Furious on Film 12.20.07: Issue 119

Posted by Arnold Furious on 12.20.2007

I’m still not buying Jessica Alba as any kind of scientist. Bruce Willis watches $100M worth of explosions. Akira Kurosawa is freed from censorship. And Humphrey Bogart battles gangsters by the ocean.

Before we start this week I'd like to remind everyone why it's taken so long to get back to reviewing films. Here below lies a list of links to the Furious on Film top 100 director's column. The one that took a huge chunk out of my life but earned me more positive feedback than a bundle of WCW reviews. Be warned though, this is a long read.

Furious on Film's Top 100 Director count down…

100-92 + intro
91-76
75-61
60-51
50-39
38-26
25-19
18-11
Top 10.

Thanks for reading, thanks for taking the time to email me and thanks for your continued support over the past hundred odd columns. I'll keep writing them if you keep reading them.

This week I have the following cinematic delights for your reading pleasure;

Die Hard 4.0, Key Largo, Drunken Angel, Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer

But first; this week I'll be stuck in Chipping Norton with no DVD player, no television and no computer. So in short there will be no column next week. As you read this I'll be holed up in a crappy little hotel reading a book. Or perhaps I'll just be working. Seeing as its Christmas week anyway I'll be too busy with work the following week to write it. So there ya go. Apologies in advance for any regular readers. If anyone is up for abolishing Christmas completely next year I'm all for it.

ONCE UPON A TIMELINE: Bruce Willis (aka John Mcfuckin'Clane)

• March 1955. Born in Germany on a US military base. Had an American soldier for a father and local German woman as a mother.
• 1957. The Willis family return to the United States.
• 1971. Willis' parents separate. Young Bruce struggled with a stutter during his teens.
• 1973. Willis went into blue collar labour in New Jersey. He quit after a co-worker was killed on the job. He enrolled in a drama class but quit in his junior year and moved to New York City.
• 1975-1984. Willis works in New York attempting to use the bar scene to get discovered. Although an unusual approach it eventually got him gigs off Broadway where he acted for a few years before moving out to LA to take advantage of the number of auditions out there.
• 1985. Cast as the lead in TV series Moonlighting beating out 3000 other hopefuls. The show would run for 4 years and make Willis a popular TV star.
• 1987. The success of Moonlighting lead to his feature film debut, as a lead, in Blind Date with Kim Basinger. The film had moderate success and Willis was on his way to becoming a household name.
• 1988. Willis' career really took off when he starred in actioner Die Hard. With Moonlighting coming to a conclusion he needed a hit film to really launch his career. Die Hard was all that and more. Made for $28M it grossed $80M and soon Willis was in demand as Die Hard reinvented the action hero from the confident musclehead (Arnie, Sly, Dolph) to a wiseass joke-cracking everyman battling the odds.
• 1990. Die Hard 2. Capitalising on the success of the first film a sequel was rushed through and also took the box office by storm grossing $115M. Bruce Willis was confirmed as money in the bank.
• Early 90's. Bruce didn't really drive home his success with a run of great films though and made a series of misfires in the early 90's including Hudson Hawk, Bonfire of the Vanities and Death Becomes Her. His sole standout being the buddy flick Last Boy Scout, which didn't do particularly well despite its genre busting performances.
• 1994. Pulp Fiction brought Bruce back into the mainstream as he played washed up boxer Butch Coolidge. Everyone involved in Tarantino's projects at that time became instantly cool. Look at the success of practically everyone else in that flick. Willis was no different.
• 1995. Die Hard With a Vengeance. Striking while the iron was hot Willis returned to John McClane once again now as a washed up detective struggling with alcoholism. Perhaps a reflection on the lowest moments of his own career. Another hit showed that Willis was still box office gold. He also starred in 12 Monkeys, one of his more challenging roles to date as a lunatic claiming to be from the future. This double whammy combined with Pulp Fiction made him cool again.
• Late 90's. Deciding to take less risky projects this time around Bruce focused on action flicks starring in the Fifth Element, the Jackal and Armageddon. His stock remained high through the remaining 90's.
• 1999. Sixth Sense. Having conquered his previous failings he now decided to take on something a little bit more complex and made a star of both kid actor Haley Joel Osment and director M. Night Shyamalan at the same time. The more the other two work the more it looks like Bruce was the reason the Sixth Sense turned out so well.
• 2000. Infiltrating pop culture he guest starred on Friends before teaming with Chandler on the Whole Nine Yards.
• 2005. Just when it seemed that Willis was fading away again he returned to prominence with a startling performance in Frank Miller's Sin City. As Hartigan he revelled in the washed up detective role that he was getting so very good at playing. So much so he repeated the turn with a spin in 2006's 16 Blocks. It was these performances that made people question whether a 4th Die Hard film was a good idea. After all Willis was up at 50 years old now. Could he still bring the goods?

