Action and Adventure films - 2015
| The Hateful Eight | Spectre | The Man From UNCLE |
| Mission Impossible: Rogue Nation | San Andreas | Mad Max: Fury Road |
| Furious 7 | Kingsman: The Secret Service | Blackhat |
| Taken 3 |
____________________
 |
For better or worse, when you go to see a Quentin Tarantino film, you know exactly what you're going to get. The Hateful Eight is as bloody and as violent, with as much quippy, profanity-ridden dialogue as any of Tarantino's other films. Unfortunately, there's not much more to say about this, the director's eighth film, which, when measured up against his classics, seems somewhat stale by comparison. Indeed, for a director who has made a career out of ripping off other movies, The Hateful Eight feels like Quentin Tarantino ripping off of himself. It's like watching a director who grew up watching Quentin Tarantino movies try to make a Quentin Tarantino movie with a larger budget, beautiful scenery, and access to QT's usual players.
Speaking of the usual suspects, Walter Goggins, a relative newcomer to QT's list of Hollywood regulars, turns in a memorable performance as Sheriff Chris Mannix and Bruce Dern brings sympathy and compassion to his role as an aging confederate general. Even amongst QT heavyweights like Samuel L. Jackson, Michael Madsen, Tim Roth, and Kurt Russell, Goggins and Dern steal the show and provide the movie with two of its most standout performances.
The scenery in the movie, with its breathtakingly expansive landscapes, snow covered mountain tops, and harsh blizzards, is both beautiful and cruel. It showcases the massive scale that Tarantino is capable of when he turns his camera toward something other than a group of people in a room talking to one another. Indeed, the movie begins to feel a little claustrophobic when our characters finally arrive at Minnie's Haberdashery --- perhaps a conscious choice made by the director, but still nothing new.
Perhaps one thing, while definitely old hat for Tarantino, that doesn't seem to get stale is the director's use of music. Whether using a score to build mood, anachronistically juxtaposing contemporary tunes with old settings, or using musical performances to showcase something unique about one of his characters, the music in Quentin Tarantino's films is almost always superb. One standout moment in the film includes Jennifer Jason Leigh performing a hauntingly beautiful and sinister version of "Jim Jones at Botany Bay" while strumming a guitar.
Unfortunately, these stellar performances, beautiful scenery, and an impressive score are not enough to save The Hateful Eight from being anything more than just another Quentin Tarantino film. For fans of the director, this might be a forgivably underwhelming addition to the canon. However, I imagine, even for the hardcore fans among us, our patience is wearing thin for a director from whom we've come to expect (perhaps mistakenly) much more.
- Michael Trainor
____________________
 |
After the major success of 2012's Skyfall, director Sam Mendes was asked to direct the next Daniel Craig / James Bond extravaganza - Spectre. I had very high hopes for this film since it had so many things going for it - a good Bond actor in Craig, a good Bond director in Mendes, a newly fleshed out supporting cast of Naomi Harris as Moneypenny, Ben Whishaw as Q, and Ralph Fiennes as the new M, and a major villain from the Connery days of Bond. The notion of the present-day Bond, suddenly pitted against a modern-day imagining of Spectre, was a tantalizing idea. And the casting of the award-winning actor, Christoph Waltz, as Spectre's head, seemed simply perfect. Oh - and Monica Bellucci as a Bond girl. How could this not be great?
The very basic plot: Bond is sent on a mission outside of MI6 because of a posthumous message from the prior M (Judi Dench). It puts him on the trail of shadowy forces with surprisingly broad scope and power. And as Bond tracks them down and attempts to discover their plans, he sees things pointing to past adversaries as well as aspects of his own personal history. After the players and their intentions are eventually revealed, all is finally resolved in a climactic showdown, as in Skyfall, in familiar surroundings. My plot summary is intentionally vague. First, because much of the story is built on a series of gradual reveals I don't wish to spoil (yet, anyway). Second, because none of the plot points are really that interesting. This is sad, because they really should have been.
