Skip to main content

Remarks like that will not get you invited to Christmas dinner.

Lethal Weapon
(1987)

(SPOILERS) The first of Shane Black’s Christmas-set screenplays – “It’s just a thing of beauty” he told Entertainment Weekly of the season to be jolly – isn’t perhaps his most essentially so. But then, the most essentially Shane Black Christmas-set movie is one where his sole contribution was furnishing the title (producer Joel Silver added a Christmas setting to Die Hard when he saw how it added a certain something to Lethal Weapon). Thematically, however, with forgiveness and family foregrounded, through the cathartic infliction of ultra-violence, nothing could be more festive.

On that level, the opening, as Jingle Bell Rock takes a woozy turn when Amanda Hunsaker (Jackie Swanson) dive offs a skyscraper, effectively informs us that it will remain a contrasting backdrop to grim proceedings. Indeed, the most Christmassy scene was one added by Jeffrey Boam (later writer of Lethal Weapons 2 and 3), in an attempt by director Richard Donner to water down the darkness of Black’s latest draft. The shootout at the Christmas tree lot replaced the sniper scene that can be seen on the “director’s cut” DVD. It’s an effective introduction to Mel Gibson’s Martin Riggs, one you wouldn’t know wasn’t penned by Black if you hadn’t been told, with Riggs announcing his suicidal bent – “You think I’m crazy?” – along with Gibson’s Three Stooges obsession (as to where Riggs’ tendencies to homophobic and racist slurs comes from, well, I’ll leave that for you to decide). The subsequent jumper scene – “Do you really wanna jump? Do you wanna?” – merely serves to underline his disposition.

If I can present the case for the prosecution for a moment, much as I’ve enjoyed the Lethal Weapon series, I’ve never counted it as one of my favourites of the action genre. Even here, before the “darker” tenor of the lead character has been watered down through comedy sidekicks and romantic interests, the tendency to overplay tends to lessen the potential impact. Gibson is really up to bug-eyed eleven here, perhaps just that little bit too indulged by Donner. His interplay and chemistry with Danny Glover’s Roger Murtaugh, just turning fifty and saddled with a new partner as reckless as he is reserved, is never less than terrific, but the Nam vet glamour-PTSD and grieving widower side is too heightened to be truly affecting.

Gibson’s the main attraction, which is why I think I’d previously paid less attention to just how great his co-star is. He gets it exactly. Both are playing about a decade older than they were at the time, both entirely convincingly (Gibson’s mid-'80s period finds him gaining a good decade of hard living in about half that time). Glover’s hangdog weariness is as perfect here as it would be out of place in Predator 2 a few years later. While Murtaugh’s attempts to hold his new partner in check are commendably for nought, it’s in his domestic interactions that he really shines, be it fretting over the big Five-O or putting on a show when he invites Riggs round for dinner. And his family are perfect, and must have enjoyed the ensemble playing – or the cheques – as they would all return for the sequels: Darlene Love as Roger’s affectionately long-suffering wife, Traci Wolfe as his Riggs-smitten eldest daughter Rianne and Ebonie Smith and Damon Hines as the cheeky kids (dad’s attempts to rap and their response are hilarious for their naturalism).

If this side goes great guns, where the picture stumbles slightly is in its failure to make the villains worthy or interesting. Gary Busey successfully reinvents himself as a bad guy in the form of blonde merc Mr Joshua, showing his steel by failing to flinch when a lighter is scorching his flesh, but he and Mitchell Ryan’s McAllister lack the wit and flair of later Black bad guys. There’s potential early on, with the intrigue of Nam connections announced by a kid witnessing Busey’s special forces tattoo, along with the mentions of Air America (later a Gibbo movie, and then the basis for a Tom Cruise one) and CIA heroin smuggling, but once Rianne has been kidnapped, there isn’t much room left for detective work.