Die Hard 4.0 (2007) aka Live Free or Die Hard



EXPECTATIONS – To say I was a fan of the original Die Hard film and its sequels would be an understatement. I don't think Die Hard is the best film ever made like certain people I know but it was a top of the line action film that redefined the genre. Action movies were just starting to struggle in the late 80's and Die Hard just swept it all away and rebuilt the world in its own form. The second Die Hard film was pretty good although I still don't get why the British plane explodes when it has no petrol in it. As Colm Meaney says "we're running on fumes". But I guess that's Hollywood for you. Die Hard With a Vengeance was also a strong entry and the best part of it being the constant battling against the clock. It created a sense of tension throughout the film on a par with the strong set up's in a confined space for the first two films. 4.0 is a somewhat delayed 4th instalment but that seems to be a common theme of late. What with another Indy film in production and John Rambo set to return in the New Year. Bruce Willis firmly believed in this new film and created a bit of a stir online when he joined a forum to defend the film pre-release. That all just seemed to add to the hype. I was actually really looking forward to it until they named Len Wiseman as director. Was John McTiernan busy or something? This does add in a second hack to direct a Die Hard film though after Renny Harlin did a decent job on part two.

TRAILER – Sadly the good trailer isn't embeddable. Why do people do that? Oh, you must go to YouTube to watch this clip so you can read what I have to say about it. Oh, look at me I'm so important I'm on YouTube. Yadda, yadda, yadda.



PLOT – Whenever rogue federal agent Thomas Gabriel (Timothy Olyphant) attempts to clean out America using cyber-terrorism he's faced with the reluctant hero John McClane (Bruce Willis). This time McClane gets roped into saving the day after accidentally saving loose end computer hacker Matt Farrell (Justin Long) from being killed. Together the duo try to stop the terrorists before they bankrupt the USA with a fire-sale.

OPINION – This film is shockingly close to being one of the best of the series. Shockingly close considering the ineptitude of director Len Wiseman. His constant inability to create tension or build up to big scenes or even clearly show what's happening in big scenes tries it's hardest to scupper Die Hard 4.0. But on the other hand his ADD riddled brain feels such an urge to display carnage at every turn that Die Hard 4.0 becomes an extended car crash and I mean that in a good way. Hardly a minute passes without a car chase, a shoot out or something exploding. Hell, if they handed out an Academy Award for most explosions, which they SHOULD, Die Hard 4.0 would win quite easily. While I'm saddened at the lack of connection with the earlier films (was Bonnie Bedelia busy?) apart from McClane's daughter Lucy (Elizabeth Mary Winstead) the newer characters are all surprisingly good. Justin Long does a terrific job of playing a more grown up nerd than his scrawny second stringer in Dodgeball. This could well be his breakout film. Maggie Q is superb as Olyphant's right hand woman as she kick boxes her way through some great action scenes opposite the aging Bruce Willis. And Kevin Smith turns in a cracking cameo is a legendary cyber-nerd called the Warlock who lives in his mom's basement. In fact the only bad performance from the main characters comes from Olyphant himself who I've never liked in anything so that was to be expected. His cartoon cut-out super-villain never goes ridiculous enough to be entertaining or good enough to be taken seriously. Wiseman's one strength behind camera is a capacity to shoot action scenes and luckily for him Die Hard 4.0 is loaded with them. He creates a number of great set up's for action scenes usually involving something exploding. The car chase with the helicopter is amazing fun especially the conclusion where Willis jumps the car at the helicopter and both explode. That makes it onto the trailer in a prime location. It's screaming "hey, look at me. BOOM". You know your brain just ate that up like some kind of mental candyfloss. Mmmm. By the time we're up to a truck battling an F-16 with bridges collapsing the brain is happily kicked back having a sugar rush and slowly melting down. My personal favourite action scene was the fight between Willis and Maggie Q where the car ends up down the elevator shaft. That was just something else. There's no doubt they pulled out all the stops for this. There really can't be a Die Hard 5 because there's just no way to top Die Hard 4.0. Hell, one of the first scenes in the film features a frenetic fire fight between McClane and multiple bad guys with stuff exploding left and right and then as they head outside we get a car chase with one of the bad guys rocking PARKOUR off the fire escapes to catch up with them. I'm thinking its Cyril Raffaelli because he was also in parkour heavy District 13. There are that many different action elements in Die Hard 4.0 that it may be one of the most action heavy films ever made. As a result it IS a satisfying blockbuster BUT it doesn't really have the tension of any of the first three films. I don't feel like McClane is really in any danger because the stunts that are set up are all so wildly ridiculous that it doesn't seem real. Not like the swinging off the rooftop wrapped in fire-hose in the first film. That was off the fuckin' chain. There are similar moments of danger throughout Die Hard 4.0 but that's the thing. It's a constant. You don't really want your hero to be threatened with possible death until very late in the film to make the audience wonder if he'll actually make it this time. Because of the constant threat in Die Hard 4.0 you don't get that like you do in Die Hard. That said it's an absolute barnburner. It's one of the best cinematic spotfests I've ever seen. It's almost the pinnacle of keeping the excitement level insanely high throughout. There's minimum dialogue and the plot is stripped to raw basics. It's a rollercoaster ride that cost over $100M. If I ever see a film set on Earth with that many explosions in again I'll be amazed. Bring on that Most Explosions Oscar, stat.

