Skip to main content

We’re going in the garbage truck.

The Getaway
(1994)

(SPOILERS) This remake of Sam Peckinpah’s Steve McQueen starrer isn’t so much bad as unnecessary. As far as I can discern, about the only alteration Walter Hill made to his original screenplay (by which I mean, his original adaptation of Jim Thompson’s 1958 novel) was adding Amy Holden Jones’ name to the credit (Jones’ most dubious claim to fame is the screenplay for the previous year’s Indecent Proposal). It’s not as if Peckinpah’s movie is an unalloyed classic (although, some revisionist takes would have it so), so there was no reason a different take on Thompson’s material couldn’t have been both valid and paid dividends. Particularly if it had tackled the novel’s ending; for which, see the review of the 1972 picture. It’s something you could easily imagine Oliver Stone, or Alex Garland, or Joe Carnahan running with. This The Getaway is not that different take.

Alec Baldwin is no McQueen, even if his hair is undeniably more lustrous. As in, he’s a character-actor lead, rather than a bona-fide star, something that became very evident in the wake of his solitary big lead hit The Hunt for Red October. Which was, in any case, a Sean Connery movie. The Getaway came just as Hollywood was ready to quit trying to get him an audience (Miami Blues, The Marrying Man, Prelude to a Kiss, The Getaway, The Shadow, all misses, with one more to come for good measure: Heaven’s Prisoners). Don’t get me wrong, Baldwin isn’t bad in any of them, and in at least one (Miami Blues) he’s absolute dynamite. But he didn’t have that draw, that elusive stuff the big guns do. And Alec knows a lot about what big guns do, of course (obligatory bad taste joke out of the way, assuming the whole incident can be taken at face value, that is).

One thing I’ll give The Getaway, though. Despite his inability to compete with McQueen’s Doc McCoy, the teaming with spouse Basinger – their second hook up, and second flop; they wouldn’t try it again – is much more believable and viable than McQueen and Ali MacGraw (however much it may have sparked offscreen). Basinger’s Carol may be impossibly stylised throughout (and ever so keen to show herself off, sensitively, in various states of undress), but you can buy her felonious smarts in a way you never for a second believe with MacGraw (this is relative, of course, but either way, the Razzie nomination was lazily meaningless). To the extent that you actively disbelieve she’d be dumb enough to fall for the locker switcheroo.

Director Roger Donaldson is no Peckinpah, any more than Baldwin is McQueen, but he’s also a more than solid journeyman, and he keeps the proceeds slick and glossy (Hill was also slated to direct originally, according to Baldwin, but budget arguments lead to him opting out). Whenever he’s called upon to stage a set piece– the initial robbery; Doc’s pursuit of the con man onto a train; the shootout in El Paso – he carries it off with something approaching verve. But Hill hasn’t bothered to mix anything up in plotting or twists, so the only changes are either about making it contemporary (Doc has to crack a more advanced safe) or down to the casting.

James Woods plays Jack Benyon, the guy who gets Doc sprung from Mexican jail to pull the job (he also serves as the repeated tension card; Carol slept with Benyon to secure Doc’s release). It’s a case of short changing us in a way Ben Johnson doesn’t in the 1972 movie, as you really need to give Woods a chance to chew on some scenery. The other problem is that offing him early makes Michael Madsen the de facto lead villain (David Morse as Benyon’s factotum is too functional to make a deep impression).

Madsen, in the role (Rudy Butler) Al Lettieri at least made a distinctive scumbag, is far too much a case of Madsen doing an autopilot Madsen villain, complete with serial mullet, five-hundred-yard squint and listless bravado. But also with shitbag in spades, even by his bad guy standards. There’s something depressingly banal about wallowing in this character’s mire. In particular, the repeat run through of his cruelty to vet James Stephens, whereby Rudy doesn’t so much lure Stephens’ cuckoo wife Jennifer Tilly as she throws herself at him (there’s evidently intended to be a degree of parallel with Doc and Carol having to learn to trust each other, but it’s all a bit murky).

