Skip to main content

They hunger for flesh, but do not require it.

Resident Evil: Extinction

(SPOILERS) My previous exposure to the Resident Evil movies was limited to the first outing and then this one. And the reason I was intrigued to see this one was to a small degree the Mad Max trappings it chose to appropriate, but mostly it was the presence of one Russell Mulcahy as director, at that point very much in the straight-to-video realm (an arena he’d quickly return to with a Scorpion King sequel). My interest in the Highlander – and Ricochet! – director tackling zombies was not misplaced. Resident Evil: Extinction is vastly superior to anything the series offered hitherto. Why, it even makes the material seem half respectable.

Paul WS Anderson, as ever on script duties, also manages to offer a few decent ideas, magpie-ing in particular Alien Resurrection’s cloning onto Alice. The opener finds her awaking in a mansion, much as we’ve come to expect, only for her to be killed and dumped in a pit… joining a load of other clones. It’s a striking and effective image (one that would in turn be magpied by Christopher Smith in Triangle a few years later). The duplicates idea will be returned to at the climax, when a clone Alice saves the original. We also revisit the control theme of Resident Evil: Apocalypse, with the transhumanism element rearing its programmed head as Alice is shutdown via satellite (you know satellites, right?) and fights the conditioning, short-circuiting the “orbiting” relay.

However, the problem with delivering more Alice, along with the general upping of the quality ante, is that it serves to emphasise Milla’s something of an empty centre; when the movies are strictly functional, kickass affairs, this matters not a jot, but try to infuse a sliver of texture and the holes start showing (she’s as blank as her face is when, for cosmetic purposes, some photoshop is called upon to smooth out Alice’s wrinkles). It’s fortunate then, that Iain Glen, who gets some stick in some quarters as wooden, yet I’ve always considered a decent actor, is there to share some of the thesping duties. In a smart move, he’s not only nefariously inclined but also up against it from unsympathetic superiors, which means his character Dr Isaacs is going out on a limb.

There are even some genuinely strong scenes occasionally, amid the convoy-in-peril swill you’d expect. Such as the one where Isaacs tries out a means of modifying/domesticating the undead. It’s a sequence with shades of Romero’s Day of the Dead (1985), and it adds an impassive, unflinching echo to Isaacs as he unblinkingly shuts his assistant in with the formerly pacified subject. Perhaps inevitably, Isaacs is infected and duly transformed into a hulking loon (the Tyrant, it says here), complete with manga tentacles, after overdosing on anti-virus software. And Mulcahy trots out the dicing effect again, because, well, it’s cool and grisly and audiences can never get enough of that kind of thing (Anderson also reminds you just who is writing this when Tyrant’s announcement “I am the future” elicits “No. You’re just another asshole”).

Getting out into the arid expanses helps Extinction considerably in establishing its own movie identity, as opposed to merely the latest add-on to its predecessors. Sure, we get the de rigueur MKUtra eye closeups, but the vistas are evocative, and the more surprisingly so, since this is David Johnson returning as cinematographer from the unexceptional original. The zombie prosthetics are solid and often used artfully to frame shots. The besieged desert base is a striking visual, and while these are evidently CGI zombies (in long shot), flies and crows, they’re used in a complementary way, rather than excessively. In general, Mulcahy’s pop-promo sensibility aids and abets the tone and atmosphere; this is a way better sequel than anyone could have hoped for, and way better than Anderson, who attested to admiring the director’s work, would have furnished himself.

We see the return of the AI presence, this time in the form of a sister entity White Queen, and there’s significant hearkening back to earlier outings (replicas of the base and visual cues) as well as revisiting previous characters (Carlos Oliveira and LJ return) and those from the games (Heroes’ Ali Larter is Claire Redfield and Jason O’Mara is Umbrella CEO Albert Wesker).