As for the action, Donner handles the task with a mixture of aplomb and '80s excess. The rain-drenched finale, a fight between Riggs and Mr Joshua, has always struck me as a bit of a fizzle, and those moments that go overboard – Riggs rolling and shooting during the lot scene – land just that wrong side of absurd. It has to be said that Michael Kamen doesn’t help matters, ladling on the sax at any given opportunity (his and Eric Clapton’s score is often great, though, and he’d become a fixture of Silver productions for good reason). The balance isn’t as effective here as in say Predator, where the entire movie was intentionally pitched on an absurd, homoerotic level, such that scenes like Riggs and Murtaugh showing off their heroic cred during sadistic/titillating torture tip into the laughable. The dialogue too tends to the overripe at times (“Are you really crazy, or are you as good as they say you are?”)

On the other hand, the preceding lakebed sequence, as Riggs hides out with a sniper’s rifle during the exchange of Murtaugh and his daughter, is a set piece highlight Donner can be justifiably proud of. And Riggs’ reintegration into society (he’s cured – at least until Patsy Kensit gets got) is a heart-warming end note, amid discussions of the quality of Murtaugh’s wife’s cooking.

And while Die Hard gets all the credit – rightly so for its own blend of festive thuggery and bloodletting in aid of restoring the nuclear family – Lethal Weapon is really the movie responsible for morphing the action movie from muscle-bound hulks to respectable actors (Willis, Gibson). You might argue that happened at the start of the decade with Indiana Jones, or even that Eddie Murphy found his way in there first, kind of, but the adult action flicks of Silver and Simpson/Bruckheimer were a thing apart, and it was principally Gibson (and Glover) who first offered them an air of respectability. Even if Mel’s mullet is obviously a no-no under any artistic criteria. 


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

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

You are, by your own admission, a vagabond.

Doctor Who Season 10 - Worst to Best
Season 10 has the cachet of an anniversary year, one in which two of its stories actively trade on the past and another utilises significant elements. As such, it’s the first indication of the series’ capacity for slavishly indulging the two-edged sword that is nostalgia, rather than simply bringing back ratings winners (the Daleks). It also finds the show at its cosiest, a vibe that had set in during the previous season, which often seemed to be taking things a little too comfortably. Season 10 is rather more cohesive, even as it signals the end of an era (with Jo’s departure). As a collection of stories, you perhaps wouldn’t call it a classic year, but as a whole, an example of the Pertwee UNIT era operating at its most confident, it more than qualifies.

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.

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.

In a few moments, you will have an experience that will seem completely real. It will be the result of your subconscious fears transformed into your conscious awareness.

Brainstorm (1983)
(SPOILERS) Might Brainstorm have been the next big thing – a ground-breaking, game-changing cinematic spectacle that had as far reaching consequences as Star Wars (special effects) or Avatar (3D) – if only Douglas Trumbull had been allowed to persevere with his patented “Showscan” process (70mm film photographed and projected at 60 frames per second)? I suspect not; one only has to look at the not-so-far-removed experiment of Ang Lee with Billy Lynn’s Long Halftime Walk, and how that went down like a bag of cold sick, to doubt that any innovation will necessarily catch on (although Trumbull at least had a narrative hinge on which to turn his “more real than real” imagery, whereas Lee’s pretty much boiled down to “because it was there”). Brainstorm’s story is, though, like its title, possibly too cerebral, too much concerned with the consciousness and touting too little of the cloyingly affirmative that Bruce Rubin inevitably brings to his screenplays. That doesn’t mea…

I mean, I am just a dumb bunny, but, we are good at multiplying.

Zootropolis (2016)
(SPOILERS) The key to Zootropolis’ (or Zootopia as our American cousins refer to it; the European title change being nothing to do with U2, but down to a Danish zoo, it seems, which still doesn’t explain the German title, though) creative success isn’t so much the conceit of its much-vaunted allegory regarding prejudice and equality, or – conversely – the fun to be had riffing on animal stereotypes (simultaneously clever and obvious), or even the appealing central duo voiced by Ginnifier Goodwin (as first rabbit cop Judy Hopps) and Jason Bateman (fox hustler Nick Wilde). It’s coming armed with that rarity for an animation; a well-sustained plot that doesn’t devolve into overblown set pieces or rest on the easy laurels of musical numbers and montages.