Stephens ends up hanging himself, distraught at having to bear witness to the two coupling next door. Of course, any right-minded soul would count their blessing at having Tilly taken off their hands (the best moment in the entire movie sees Basinger laying out a hysterical Jen). This subplot even finds Rudy playing with a kitten, per the original, so undifferentiated is it. The same is true earlier with the bulletproof vests (Baldwin appeared to suggest Hill wasn’t entirely happy with Peckinpah reinterpreting his screenplay, but the writer has indicated otherwise; either way, I’m left wondering why he felt it worthwhile being involved in a remake that succeeded only in replicating all the same beats and sometimes word for word: “Say, you wouldn’t happen to be a Mormon, would you?” Well, other than for the cash, obviously).

The climax is solid, with a welcome appearance from Burton Gilliam as Gollie the bartender. However, Doc’s inkling that something is up before he goes for a bout of extended steamy rumpo with Carol, and only then remembering his thought post coitus, while Rudy has obligingly not decided to spring his trap on the couple in the meantime, is decidedly tenuous. The extended Doc/Rudy fight also becomes aggravating when it would have benefited from brevity.

It’s telling that it takes the final sequence, in which Doc and Carol commandeer their way across the border with an obliging old timer, to instil a trace of heart into the proceedings, and all of that is down to Richard Farnsworth’s warm-hearted manner. That’s the key problem with this remake, doubling down on the essential cynicism of the original; it’s empty, with no real flair in any of the key departments (performance, direction, script). The Getaway is also notable as an early Philip Seymour Hoffman outing (he exits in the first reel) and a Mark Isham score trapped in 1987. This remake just about gets away with it, but no one is discovering a neglected classic here.


Popular posts from this blog

The Bible never said anything about amphetamines.

The Color of Money (1986) (SPOILERS) I tend to think it’s evident when Scorsese isn’t truly exercised by material. He can still invest every ounce of the technical acumen at his fingertips, and the results can dazzle on that level, but you don’t really feel the filmmaker in the film. Which, for one of his pictures to truly carry a wallop, you need to do. We’ve seen quite a few in such deficit in recent years, most often teaming with Leo. The Color of Money , however, is the first where it was out-and-out evident the subject matter wasn’t Marty’s bag. He needed it, desperately, to come off, but in the manner a tradesman who wants to keep getting jobs. This sequel to The Hustler doesn’t linger in the mind, however good it may be, moment by moment.

I said I had no family. I didn’t say I had an empty apartment.

The Apartment (1960) (SPOILERS) Billy Wilder’s romcom delivered the genre that rare Best Picture Oscar winner. Albeit, The Apartment amounts to a rather grim (now) PG-rated scenario, one rife with adultery, attempted suicide, prostitution of the soul and subjective thereof of the body. And yet, it’s also, finally, rather sweet, so salving the darker passages and evidencing the director’s expertly judged balancing act. Time Out ’s Tom Milne suggested the ending was a cop out (“ boy forgives girl and all’s well ”). But really, what other ending did the audience or central characters deserve?

Listen to the goddamn qualified scientists!

Don’t Look Up (2021) (SPOILERS) It’s testament to Don’t Look Up ’s “quality” that critics who would normally lap up this kind of liberal-causes messaging couldn’t find it within themselves to grant it a free pass. Adam McKay has attempted to refashion himself as a satirist since jettisoning former collaborator Will Ferrell, but as a Hollywood player and an inevitably socio-politically partisan one, he simply falls in line with the most obvious, fatuous propagandising.

Your desecration of reality will not go unpunished.

2021-22 Best-of, Worst-of and Everything Else Besides The movies might be the most visible example of attempts to cling onto cultural remnants as the previous societal template clatters down the drain. It takes something people really want – unlike a Bond movie where he kicks the can – to suggest the model of yesteryear, one where a billion-dollar grosser was like sneezing. You can argue Spider-Man: No Way Home is replete with agendas of one sort or another, and that’s undoubtedly the case (that’s Hollywood), but crowding out any such extraneous elements (and they often are) is simply a consummate crowd-pleaser that taps into tangible nostalgia through its multiverse take. Of course, nostalgia for a mere seven years ago, for something you didn’t like anyway, is a symptom of how fraught these times have become.

Doctors make the worst patients.