The Vegas setting represents another cue lifted by Zack Snyder for Army of the Dead (see also Resident Evil: Apocalypse). And obviously, on the predictive side, the depopulation signifiers abound. This is a world where humanity has been devastated, albeit nursing very ’80s wasteland visual cues (the T-virus has infected everything, not just people). The future for the remainder appears to be one of augmentation or else. It’s quite possible Resident Evil: Extinction isn’t as popular with game enthusiasts for taking a significant detour in content and setting, but that’s probably one of the reasons it’s halfway satisfying.

Popular posts from this blog

Ziggy smokes a lot of weed.

Moonfall (2022) (SPOILERS) For a while there, it looked as if Moonfall , the latest and least-welcomed – so it seems – piece of apocalyptic programming from Roland Emmerich, might be sending mixed messages. Fortunately, we need not have feared, as it turns out to be the same pedigree of disaster porn we’ve come to expect from the director, one of the Elite’s most dutiful mass-entertainment stooges, even if his lustre has rather dimmed since the glory days of 2012.

The Illumi-what-i?

Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness (2022) (SPOILERS) In which Sam Raimi proves that he can stand proudly with the best – or worst – of them as a good little foot soldier of the woke apocalypse. You’d expect the wilfully anarchic – and Republican – Raimi to choke on the woke, but instead, he’s sucked it up, grinned and bore it. Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness is so slavishly a production-line Marvel movie, both in plotting and character, and in nu-Feige progressive sensibilities, there was no chance of Sam staggering out from beneath its suffocating demands with anything more than a few scraps of stylistic flourish intact.

What’s so bad about being small? You’re not going to be small forever.

Innerspace (1987) There’s no doubt that Innerspace is a flawed movie. Joe Dante finds himself pulling in different directions, his instincts for comic subversion tempered by the need to play the romance plot straight. He tacitly acknowledges this on the DVD commentary for the film, where he notes Pauline Kael’s criticism that he was attempting to make a mainstream movie; and he was. But, as ever with Dante, it never quite turns out that way. Whereas his kids’ movies treat their protagonists earnestly, this doesn’t come so naturally with adults. I’m a bona fide devotee of Innerspace , but I can’t help but be conscious of its problems. For the most part Dante papers over the cracks; the movie hits certain keynotes of standard Hollywood prescription scripting. But his sensibility inevitably suffuses it. That, and human cartoon Martin Short (an ideal “leading man” for the director) ensure what is, at first glance just another “ Steven Spielberg Presents ” sci-fi/fantas

All I saw was an old man with a funky hand, that’s all I saw.

The Blob (1988) (SPOILERS) The 1980s effects-laden remake of a ’50s B-movie that couldn’t. That is, couldn’t persuade an audience to see it and couldn’t muster critical acclaim. The Fly was a hit. The Thing wasn’t, but its reputation has since soared. Like Invaders from Mars , no such fate awaited The Blob , despite effects that, in many respects, are comparable in quality to the John Carpenter classic – and are certainly indebted to Rob Bottin for bodily grue – and surehanded direction from Chuck Russell. I suspect the reason is simply this: it lacks that extra layer that would ensure longevity.

Are you telling me that I should take my daughter to a witch doctor?

The Exorcist (1973) (SPOILERS) Vast swathes have been written on The Exorcist , duly reflective of its cultural impact. In a significant respect, it’s the first blockbuster – forget Jaws – and also the first of a new kind of special-effects movie. It provoked controversy across all levels of the socio-political spectrum, for explicit content and religious content, both hailed and denounced for the same. William Friedkin, director of William Peter Blatty’s screenplay based on Blatty’s 1971 novel, would have us believe The Exorcist is “ a film about the mystery of faith ”, but it’s evidently much more – and less – than that. There’s a strong argument to be made that movies having the kind of seismic shock on the landscape this one did aren’t simply designed to provoke rumination (or exultation); they’re there to profoundly influence society, even if largely by osmosis, and when one looks at this picture’s architects, such an assessment only gains in credibility.

I work for the guys that pay me to watch the guys that pay you. And then there are, I imagine, some guys that are paid to watch me.