So credit’s due to co-directors Byron Howard (Bolt, Tangled) and Rich Moore (of The Simpsons, Futurama, and latterly, the great until it kind of rests on its laurels Wreck-It-Ralph) and Jared Bush (presumably one of the th…

You can’t keep the whole world in the dark about what’s going on. Once they know that a five-mile hunk of rock is going to hit the world at 30,000 miles per hour, the people will want to know what the hell we intend to do about it.

Meteor (1979)
(SPOILERS) In which we find Sean Connery – or his agent, whom he got rid of subsequent to this and Cuba – showing how completely out of touch he was by the late 1970s. Hence hitching his cart to the moribund disaster movie genre just as movie entertainment was being rewritten and stolen from under him. He wasn’t alone, of course – pal Michael Caine would appear in both The Swarm and Beyond the Poseidon Adventure during this period – but Meteor’s lack of commercial appeal was only accentuated by how functional and charmless its star is in it. Some have cited Meteor as the worst movie of his career (Christopher Bray in his book on the actor), but its sin is not one of being outright terrible, rather of being terminally dull.

Never compare me to the mayor in Jaws! Never!

Ghostbusters (2016)
(SPOILERS) Paul Feig is a better director than Ivan Reitman, or at very least he’s savvy enough to gather technicians around him who make his films look good, but that hasn’t helped make his Ghostbusters remake (or reboot) a better movie than the original, and that’s even with the original not even being that great a movie in the first place.

Along which lines, I’d lay no claims to the 1984 movie being some kind of auteurist gem, but it does make some capital from the polarising forces of Aykroyd’s ultra-geekiness on the subject of spooks and Murray’s “I’m just here for the asides” irreverence. In contrast, Feig’s picture is all about treating the subject as he does any other genre, be it cop, or spy, or romcom. There’s no great affection, merely a reliably professional approach, one minded to ensure that a generous quota of gags (on-topic not required) can be pumped out via abundant improv sessions.

So there’s nothing terribly wrong with Ghostbusters, but aside from …

You keep a horse in the basement?

The ‘Burbs (1989)
(SPOILERS) The ‘Burbs is Joe Dante’s masterpiece. Or at least, his masterpiece that isn’t his bite-the-hand-that-feeds-you masterpiece Gremlins 2: The New Batch, or his high profile masterpiece Gremlins. Unlike those two, the latter of which bolted out of the gate and took audiences by surprise with it’s black wit subverting the expected Spielberg melange, and the first which was roundly shunned by viewers and critics for being absolutely nothing like the first and waving that fact gleefully under their noses, The ‘Burbs took a while to gain its foothold in the Dante pantheon. 

It came out at a time when there had been a good few movies (not least Dante’s) taking a poke at small town Americana, and it was a Tom Hanks movie when Hanks was still a broad strokes comedy guy (Big had just made him big, Turner and Hooch was a few months away; you know you’ve really made it when you co-star with a pooch). It’s true to say that some, as with say The Big Lebowski, “got it” on fi…

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.

Well, if we destroy Kansas the world may not hear about it for years.

Diamonds are Forever (1971)
In conception, Diamonds are Forever was a retreat to safer ground for the series following the “failure” of On Her Majesty’s Secret Service. In the end, it proved to be a significant break in tone and humour from what had gone before. More playfulness was evident in the heightened characterisations and settings, but simultaneously more boundaries were pushed in terms of sex and violence. Las Vegas lends the film a tarnished, glitterball quality that would quite accurately predict the excess and decadence of the coming decade. And presiding over the proceedings was a greying Bond, somewhat gone to seed and looking noticeably older than the near-decade it was since his first appearance. Somehow, the result is as sparkling and vital as the diamonds of the title, but it is understandably a curate’s egg. In many respects it bears more resemblance to the camp affectations, eccentricities and quirks of the television series The Avengers than the more straightforward…