BEST BIT – I mentioned the elevator fight scene earlier and that's probably my favourite part (what with the tip of the hat to the first film) but who can argue with a car colliding with a helicopter.



RATING – ****. Four point zero stars. A rip roaring ride. Almost constant action throughout. The kind of movie that any red blooded man would happily add to their collection. Yeah, I own this movie and it has a tonne of explosions, car chases and fights in it. Arf, arf, arf. Tim Taylor would love this film.

Sidenote – I did enjoy how many nods of the head there were to the Die Hard franchise. Like Lucy having her mother's name, the Agent Johnson, the henchman falling down the stairs and of course Yippy Ki-Yay Motherfucker.

Key Largo (1948)



EXPECTATIONS – Directed by the legendary John Huston and starring a triumvirate of top name stars; Humphrey Bogart, Lauren Bacall and Edward G. Robinson. This film comes with a strong pedigree. This film came out the same year as another huge Huston success story; the Treasure of Sierra Madre (home of the "we don't need no stinkin' badges" line). The timing therefore is during Bogart's transition from big time star to a more experienced star willing to try different things. Starting with his cowardly turn in Sierra Madre and moving on to this shortly afterwards. Three years later he'd be captain of the African Queen.

TRAILER – Nothing on YouTube apart from a few compilation tributes to the stars involved that use scenes from Key Largo.

PLOT – World War 2 veteran Frank McCloud (Humphrey Bogart) heads down to Key Largo to see the widow of one of his war buddies; Nora Temple (Lauren Bacall) to tell the story of his final days to the woman and her father James (Lionel Barrymore). James runs the hotel down in Key Largo and it seems rather busy for the time of the year. It's revealed that a group of fishermen lead by the reclusive Mr Brown (Edward G. Robinson) have hired the place exclusively. When a hurricane rolls in trouble comes with it as the fisherman are shown to be gangsters and Brown to be the notorious Chicago gangster Johnny Rocco.