The Day of the Dolphin (1973) (SPOILERS) Perhaps the most bizarre thing out of all the bizarre things about The Day of the Dolphin is that one of its posters scrupulously sets out its entire dastardly plot, something the movie itself doesn’t outline until fifteen minutes before the end. Mike Nichols reputedly made this – formerly earmarked for Roman Polanski, Jack Nicholson and Sharon Tate, although I’m dubious a specific link can be construed between its conspiracy content and the Manson murders - to fulfil a contract with The Graduate producer Joseph Levine. It would explain the, for him, atypical science-fiction element, something he seems as comfortable with as having a hairy Jack leaping about the place in Wolf .

You ever heard the saying, “Don’t rob the bank across from the diner that has the best donuts in three counties”?

2 Guns (2013) (SPOILERS) Denzel Washington is such a reliable performer, that it can get a bit boring. You end up knowing every gesture or inflection in advance, whether he’s playing a good guy or a bad guy. And his films are generally at least half decent, so you end up seeing them. Even in Flight (or perhaps especially in Flight ; just watch him chugging down that vodka) where he’s giving it his Oscar-nominatable best, he seems too familiar. I think it may be because he’s an actor who is more effective the less he does. In 2 Guns he’s not doing less, but sometimes it seems like it. That’s because the last person I’d ever expect blows him off the screen; Mark Wahlberg.

This risotto is shmackin’, dude.

Stranger Things Season 4: Part I (SPOILERS) I haven’t had cause, or the urge, to revisit earlier seasons of Stranger Things , but I’m fairly certain my (relatively) positive takes on the first two sequel seasons would adjust down somewhat if I did (a Soviet base under Hawkins? DUMB soft disclosure or not, it’s pretty dumb). In my Season Three review, I called the show “ Netflix’s best-packaged junk food. It knows not to outstay its welcome, doesn’t cause bloat and is disposable in mostly good ways ” I fairly certain the Duffer’s weren’t reading, but it’s as if they decided, as a rebuke, that bloat was the only way to go for Season Four. Hence episodes approaching (or exceeding) twice the standard length. So while the other points – that it wouldn’t stray from its cosy identity and seasons tend to merge in the memory – hold fast, you can feel the ambition of an expansive canvas faltering at the hurdle of Stranger Things ’ essential, curated, nostalgia-appeal inconsequentiality.

That, my lad, was a dragon.

The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug (2013) (SPOILERS) It’s alarming how quickly Peter Jackson sabotaged all the goodwill he amassed in the wake of The Lord of the Rings trilogy. A guy who started out directing deliciously deranged homemade horror movies ended up taking home the Oscar for a fantasy movie, of all genres. And then he blew it. He went from a filmmaker whose naysayers were the exception to one whose remaining cheerleaders are considered slightly maladjusted. The Desolation of Smaug recovers some of the territory Jackson has lost over the last decade, but he may be too far-gone to ever regain his crown. Perhaps in years to come The Lord of the Rings trilogy will be seen as an aberration in his filmography. There’s a cartoonishness to the gleeful, twisted anarchy on display in his earlierr work that may be more attuned to the less verimilitudinous aspects of King Kong and The Hobbit s. The exceptions are his female-centric character dramas, Heavenly Creat

Gizmo caca!

Gremlins (1984) I didn’t get to see Gremlins at the cinema. I wanted to, as I had worked myself into a state of great anticipation. There was a six-month gap between its (unseasonal) US release and arrival in the UK, so I had plenty of time to devour clips of cute Gizmo on Film ’84 (the only reason ever to catch Barry Norman was a tantalising glimpse of a much awaited movie, rather than his drab, colourless, reviews) and Gremlins trading cards that came with bubble gum attached (or was it the other way round?). But Gremlins ’ immediate fate for many an eager youngster in Britain was sealed when, after much deliberation, the BBFC granted it a 15 certificate. I had just turned 12, and at that time an attempt to sneak in to see it wouldn’t even have crossed my mind. I’d just have to wait for the video. I didn’t realise it then (because I didn’t know who he was as a filmmaker), but Joe Dante’s irrepressible anarchic wit would have a far stronger effect on me than the un