Spectre comes off as an attempt to build a good story with a collection of promising elements. Unfortunately, they just don't do enough with them. [Warning: plot reveals follow] Also, many of the elements are all too familiar: the all-but-invincible, hulking, silent henchman, ala Jaws and Oddjob, Mr. Hinx (Dave Bautista); the foster brother arch-enemy ala Thor and Loki; manipulating governments to act with targeted acts of terrorism ala Blackhat; the hero's own agency turning against him ala Mission: Impossible - Rogue Nation and that this is actually the villain's doing and big plan ala Captain America: The Winter Soldier. The idea of having Bond's romantic interest, Dr. Madeline Swann (Lea Seydoux), be the daughter of an old adversary was interesting, but the two go from distrust and dislike to romance rather rapidly and for no apparent reason. Bellucci's character, though appealing, is only in the film for a few minutes. For a film with so many things that should have made it resonate with significance - people, relationships, events - it simply feels emotionally flat. How can that be?
From a storytelling standpoint, Spectre makes the identical error of Quantum of Solace, trying to sequel a previous hit instead of standing on its own - and it needn't have been told that way. One would think they would have known better. Also, the use of the fictional Spectre organization may have been to preserve copyrights to Spectre and characters attached to it. This constrains writers to having to be creative along predetermined guidelines for financial reasons. Attempted sequels to Gone With the Wind and other highly valued fictional properties, solely to retain legal rights, have demonstrated how tricky this can be.
However, all complaints about familiar elements and copyrights aside, this still should have been a more compelling film, given the cast and the plot possibilities. The action scenes are well-done and plentiful. But as I replayed scenes in my mind, I kept thinking how the scenes could have been set up to better dramatic effect and how the relational interaction between the characters should have been better. But apparently, no one was insisting on quality control. This must be laid at the feet of the director, Sam Mendes. The scenes between Bond and Swann and those between Bond and the villain should have been much more impactful. Without emotional content - stakes, meaning - action is just action. While their intentions may have been good, their execution was weak. And that is a shame, considering all the potential this film had. In all, Spectre is worth seeing, but it's not going to go down as one of the finer films in the franchise.
- Swift
____________________
 |
Guy Ritchie, the director behind action comedies Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels and Snatch, brings us a fresh take on the 1960's TV spy series, The Man From UNCLE. As he did with the Sherlock Holmes films starring Robert Downey Jr., Ritchie keeps the story in the time period it came from, in this case the Cold War of the 1960's. As in the Holmes films, the setting comprises a major element in the look and feel of the film, down to the clothes, the cars, the weapons, and the refreshing absence of digital technology.
We are introduced to our main characters as American CIA agent and former professional thief, Napoleon Solo (Henry Cavill), helps Gaby Teller (Alicia Vikander), a former Nazi scientist's daughter, escape from East Berlin. They are doggedly pursued by a KGB agent, Illya Kuryakin (Armie Hammer). While Solo relies principally on his wits, Kuryakin is like a juggernaut bearing down on them as they narrowly escape. As the main plot of the story unfolds, all three are brought back together as both American and Soviet governments seek to prevent wealthy Nazi sympathizers from using Teller's father to make nuclear weapons for them.
What worked in this film? Cavill does a decent job playing the suave and clever, though sometimes overconfident, Napoleon Solo. Hammer, not re-knowned for his stellar acting skills, is just fine as the mostly stoic, but hot-tempered, Kuryakin. Oddly enough, these two are an appealing pairing. It may strike a chord with the audience that these are extremely different men who come to learn to respect and even have loyalty for one another by the time all is said and done. They may not have the chemistry of Downey Jr. and Jude Law from Ritchie's Holmes films, but to be fair, these are less-experienced actors playing less-known roles.
Alicia Vikander, coming off of other box office successes Seventh Son and Ex Machina, is good here as in everything else she appears in. And Hugh Grant is actually amusingly perfect as British MI6 agent Waverly who steps in for the film's final act. Ritchie apparently wanted to highlight the fact that UNCLE is a multinational force designed to address global threats, as we bring in an international array of characters from the United States, Russia, Germany, and the United Kingdom.
I found the film enjoyable, but it doesn't really knock one's socks off. Why? The plot isn't that complex for a spy film and the villains aren't that well portrayed. Elizabeth Debicki as Victoria Vinciguerra certainly has a femme fatale look going on, but she is unfortunately lacking in the sensuality of someone who could seduce anyone or the presence of someone who could run an international terrorist organization.
