Skip to main content

Look out the window. Eden’s not burning, it’s burnt.

Reign of Fire
(2002)

(SPOILERS) There was good reason to believe Rob Bowman would make a successful transition from top-notch TV director to top-notch film one. He had, after all, attracted attention and plaudits for Star Trek: The Next Generation and become such an integral part of The X-Files that he was trusted with the 1998 leap to the big screen. That movie wasn’t the hit it might have been – I suspect because, such was Chris Carter’s inability to hone a coherent arc, it continued to hedge its bets – but Bowman showed he had the goods. And then came Reign of Fire. And then Elektra. And that was it. Reign of Fire is entirely competently directed, but that doesn’t prevent it from being entirely lousy.

Dragonheart had already proved a moderate success as far as attempts to do for dragons what Jurasssic Park did for dinosaurs went: make them believable to a modern audience. That one now looks very creaky, and Rob Cohen is no one’s idea of a shit-hot shooter – although that’s probably the least of the negatives that come to mind – but it was helped considerably by Sean Connery’s dragon’s burr. Alas, the thinking that accompanied Reign of Fire’s conception was: what dragons really needed was unremittingly grimdark, apocalyptic trappings and characters. Namely, a determinedly “adult” approach that was the precise antithesis of the “magical” appeal one usually associates with dragon lore and legends (of course, Rudolf Steiner had it that dragons were real, and indeed that the Archaeopteryx breathed fire). As stricken as the Peter Jackson Hobbits are, one thing he didn’t go too far wrong with was his realisation of Smaug. Here, though.

The guys who came up with the idea for Reign of Fire, Gregg Chabot and Kevin Peterka, haven’t mustered a writing credit since, which is what is often what happens in Hollywood when your movie goes down like a bag of cold sick. Matt Greenberg, who came in on the screenplay, co-wrote Halloween H20: 20 Years Later (you know, the one that was a better return to Laurie Strode’s character than the recent one that entirely ignored his one) and would go on to pen adaptations of Stephen King novels 1408 and Pet Sematary. Between them, they were unable to come up with anything much more than unearthed dragons wreaking havoc on the Earth and ending society as we know it. Because even if you think that premise holds promise, what they do with it is utterly trite.

The most striking thing about Reign of Fire – in between inclinations to vaguely nod off – is how influential its tone has been. For a flop, it manages to set the template for the next two decades’ dour SF/fantasy, both in terms of humourless conception and grey, drab cinematography (arguably, Roland Emmerich’s Godzilla also had something of this, but it was generally much larkier in sensibility). From here, you move on to the later Harry Potters, to the Planet of the Apes reboots, Spielberg’s War of the Worlds, the diligently dark Dark Knight and absurdly so Supes. I’m sure some would frame the wasted Earth as paralleling real world events (War of the Worlds received kudos for precisely that, as if the berg ever had a political bone in his body that hadn’t been artificially inserted and undergone rigorous vetting by ILM), but Peterka and Chabot came up with the idea in 1996, and Greenberg rejigged it in 2000, before 9/11 (ahhhh, but that is what predictive programming is for, I hear you say. Which is a fair point).

Mostly, though, Reign of Fire is thoroughly disappointing in terms of trying to trace thematic intent or even a semblance of innocent coincidence. The most noteworthy element is the dating, with the unearthing of the prologue, witnessed by young Quinn Abercromby (Ben Thornton), taking place in 2008 – the year of the financial meltdown – before jumping to 2020 – the year of the… well, there are lots of words for it, none of them polite. We see newspaper headlines from 2010, of the “Is this the End?” and “Paris in Flames” variety, and learn that nukes did no good in repelling the dragon menace (well, like duh). I guess one could construe from their backstory – “A species that turned the dinosaurs to dust” – that they are in some respects akin to those currently implementing a not-so-great reset. The dragons, after all are figurative reptiles who hibernate after having a ruddy good chomp, so as to repopulate the planet for another ruddy good chomp. Dragon food or loosh, it’s all the same.

One might also point to the special relationship between Britain and America (the latter march in to save us, despite an inevitable backlash: “Only one thing worse than a dragon. Americans”). Matthew McConaughey’s Denton Van Zan (the what?) arriving with all the firepower available might even be seen as somewhat redolent of valorous GIs arriving in a war-torn London – or Northumbria. There’s also the requirement to obey the rules imposed by the nominated leaders (“If you go outside those gates, you jeopardise this community… You’re staying out there, not coming back”). Even the line “It’s a community, not a prison” is quite reflective of current times, although at least one has a choice in Reign’s dragon-infested future (or present), There’s also a scene where Van Zan forcibly attempts to draft some of the now grown up Quinn’s men.

Evidently, these dragons need an Achilles heel, so they’ve obliged that if you kill the sole male, that’s it for them. Plus, they very much are not a crepuscular species. And, if you fire a harpoon down their throats, they find it terminally uncomfortable.

