Day, Casino Royale ends up getting an enormous amount right. If anything, its failure is that it doesn’t push far enough, so successful is it in disarming itself of the overblown set pieces and perfunctory plotting that characterise the series (even at its best), elements that would resurge with unabated gusto in subsequent Craig excursions.

For the majority of its first two hours, Casino Royale is top-flight entertainment, with returning director Martin Campbell managing to exceed his excellent work reformatting Bond for the ‘90s. That the weakest sequence (still good, mind) prior to the finale is a traditional “big” (but not too big) action set piece involving an attempt to…

Haven’t you ever heard of the healing power of laughter?

Batman (1989)
(SPOILERS) There’s Jaws, there’s Star Wars, and then there’s Batman in terms of defining the modern blockbuster. Jaws’ success was so profound, it changed the way movies were made and marketed. Batman’s marketing was so profound, it changed the way tentpoles would be perceived: as cash cows. Disney tried to reproduce the effect the following year with Dick Tracy, to markedly less enthusiastic response. None of this places Batman in the company of Jaws as a classic movie sold well, far from it. It just so happened to hit the spot. As Tim Burton put it, it was “more of a cultural phenomenon than a great movie”. It’s difficult to disagree with his verdict that the finished product (for that is what it is) is “mainly boring”.

Now, of course, the Burton bat has been usurped by the Nolan incarnation (and soon the Snyder). They have some things in common. Both take the character seriously and favour a sombre tone, which was much more of shock to the system when Burton did it (even…

The more you drive, the less intelligent you are.

Repo Man (1984)
In fairness, I should probably check out more Alex Cox’s later works. Before I consign him to the status of one who never made good on the potential of his early success. But the bits and pieces I’ve seen don’t hold much sway. I pretty much gave up on him after Walker. It seemed as if the accessibility of Repo Man was a happy accident, and he was subsequently content to drift further and further down his own post-modern punk rabbit hole, as if affronted by the “THE MOST ASTONISHING FEATURE FILM DEBUT SINCE STEVEN SPIELBERG’S DUEL” accolade splashed over the movie’s posters (I know, I have a copy; see below).

You guys sure like watermelon.

The Irishman aka I Heard You Paint Houses (2019)
(SPOILERS) Perhaps, if Martin Scorsese hadn’t been so opposed to the idea of Marvel movies constituting cinema, The Irishman would have been a better film. It’s a decent film, assuredly. A respectable film, definitely. But it’s very far from being classic. And a significant part of that is down to the usually assured director fumbling the execution. Or rather, the realisation. I don’t know what kind of crazy pills the ranks of revered critics have been taking so as to recite as one the mantra that you quickly get used to the de-aging effects so intrinsic to its telling – as Empire magazine put it, “you soon… fuggadaboutit” – but you don’t. There was no point during The Irishman that I was other than entirely, regrettably conscious that a 75-year-old man was playing the title character. Except when he was playing a 75-year-old man.

This is one act in a vast cosmic drama. That’s all.

Audrey Rose (1977)
(SPOILERS) Robert Wise was no stranger to high-minded horror fare when he came to Audrey Rose. He was no stranger to adding a distinctly classy flavour to any genre he tackled, in fact, particularly in the tricky terrain of the musical (West Side Story, The Sound of Music) and science fiction (The Day the Earth Stood Still, The Andromeda Strain). He hadn’t had much luck since the latter, however, with neither Two People nor The Hindenburg garnering good notices or box office. In addition to which, Audrey Rose saw him returning to a genre that had been fundamentally impacted by The Exorcist four years before. One might have expected the realist principals he observed with The Andromeda Strain to be applied to this tale of reincarnation, and to an extent they are, certainly in terms of the performances of the adults, but Wise can never quite get past a hacky screenplay that wants to impart all the educational content of a serious study of continued existence in tandem w…

They literally call themselves “Decepticons”. That doesn’t set off any red flags?

Bumblebee  (2018)
(SPOILERS) Bumblebee is by some distance the best Transformers movie, simply by dint of having a smattering of heart (one might argue the first Shia LaBeouf one also does, and it’s certainly significantly better than the others, but it’s still a soulless Michael Bay “machine”). Laika VP and director Travis Knight brings personality to a series that has traditionally consisted of shamelessly selling product, by way of a nostalgia piece that nods to the likes of Herbie (the original), The Iron Giant and even Robocop.

Look, the last time I was told the Germans had gone, it didn't end well.

1917 (2019)
(SPOILERS) When I first heard the premise of Sam Mendes’ Oscar-bait World War I movie – co-produced by Amblin Partners, as Spielberg just loves his sentimental war carnage – my first response was that it sounded highly contrived, and that I’d like to know how, precisely, the story Mendes’ granddad told him would bear any relation to the events he’d be depicting. And just why he felt it would be appropriate to honour his relative’s memory via a one-shot gimmick. None of that has gone away on seeing the film. It’s a technical marvel, and Roger Deakins’ cinematography is, as you’d expect, superlative, but that mastery rather underlines that 1917 is all technique, that when it’s over and you get a chance to draw your breath, the experience feels a little hollow, a little cynical and highly calculated, and leaves you wondering what, if anything, Mendes was really trying to achieve, beyond an edge-of-the-seat (near enough) first-person actioner.