The Man From UNCLE works as a fun time at the movies, but not to be taken seriously. If more of these films are made, I hope for something with a bit more Cold War intrigue and a more intricate plot.
- Swift
____________________
 |
Tom Cruise returns as Impossible Missions Force agent Ethan Hunt in the fifth film in the Mission: Impossible film series, Mission: Impossible - Rogue Nation.
In this story, the IMF is faced with the threat of a group of agents, not unlike themselves, except that these agents serve their own ends, not those of any nation - "rogues," by definition. One of their goals is the destruction of the IMF. While Ethan and his comrades attempt to deal with this threat, the director of the CIA has the IMF disbanded and orders Ethan's arrest. While on the run, Ethan continues to pursue the rogue spy group, known as "the Syndicate," bringing him into contact with a female agent in the group whose loyalties seem difficult to discern.
The Mission: Impossible series had been declining in popularity by the third film, but the very successful fourth outing, Ghost Protocol, breathed new life into it. Does Rogue Nation measure up?
Ethan's team has seen members come and go with each film. But by Rogue Nation, audiences and the creators seem to have settled on a strong core group - Jeremy Renner as William Brandt, Ving Rhames as Luther Stickell, and Simon Pegg as Benji Dunn - Ethan's "go-to-guys." It's a bit unfortunate that the series can't seem to hold onto any female agents beyond a single film, making it somewhat reminiscent of the Bond series.
However, on the account of female characters, Rebecca Ferguson as Ilsa Faust, may be the strongest female character in the series yet. As a cunning spy, capable combatant, and daredevil like Hunt himself, she is the closest thing we have seen to his female equivalent - the Irene Adler to his Sherlock Holmes.
The plot in this film keeps the viewer guessing as to what will happen next, as a story about international geo-political intrigue should. Also, in the style of the classic TV series, the viewer isn't even completely in on the team's plans until they finally play out. It was nice to see the return of a more cereral, chess-like element to the story rather than just progressive sequences of chases and fights.
As to those chases and fights, one won't be disappointed, as Cruise hangs from the side of an airplane, tries not to drown breaking into a secure facility, and engages in a death-defying motorcycle chase on a mountain road. Interestingly, there were some moments where Cruise's facial expressions and physical acting seem to show that the fights and the falls are starting to take more of a toll on him than in his earlier, more indestructible days. Perhaps he is giving a nod to the passage of time as he attempts to continue his role of super-agent into his 50's.
My only note of complaint has to do with the villain and his scheme. Sean Harris as Solomon Lane, the Syndicate's mastermind, came off as chilling and formidable, but it seemed we could have heard more about why he was making the choices he made. Like Silva in Skyfall, he was a good agent turned rogue, but unlike Silva, no real backstory is offered. Lane's evil plan is ultimately just one to sustain and expand his organization. His actual goals are never really laid out, except that whatever he is trying to accomplish, the body count doesn't concern him.
Mission: Impossible - Rogue Nation isn't quite the spectacle that Ghost Protocol was. It's hard to top the Burj scene. However, this story compensates with strong chemistry between the protagonists and an intelligent plot. I highly recommend it.
- Swift
____________________
 |
The thing that makes a disaster movie stand out is the thematic conflict of the characters amidst a backdrop of extreme circumstances. In the original The Poseidon Adventure, the theme was faith versus self-reliance. In Titanic, it was choosing your own path versus the path others had chosen for you. In The Towering Inferno, it was greed and ambition versus safety. The larger, philosophical ideas give meaning to the choices the characters make and the consequences. San Andreas wonderfully displays what a catastrophic California earthquake might look like, but the story lacks the thematic depth to give it much impact.
The story: Ray (Dwayne Johnson), is an LA Fire Department helicopter rescue pilot. His estranged wife, Emma (Carla Gugino), is about to take their teen-aged daughter, Blake (Alexandra Daddario), and move in with wealthy architect, Daniel (Ioan Gruffudd). Meanwhile, Cal Tech seismologists (Paul Giamatti, Will Yun Lee), working on predicting earthquakes, learn that the San Andreas fault is on the verge of a major shift. The remainder of the film consists of Ray's battle to save his family amidst this huge natural disaster.