As decent as Bowman’s direction is, and as solid as the dragon effects are (some of the fire ones are showing their age), none of it can salvage the essential lack of interest or dramatic tension within the story. This isn’t uncommon with the monster movie (clump forward the recent Godzillas). Unless you introduce an Aliens element or throw in some human antagonists (Aliens again), you can too easily produce something rather inert in terms of dynamics vs spectacle. The saddest thing about Reign of Fire’s failure is that my hopes for a big screen adaptation of DC Thompson’s Victor comic strip Tunnels of Terror, about a giant mole causing havoc in London, were completely scuppered (admittedly, those hopes were negligible in the first place).

There are moves to address the need for an engaging human element through the developing dispute/ comradeship between Quinn and Van Zan. Unfortunately, both lead actors, by dint of accentuating the dramatic sterility of the material, succeed only in doubling down on the inherent problems. Grown-up Quinn arrives in the strapping form of Christian Bale, earthy of accent and gravelly of voice (that part might have been a pitch for Batman). He’s exactly the laugh riot this doesn’t need (Bale’s relationship with Hollywood leading man parts of this ilk is patchy, as can also be seen in Terminator Salvation and Exodus: Gods and Kings). He’s so method in his humourless grimacing, he kills any dying spark the proceedings might have.

McConaughey, meanwhile, shaving his balding barnet and bulking up like a silly fool set on a slew of failed action vehicles (Sahara, Fool’s Gold), seems to have decided to compete with Bale at the method game: Alexander Siddig, sadly underused, told how everyone was informed McConaughey was to be called Van Zan throughout the shoot. Bale, who seemed to have been heading in a Machinist direction, took one look at the size of his co-star and crash-bulked up (his reasoning that those in the future would be starving is sound, his rationale that Quinn needed to be believable against Van Zan in a fight scene less so).

If they, together, despite gritting their teeth and going over the top, represent a charisma vacuum, the support is also patchy. Izabella Scorupo is at the tail end of her brief post-Goldeneye cachet, while Alice Krige appears only in the prologue. Most welcome is Gerard Butler, pre-refashioning himself as a B-level action star. Indeed, his performance and manner here is strangely James McAvoy-ish. I guess once you’ve gone all 300 on your six pack, there’s no going back, no matter how chunky you become.

Reign of Fire’s an entirely flavourless affair, and both this and the entirely flavourless Elektra suggest Bowman was probably right to retreat to TV (where he quickly attached himself to the underseen Groundhog Day show Day Break). The re-enactment of The Empire Strikes Back for children growing up in a TV and technology-deprived age has been rightly noted as a creative highpoint in the movie, but it’s about the only one. The irony is, this did nothing to stem the tide of austere takes on fantasy material: King Arthur, without the sorcery. Troy, without the gods. Like a dragon’s breath, they seemed perversely intent on sucking all the air out of the room.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Mondo bizarro. No offence man, but you’re in way over your head.

The X-Files 8.7: Via Negativa I wasn’t as down on the last couple of seasons of The X-Files as most seemed to be. For me, the mythology arc walked off a cliff somewhere around the first movie, with only the occasional glimmer of something worthwhile after that. So the fact that the show was tripping over itself with super soldiers and Mulder’s abduction/his and Scully’s baby (although we all now know it wasn’t, sheesh ), anything to stretch itself beyond breaking point in the vain hope viewers would carry on dangling, didn’t really make much odds. Of course, it finally snapped with the wretched main arc when the show returned, although the writing was truly on the wall with Season 9 finale The Truth . For the most part, though, I found 8 and 9 more watchable than, say 5 or 7. They came up with their fair share of engaging standalones, one of which I remembered to be Via Negativa .

You have done well to keep so much hair, when so many’s after it.

Jeremiah Johnson (1972) (SPOILERS) Hitherto, I was most familiar with Jeremiah Johnson in the form of a popular animated gif of beardy Robert Redford smiling and nodding in slow zoom close up (a moment that is every bit as cheesy in the film as it is in the gif). For whatever reason, I hadn’t mustered the enthusiasm to check out the 1970s’ The Revenant until now (well, beard-wise, at any rate). It’s easy to distinguish the different personalities at work in the movie. The John Milius one – the (mythic) man against the mythic landscape; the likeably accentuated, semi-poetic dialogue – versus the more naturalistic approach favoured by director Sydney Pollack and star Redford. The fusion of the two makes for a very watchable, if undeniably languorous picture. It was evidently an influence on Dances with Wolves in some respects, although that Best Picture Oscar winner is at greater pains to summon a more sensitive portrayal of Native Americans (and thus, perversely, at times a more patr

I tell you, it saw me! The hanged man’s asphyx saw me!

The Asphyx (1972) (SPOILERS) There was such a welter of British horror from the mid 60s to mid 70s, even leaving aside the Hammers and Amicuses, that it’s easy to lose track of them in the shuffle. This one, the sole directorial effort of Peter Newbrook (a cameraman for David Lean, then a cinematographer), has a strong premise and a decent cast, but it stumbles somewhat when it comes to taking that premise any place interesting. On the plus side, it largely eschews the grue. On the minus, directing clearly wasn’t Newbrook’s forte, and even aided by industry stalwart cinematographer Freddie Young (also a go-to for Lean), The Aspyhx is stylistically rather flat.