OPINION – When I started into Furious on Film I had seen only two John Huston movies (Annie & Casino Royale). I also hadn't seen much from Humphrey Bogart (aside from the obvious; Casablanca). It's been a great experience checking out films from the past hundred years of cinema and from those hundred years both Huston and Bogart have made a big impression. Oddly enough the best work Huston has ever done has involved Bogart (Maltese Falcon, Treasure of Sierra Madre, African Queen) so I like to think they bring out the best in each other. While Key Largo isn't on the same level as any of those films it does have a tremendous cast and a decent story to tell. Bogart's McCloud isn't quite as straightforward as his basically heroic characters nor is it quite as black as the dodgy prospector featuring in Sierra Madre. It's perhaps his most realistic role because of the shades of grey involved in it. He's scared for his life when faced with the gangsters and when threatened by Johnny Rocco he backs down. That's not the most heroic American thing to do. John Wayne would be upset. Especially as McCloud is a former soldier who survived World War 2. But the character is far more subtle than the majority of Wayne's. He remembers being a hero. There are gut reflexes and he has to fight them. As good as Bogart, and Bacall, are they're both overshadowed by the slightly scene chewing Edward G. Robinson whose bad guy Johnny Rocco is defining of his character performances. If you're not familiar he's the guy that says "see" at the end of every sentence just so you know he means business. That and delivering snappy dialogue with extra added snap to it. When you make Humphrey Bogart look long winded in his delivery you know you're talking fast, 1930'S STYLE~! The claustrophobic setting of a hotel surrounded by a storm just adds to the ambience. As does the concept behind Key Largo whereby the hero has to face a big bully and the odds, which is just a metaphor for McCarthyism and fighting the Un-American activities committees.

BEST BIT – Rocco plays it mean by forcing his girl Gaye (Claire Trevor) to sing for her booze. When she's done he refuses her the drink saying she stank and she's a lush and he's sorry he wasted his time on her. Another metaphor surely but another fine chance for Edward G. Robinson to act like a supreme jerk.

RATING - ****1/4. There's a reason why Humphrey Bogart is regarded as one of the best actors of all time and its films like this. The heavyweight cast seem to enjoy bouncing off each other and Huston's taut direction keeps the film together.

Drunken Angel (1948) aka Yoidore Tenshi



EXPECTATIONS – I don't think anyone needs to be told how good Akira Kurosawa is. And his favourite actors were always Toshiro Mifune and Takashi Shimura. Both star here. Mifune for the first time in a Kurosawa movie. In fact this is hailed as the film where Kurosawa turned the corner as a director and really started to come into his own as not just a director but as an artist. Stray Dog followed a year later then Rashomon in 1950.

TRAILER – Sadly again no trailer available. Really not been the best of weeks. Instead here's a Kurosawa "tribute" off YouTube, which is mostly just Mifune going nuts with a sword.



PLOT – Gangster and fast living lothario Matsunaga (Toshiro Mifune) has everything he wants but he also has tuberculosis. He seeks help from the local doctor, a drunkard, named Sanada (Takashi Shimura). He despises gangsters and refuses Matsunaga treatment. Matters are further complicated when Sanada's assistant discovers her boyfriend, and notorious bad guy, Okada (Reisaburo Yamamoto) has been released from prison. He's angling to win her back and take Matsunaga's turf. Sanada stands in the way of both.

OPINION – From watching Drunken Angel you can see where Kurosawa got his love of Mifune from. It's quite a staggering performance of depth from him. One minute he's the nightclub loving playboy the next a TB riddled weakling. He plays both expertly keeping a bridge of honour between the two where he feels Matsunaga needs to retain a certain degree of pride even when he's sick. He should refuse help because he can look after himself. The ensuing showdown with Okada over territory ends up being one of the more one-sided feuds in cinematic history but nevertheless a highly memorable one. And it's Mifune that Kurosawa has to thank for it. Shimura is also terrific barking drunken orders at the fiercely obstinate Matsunaga. The two leads really never let up and it's an early error on Kurosawa's part that he ever focuses on anyone else. Any time we follow Okada around or Nurse Miyo or Nanae there's a definite lack of quality onscreen. There's also a feeling that Kurosawa's early work, specifically this film, owes a debt of gratitude to American film noirs. There are only a few little chunks of Japanese culture in the script and sake could easily be substituted for whisky and voila we're not in Japan we're in Chicago. Given their penchant for stealing Kurosawa movies wholesale I'm surprised no one Hollywood side ever considered just transferring this whole film stateside. It would only require minimal changes. Imagine this being re-shot in the 60's as a noir starring Clint Eastwood? I can. Of course the genre was dying off at the time but that could have breathed fresh life into it the same way Kurosawa's samurai epics breathed fresh life into the Western. Kurosawa is still a little green around the gills though and Drunken Angel suffers badly from experimentation. The nightclub scenes are badly dated and some of the lesser characters get too much screentime but he'd learn and quickly. Kurosawa rarely repeated errors.