I hate beating up this movie, because the main characters are so likeable and the special effects are pretty good. But honestly, there isn't much here. There is no over-arching theme and the plot is very similar to that of the Taken films - a father, "with a unique set of skills," rescues and wins back his estranged wife and daughter. We are simply replacing the gangsters with an earthquake. Oh, and also, any guy the hero's wife picks out after him, will be a real sleaze (evil step-father cliche).
Most large scale disaster films boast a large cast of characters so we can see the impacts of the events on the lives of many people. But here, we only see this one family and hoards of un-named extras. If you enjoy disaster film spectacles or simply watching "The Rock" play hero, then you might want to catch San Andreas in theaters. Otherwise, wait until it's on TV.
- Swift
____________________
 |
If protracted combat-chase scenes over desert terrain are your thing, this film may be for you. But if you require a plot with any complexity or much in the way of knowing who the characters are, you might prefer to wait and see this on TV.
Mad Max: Fury Road continues the "Mad Max" film series; the previous three films all starring Mel Gibson, from 1979 to 1985. In this film, we now have Tom Hardy (Star Trek: Nemesis, The Dark Knight Rises) as Max. Series creator and director, George Miller returns after the 30-year break to helm this new installment.
Our story: Set in Miller's post-apocalyptic Australian desert, a population of survivors is ruled by a despot, Immortan Joe (Hugh Keays-Byrne) who keeps them in thrall with meager dispensations of food and water. One of Joe's main soldiers, Imperator Furiosa (Charlize Theron), while on a run to acquire gasoline, breaks from her designated path to attempt an escape with Joe's harem of five wives concealed in her vehicle. Max is drawn into the fray as Joe's forces give chase with him as a captive. The film mostly consists of impressively staged, if overly long, action sequences with occasional breaks for the characters to say just enough for one to know the basics of who they are and what they are attempting to do.
Tom Hardy gives a mostly scowling, barely speaking performance as Max. If there are stand-out performances in this raucous piece, the best was rendered by Charlize Theron (Snow White and the Huntsman, Prometheus) as Joe's renegade freedom fighter. She plays her part with enough sensitivity to seem believable and enough passion to make her goals seem compelling. Nicholas Hoult (Warm Bodies, X-Men: Days of Future Past) gives a sympathetic portrayal of one of Joe's half-crazed soldiers who switches sides midway through the chase. And somewhat surprisingly, former Victoria's Secret model Rosie Huntington-Whitely, gives a good turn as one of Joe's very pregnant runaway brides.
Many critics are giving this film high marks, but I just don't see it. It's bad when an action scene gets long and repetitive enough that one is looking forward to it finally being over. Most of the characters are savage simpletons that it's hard to care about. Fury Road isn't a bad addition to a post-apocalyptic franchise with limited appeal, but if they do decide to make another, a lead actor willing to show a bit more charisma might help.
- Swift
____________________
 |
There are all kinds of fantasies. Some involve elves or talking animals. Some involve traveling through time. Now we have ones where men jump their cars between skyscrapers hundreds of feet in the air. Furious 7 is a great-looking, pulse-raising action movie for those who find The Expendables and G.I. Joe: Retaliation too realistic. Vehicles fly through the air, people engage in fist-fights that go through walls and shatter furniture, but no one dies (or even bleeds) unless they are pretty much blown to bits. But everyone is entitled to their own brand of fantasy, I suppose.
The plot of Furious 7 is fairly straightforward . . at first. The elder brother, Deckard Shaw, of the bad guy from the previous film is out for revenge against the street racers who put his brother in a coma. In an initial confrontation between the racer leader Dom (Vin Diesel) and Shaw (Jason Statham), it appears that our heroes are overmatched and Dom is actually rescued by the intervention of a covert ops team led by agent Frank Petty (Kurt Russell). In exchange for Petty's help dealing with Shaw, Dom and his group agree to steal a high-tech tracking device and its creator from a mercenary named Jakande (Djimon Hounsou). Complications and mayhem ensue.