Isn’t it true, it’s easier to be a holy man on the top of a mountain?

The Razor’s Edge (1984) (SPOILERS) I’d hadn’t so much a hankering as an idle interest in finally getting round to seeing Bill Murray’s passion project. Partly because it seemed like such an odd fit. And partly because passion isn’t something you tend to associate with any Murray movie project, involving as it usually does laidback deadpan. Murray, at nigh-on peak fame – only cemented by the movie he agreed to make to make this movie – embarks on a serious-acting-chops dramatic project, an adaptation of W Somerset Maugham’s story of one man’s journey of spiritual self-discovery. It should at least be interesting, shouldn’t it? A real curio? Alas, not. The Razor’s Edge is desperately turgid.

You’re a disgrace, sir... Weren’t you at Harrow?

Our Man in Marrakesh aka Bang! Bang! You’re Dead (1966) (SPOILERS) I hadn’t seen this one in more than three decades, and I had in mind that it was a decent spy spoof, well populated with a selection of stalwart British character actors in supporting roles. Well, I had the last bit right. I wasn’t aware this came from the stable of producer Harry Alan Towers, less still of his pedigree, or lack thereof, as a sort of British Roger Corman (he tried his hand at Star Wars with The Shape of Things to Come and Conan the Barbarian with Gor , for example). More legitimately, if you wish to call it that, he was responsible for the Christopher Lee Fu Manchu flicks. Our Man in Marrakesh – riffing overtly on Graham Greene’s Our Man in Havana in title – seems to have in mind the then popular spy genre and its burgeoning spoofs, but it’s unsure which it is; too lightweight to work as a thriller and too light on laughs to elicit a chuckle.

You know what I sometimes wish? I sometimes wish I were ordinary like you. Ordinary and dead like all the others.

Séance on a Wet Afternoon (1964) (SPOILERS) Bryan Forbes’ adaptation of Mark McShane’s 1961’s novel has been much acclaimed. It boasts a distinctive storyline and effective performances from its leads, accompanied by effective black-and-white cinematography from Gerry Turpin and a suitably atmospheric score from John Barry. I’m not sure Forbes makes the most of the material, however, as he underlines Séance on a Wet Afternoon ’s inherently theatrical qualities at the expense of its filmic potential.

My Doggett would have called that crazy.

The X-Files 9.4: 4-D I get the impression no one much liked Agent Monica Reyes (Annabeth Gish), but I felt, for all the sub-Counsellor Troi, empath twiddling that dogged her characterisation, she was a mostly positive addition to the series’ last two years (of its main run). Undoubtedly, pairing her with Doggett, in anticipation of Gillian Anderson exiting just as David Duchovny had – you rewatch these seasons and you wonder where her head was at in hanging on – made for aggressively facile gender-swapped conflict positions on any given assignment. And generally, I’d have been more interested in seeing how two individuals sympathetic to the cause – her and Mulder – might have got on. Nevertheless, in an episode like 4-D you get her character, and Doggett’s, at probably their best mutual showing.

A ship is the finest nursery in the world.

A High Wind in Jamaica (1965) (SPOILERS) An odd one, this, as if Disney were remaking The Swiss Family Robinson for adults. One might perhaps have imagined the Mouse House producing it during their “Dark Disney” phase. But even then, toned down. After all, kids kidnapped by pirates sounds like an evergreen premise for boy’s own adventuring (more girl’s own here). The reality of Alexander Mackendrick’s film is decidedly antithetical to that; there’s a lingering feeling, despite A High Wind in Jamaica ’s pirates largely observing their distance, that things could turn rather nasty (and indeed, if Richard Hughes’ 1929 novel  had been followed to the letter, they would have more explicitly). 

The best thing in the world for the inside of a man or a woman is the outside of a horse.

Marnie (1964) (SPOILERS) Hitch in a creative ditch. If you’ve read my Vertigo review, you’ll know I admired rather than really liked the picture many fete as his greatest work. Marnie is, in many ways, a redux, in the way De Palma kept repeating himself in the early 80s only significantly less delirious and… well, compelling. While Marnie succeeds in commanding the attention fitfully, it’s usually for the wrong reasons. And Hitch, digging his heels in as he strives to fashion a star against public disinterest – he failed to persuade Grace Kelly out of retirement for Marnie Rutland – comes entirely adrift with his leads.

Schnell, you stinkers! Come on, raus!

Private’s Progress (1956) (SPOILERS) Truth be told, there’s good reason sequel I’m Alright Jack reaps the raves – it is, after all, razor sharp and entirely focussed in its satire – but Private’s Progress is no slouch either. In some respects, it makes for an easy bedfellow with such wartime larks as Norman Wisdom’s The Square Peg (one of the slapstick funny man’s better vehicles). But it’s also, typically of the Boulting Brothers’ unsentimental disposition, utterly remorseless in rebuffing any notions of romantic wartime heroism, nobility and fighting the good fight. Everyone in the British Army is entirely cynical, or terrified, or an idiot.