Coma (1978) (SPOILERS) Michael Crichton’s sophomore big-screen feature, and by some distance his best. Perhaps it’s simply that this a milieu known to him, or perhaps it’s that it’s very much aligned to the there-and-now and present, but Coma , despite the occasional lapse in this adaptation of colleague Robin Cook’s novel, is an effective, creepy, resonant thriller and then some. Crichton knows his subject, and it shows – the picture is confident and verisimilitudinous in a way none of his other directorial efforts are – and his low-key – some might say clinical – approach pays dividends. You might also call it prescient, but that would be to suggest its subject matter wasn’t immediately relevant then too.

You ruined every suck-my-silky-ass thing!

The Matrix Resurrections (2021) (SPOILERS) Warner Bros has been here before. Déjà vu? What happens when you let a filmmaker do whatever they want? And I don’t mean in the manner of Netflix. No, in the sequel sense. You get a Gremlins 2: The New Batch (a classic, obviously, but not one that financially furthered a franchise). And conversely, when you simply cash in on a brand, consequences be damned? Exorcist II: The Heretic speaks for itself. So in the case of The Matrix Resurrections – not far from as meta as The New Batch , but much less irreverent – when Thomas “Tom” Anderson, designer of globally successful gaming trilogy The Matrix , is told “ Our beloved company, Warner Bros, has decided to make a sequel to the trilogy ” and it’s going ahead “with or without us”, you can be fairly sure this is the gospel. That Lana, now going it alone, decided it was better to “make the best of it” than let her baby be sullied. Of course, quite what that amounts to in the case of a movie(s) tha

You just threw a donut in the hot zone!

Den of Thieves (2018) (SPOILERS) I'd heard this was a shameless  Heat  rip-off, and the presence of Gerard Butler seemed to confirm it would be passable-at-best B-heist hokum, so maybe it was just middling expectations, even having heard how enthused certain pockets of the Internet were, but  Den of Thieves  is a surprisingly very satisfying entry in the genre. I can't even fault it for attempting to Keyser Soze the whole shebang at the last moment – add a head in a box and you have three 1995 classics in one movie – even if that particular conceit doesn’t quite come together.

It’s always possible to find a good moral reason for killing anybody.

The Assassination Bureau (1969) (SPOILERS) The Assassination Bureau ought to be a great movie. You can see its influence on those who either think it is a great movie, or want to produce something that fulfils its potential. Alan Moore and The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen . The just-released (and just-flopped) The King’s Men . It inhabits a post-Avengers, self-consciously benign rehearsal of, and ambivalence towards, Empire manners and attitudes, something that could previously be seen that decade in Those Magnificent Men in Their Flying Machines (and sequel Monte Carlo or Bust , also 1969), Adam Adamant Lives! , and even earlier with Kind Hearts and Coronets , whilst also feeding into that “Peacock Revolution” of Edwardian/Victorian fashion refurbishment. Unfortunately, though, it lacks the pop-stylistic savvy that made, say, The President’s Analyst so vivacious.

Abandon selective targeting. Shoot everything.

28 Weeks Later (2007) (SPOILERS) The first five minutes of 28 Weeks Later are far and away the best part of this sequel, offering in quick succession a devastating moral quandary and a waking nightmare, immortalised on the screen. After that, while significantly more polished, Juan Carlos Fresnadillo reveals his concept to be altogether inferior to Danny Boyle and Alex Garland’s, falling back on the crutches of gore, nihilism, and disengaging and limiting shifts of focus between characters in whom one has little investment in the first place.

This guy’s armed with a hairdryer.

An Innocent Man (1989) (SPOILERS) Was it a chicken-and-egg thing with Tom Selleck and movies? Did he consistently end up in ropey pictures because other, bigger big-screen stars had first dibs on the good stuff? Or was it because he was a resolutely small-screen guy with limited range and zero good taste? Selleck had about half-a-dozen cinema outings during the 1980s, one of which, the very TV, very Touchstone Three Men and a Baby was a hit, but couldn’t be put wholly down to him. The final one was An Innocent Man , where he attempted to show some grit and mettle, as nice-guy Tom is framed and has to get tough to survive. Unfortunately, it’s another big-screen TV movie.