Furious 7 stands out in the Fast and Furious film franchise. Much of this is because it features an action star cast that practically ensures success - Vin Diesel, Dwayne Johnson, Jason Statham, Michelle Rodriguez, Tony Jaa, Ronda Rousey - if you just give them enough interesting things to do. But most people will be drawn to the fact that this was Paul Walker's last film. Walker was greatly beloved by friends, colleagues, and fans. (He was also a philanthropist, creating Reach Out World Wide, a first response group for natural disasters.) It was hoped that this film would serve as a fitting tribute to the man, and given the critical praise and box office results it has enjoyed, it would appear they were successful.
It's also noteworthy that Furious 7 is director James Wan's first major action film. Wan's career has previously been as the director, writer, or producer of horror films, including Saw 1-3, Insidious 1 & 2, and The Conjuring.
This isn't a real cerebral film, which shouldn't surprise anyone. But it succeeds at what it sets out to do. The stunt work for both the driving and the fights is all top notch. When you are striving for spectacular, credibility can be a casualty. But so what? It's all just for fun.
- Swift
____________________
 |
"The suit is the modern gentleman's armor. And the Kingsman agents are the new knights." This simple summary, uttered by Kingsman Harry Hart, played by Colin Firth, essentially gives the entire concept for Kingsman: The Secret Service - an elite, modern, beyond-anything fighting force, presumably under the British monarchy. They are all extremely physically adept, equipped with the deadliest weapons Q branch could have cooked up, and they are dressed as if they are going to go to the stock exchange or Buckingham Palace for tea.
With the juxtaposition of the exaggerated very English manners and the sometimes bloody-to-the-point-of-gruesome stylishly choreographed violence, one might be tempted to just write off Kingsman as a parody of older Bond movies or an homage to the spy parodies of the 60's and 70's - Matt Helm, Derek Flint, etc. In that era, the Bond movies themselves even got into the act and parodied themselves with fight and chase scenes intermingled with bad puns and slapstick gags. All this was before the re-imagining of spy stories as more realistic and dark. Can we still be entertained by spy stories where the characters are a bit like comic-book characters? Can we take them at all seriously? Apparently, yes. Because even though the tailored suits and gadgets seem a bit silly, the audience actually buys into characters we come to have feelings about - good and bad - and the stakes and the tension in the plot can be white-knuckle effective.
Kingsman: The Secret Service is based on a graphic novel (as so many things are these days) by Mark Millar who, in addition to writing several existing comics titles - The Authority, The Ultimates, Civil War - also created the stories adapted into previous films Wanted and Kick-Ass. The film is directed by Matthew Vaughn, mostly known for directing action films Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels, Kick-Ass, and X-Men: First Class. This film is a result of Millar's subject matter of very properly stylish agents, who are as violent as need be, shown through the lens of Vaughn's own penchant for visual style and high-energy violence. It may not be a perfect match, but no cinematic re-telling ever is.
It was nice seeing the normally harmlessly amusing Colin Firth (Love Actually, The Importance of Being Earnest, The King's Speech) handing out thrashings and dealing death as a super-agent. It was nice seeing Mark Strong (Sherlock Holmes, Green Lantern, John Carter) getting to be a good guy. Taron Egerton did a convincing job as the "diamond in the rough" who becomes a hero. Samuel Jackson is the complete opposite of Nick Fury here, which I'm sure was completely the point. His villain is both laughable and oddly credible. And Sofia Boutella, as Gazelle, the deadly hench-woman with blades for legs, is an interesting successor to Jaws and Oddjob. When our hero finally has to take her on, you really don't see how he has a chance.
I will address the one little note of controversy at the end (no pun intended). I'm not talking about the implied deaths of certain world leaders. G.I. Joe movies wipe out whole cities and no one bats an eye. While speaking briefly to an imprisoned princess, she offers the hero essentially "anything" to save the world. I think it was intended to be a joke that referenced the days when the gentleman-spy seemed to end every film with sex and a double-entendre quip about it. Some people have remarked that it ended an otherwise flawless film on a sour note. To that, I would say, I don't think one joke should sink or swim a movie unless it's outrightly offensive. (Unfortunately, many would say that in this case.) And no film is flawless. To be honest, I think they would have been better off without it, because even though it may have spoofed the genre, it did it at the expense of the characters and the emotional finish of the story.
