Skip to main content

You’re easily the best policeman in Moscow.

Gorky Park
(1983)

(SPOILERS) Michael Apted and workmanlike go hand in hand when it comes to thriller fare (his Bond outing barely registered a pulse). This adaptation of Martin Cruz Smith’s 1981 novel – by Dennis Potter, no less – is duly serviceable but resolutely unremarkable. William Hurt’s militsiya officer Renko investigates three faceless bodies found in the titular park. It was that grisly element that gave Gorky Park a certain cachet when I first saw it as an impressionable youngster. Which was actually not unfair, as it’s by far its most memorable aspect.

That and the casting. Hurt is solid, but not really a perfect fit for such mainstream fare, bringing ill-serving passivity and introspection to a character whose most noteworthy trait is a very capable ability to reimagine the scene of the crime and the circumstances leading up to the victims’ deaths (in the novel, Renko is said to suffer from the made-up Pathoheterodoxy Syndrome, or “misguided arrogance”). If Renko sounds like a pet detective (as in, the author’s pet), Smith would use him in a further seven tomes. I can feel Netflix calling…

Hurt’s supported by Joanna Pacula, whose character knew two of the victims, and further American muscle in the form of Brian Dennehy, filling out the kind of brawny sidekick role you entirely expect of him. If anything, there isn’t enough Dennehy, although he’s memorably disposed of at a late stage, courtesy of disembowelment by Lee Marvin’s sable-smuggling businessman. Marvin’s fine; he always makes an impression, even here where he’s called upon to underplay, but the intended Burt Lancaster would have been better.

The ante ups agreeably during the Stockholm-set closing stages of the picture, when the net draws in on Marvin. Unfortunately, though, the sheer mundanity of his operation rather lessens the impact of the web of intrigue Renko becomes embroiled in. Sure, there’s the requisite dodgy superior (it’s clear quite early on that Ian Bannen’s Chief Prosecutor Iamskoy isn’t straight as a die), and the KGB are constantly lurking on the edges of the investigation, but Apted fails to create the kind of oppressive atmosphere that would ensure a lingering impact.

In principle, Gorky Park represents a nice shift from the norm: a Cold War thriller from point of view of the Soviets. But the movie lacks the resonance of more “authentic” western protagonist fare; maybe it’s partly the hurdle of presenting a Hollywood-ised, English-speaking tale that does for it – more recently, both Child 44 and The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo went down underwhelmingly – but the presence of a broad selection of British faces in the cast tends to underline that this is from the same era as classic La Carré, just much lower calorie (both Bannen and Alexander Know had appeared din Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy, while Hurt eschews his native accent for an English one).

You’ve also got two later Withnail & I players: Michael Elphick (as Renko’s sergeant) and Richard Griffiths. Plus Alexei Sayle as a Muscovite wideboy. Best of the lot is the same year’s Emperor Palpatine, Ian McDiarmid, in the part of a professor asked to reconstruct the faceless faces; it’s the one role where you can actually hear Potter’s voice coming to the fore (“Promise me I can have your face when the breath has left your body”) and McDiarmid relishes it.

There are other well-written scenes; Hurt meets with Marvin, more concerned with the food on his lip than the corpses; Hurt’s confrontation with Bannen in a bath house. And there’s a nimble piece of action where Renko leaps, Bourne-like, through a window to save Pacula. For the most part, though, you wouldn’t place the screenwriter’s involvement if you hadn’t been told. Likewise, you might not realise Helsinki was cast as Russia. Unsurprising, given the less than laudatory depiction of the KGB, although the reason given for denying access was that there was no crime of the movie’s ilk there. Naturally. James Horner furnishes a disappointingly anonymous score, the epitome of intrusive 80s blare, which rather adds to the sense of Gorky Park’s lack of finesse where it counts. 


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.

I’m giving you a choice. Either put on these glasses or start eating that trash can.

They Live * (1988) (SPOILERS) Don’t get me wrong, I’m a big fan of They Live – I was a big fan of most things Carpenter at the time of its release – but the manner in which its reputation as a prophecy of (or insight into) “the way things are” has grown is a touch out of proportion with the picture’s relatively modest merits. Indeed, its feting rests almost entirely on the admittedly bravura sequence in which WWF-star-turned-movie-actor Roddy Piper, under the influence of a pair of sunglasses, first witnesses the pervasive influence of aliens among us who are sucking mankind dry. That, and the ludicrously genius sequence in which Roddy, full of transformative fervour, attempts to convince Keith David to don said sunglasses, for his own good. They Live should definitely be viewed by all, for their own good, but it’s only fair to point out that it doesn’t have the consistency of John Carpenter at his very, very best. Nada : I have come here to chew bubblegum and kick a

Ladies and gentlemen, this could be a cultural misunderstanding.

Mars Attacks! (1996) (SPOILERS) Ak. Akk-akk! Tim Burton’s gleefully ghoulish sci-fi was his first real taste of failure. Sure, there was Ed Wood , but that was cheap, critics loved it, and it won Oscars. Mars Attacks! was BIG, though, expected to do boffo business, and like more than a few other idiosyncratic spectaculars of the 1990s ( Last Action Hero , Hudson Hawk ) it bombed BIG. The effect on Burton was noticeable. He retreated into bankable propositions (the creative and critical nadir perhaps being Planet of the Apes , although I’d rate it much higher than the likes of Alice in Wonderland and Dumbo ) and put the brakes on his undisciplined goth energy. Something was lost. Mars Attacks! is far from entirely successful, but it finds the director let loose with his own playset and sensibility intact, apparently given the licence to do what he will.

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.

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

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.

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.