All in all, it's not a great movie, but it was definitely fun and that was really all that most of us were hoping it would be.
- Swift
____________________
 |
Blackhat offers us a plot in which Chinese counter cyber-crime agents seek help from the U.S. and an imprisoned hacker, played by Chris Hemsworth (Thor, Rush),to stop a "Blackhat" hacker who caused a nuclear reactor meltdown. "Blackhat," is a term referring to a hacker who violates computer security out of malice or personal gain. This film is directed by Michael Mann (Heat, The Insider, Ali, Collateral). Given Mann's distinguished background as a director of quality drama-action films and the intriguing and timely idea of an international hunt for a cyber-criminal, I had fairly high hopes for this film. Unfortunately, it has a number of flaws that make the whole thing fall a bit flat.
Blackhat suffers from a murky narrative. The characters are very vaguely defined and none of them really develops over the course of the story. As often happens in action films, protracted fight and chase scenes could have been truncated and more time could have been spent on the characters and having them discuss what was going on and why. Often, we found ourselves jumping from place to place with little idea of why or even where. It's difficult to maintain interest in a fairly complex plot stretched over more than two hours when one has to struggle to keep track of what's going on and with characters you have little reason to care about.
There were also several implausible elements. Chris Hemsworth plays his part well enough, but it's hard to buy him as a genius hacker. You can always say they were intentionally casting against type, but he is literally nothing like any technology-oriented person I've ever met. The romance between his character and one of the Chinese agents seems to come out of nowhere. He is released from prison and supposedly accompanied by a guard, but he is rarely seen with the guard. Trailers for this film suggest the villain was a world-threatening genius cyber terrorist. It turns out that he isn't really that exceptional and that he is just cracking systems and doing damage to make money. It's a bit of a letdown.
This film really should have been better. One reviewer laid the blame on the writer, Morgan Davis Foehl. This is Foehl's first outing as a writer, though he is an experienced script editor. Even if some of the blame could be assigned to him, the director has the final responsibility of setting the film's pace and taking corrective steps for elements that are missing or under-represented. But, even a gifted director is bound to have a misstep every now and then.
- Swift
____________________
 |
Taken 3 gives us another chapter in the life of former CIA super-agent Bryan Mills (Liam Neeson). In Taken, he was on the hunt, playing offense against his daughter’s kidnappers. In Taken 2, he had to escape and play defense against vengeful criminals. Here, he is on the run and solving a mystery.
When writer-producer Luc Besson created the Mills character he was much along the lines of another character he had created, Frank Martin of the "Transporter" films. He was a regular guy, but with a “set of skills” that made him an unstoppable force when he found himself in a bad situation; a slightly more down-to-earth version of James Bond.
In this outing, Mills is framed for a murder he didn’t commit and while on the run, he has to figure out who the actual perpetrator is and protect those closest to him. It’s not a terribly original plot, but this film mostly serves to run our hero through a gauntlet so we can have the vicarious thrill of watching him gather clues, crash cars, and beat bad guys to a pulp.
Other reviewers have complained about director Olivier Megaton’s action filming style of rapid shot changes, but it seemed to me that he was deliberately using this method to make the fights and chases seem more chaotic to impart to the viewer a feeling of being off-balance amidst the mayhem, closer to what a participant might feel. It may have also been to make Neeson appear more dynamic in his action scenes, since the star is 62 years old now.
If I were to make a complaint about this film or the series overall, it would be the continued involvement of Mills’ ex-wife (Famke Janssen) and daughter (Maggie Grace). While these characters figured prominently in the plot of Taken, I have tired of the formula of constantly putting them in jeopardy to motivate Neeson’s character in every film The Mills character is interesting enough that we would have gladly watched him in other settings and with other motivations. There could have been stories exploring more of his past, but these possibilities have been left un-mined.
All in all, like Taken 2, I thought this film was fine for what it was. It lacked the originality of the first film, but most sequels do. Besson has indicated this film will round out a trilogy and there will be no more sequels. Sometimes it’s best to know when to quit. But if the search for more money brings everyone back (Neeson reportedly received $20 million for this film), I hope they take the story in a new direction.
- Swift