BEST BIT – The eventual showdown with Okada overpowering the weakened Matsunaga as he fights for his life. For a gangster film it takes the majority of the flick for blood to be spilt but when it is it sees both men scrabbling away in pools of spilled paint messing up their stylish suits. Both men desperate to finish the other. It's an incredibly tense scene made all the better by it's starting originality.

RATING - ***1/2. Not Kurosawa at his level best but an early example of what he was capable of. The teaming with Mifune for the first time is historically important and delivers such big results that the two would pair up on 15 further films including the vast majority of Kurosawa's best work. It has to be noted this was the first film Kurosawa had full control over. Previously his work had been government censored. The somewhat downbeat vibe is the result.

Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer (2007)



EXPECTATIONS – I reviewed Fantastic Four back in FoF#28. It really doesn't seem that long ago. I didn't hate the first film but I did hate Julian McMahon for his dreadful campy Dr Doom and I didn't agree with some of the casting. But seeing as time has now passed I think I'm over the casting snafus. I still think Jessica Alba is too young to play Sue Storm or Chris Evans is too old to play Johnny Storm. The dynamic between them isn't right. That said I can live with this cast making another film. I think a decent enough storyline around it can help to paper over the cracks.

TRAILER –



PLOT – Reed Richards (Ioan Gruffudd) is set to tie the knot with his superhero girlfriend Sue Storm (Jessica Alba) in the media event of the decade. However on the day of the wedding a bizarre supernatural force arrives from an alien planet to prepare for Earth's doom. This being is known as the Silver Surfer (voiced by Laurence Fishburne). Initially he encounters Johnny Storm (Chris Evans) the youngest of the Fantastic Four and effects the way his powers work before colliding with the returning power mad Dr Doom (Julian McMahon) who seeks to steal the Surfer's technology for himself. Meanwhile The Thing (Michael Chiklis) is enjoying himself against the odds with blind but intuitive girlfriend Alicia (Kerry Washington).

OPINION – Well, for starters this is better than the first film. It's slicker and has far better production values. Also several of the issues the first film suffered from are no longer a problem. Gruffud seems to have matured nicely into the role of Reed and feels closer to the character he's playing. Jessica Alba seems marginally more mature and her relationship with Johnny is slightly improved as a result although it's not quite right still. I'm still underwhelmed by the Thing although Michael Chiklis plays him very well still. My biggest gripe with the first film was Julian McMahon and he's less bad in this. He's still bad but merely ‘not getting the character bad' as opposed to overacting scene chewing bad. So improvements all r0und from the first film. Also the second film has the benefit of an outstandingly cool new character in Norrin Rad, the Silver Surfer. I've never been a big fan but the way he's designed is very cool. His chase scene with the Human Torch after the wedding is a highlight and made it into most of the film's promotional material. Hey, when you've got something flaunt it! The special effects budget looked significantly swelled although I find it very hard to believe they blew $130M on this film when Die Hard 4.0 was made for less. The bigger budget effectively makes it a better looking film, and indeed by osmosis a better film, but makes it far less profitable. The first film, mediocre though it was, made $50M at the cinema. This flick scraped even. And even the improved special effects can't hide the fact that the Fantastic Four is the least up to date franchise Marvel has. It's still wholesome and cuddly and stuck in the 1960's. While the X-Men and Spider-Man have been successfully updated and made relevant in the modern era (although X-Men wasn't a difficult achievement at all) the Fantastic Four don't really feel relevant at all. Their concept is badly outdated and reduced to cool looking special effects with a barebones storyline that reflects how shallow the original storylines were for Fantastic Four. Innovative at the time but that time was 50 years ago. Now I'm left kicking back thinking that no matter how cool looking it looks it can't stop me thinking this is the Brady Bunch of superhero movies. The family friendly team. On the upside Marvel now has another franchise that's basically a success and the Silver Surfer has his own movie in 2009. Damn Marvel! You're just a licence to print money. Tim Story progresses slightly as a director here as it at least looks like he spent his enormous budget on something worthwhile but there's still no escaping the thought that this franchise hasn't been well handled to date. Meanwhile the Silver Surfer will now be handled by Alex Proyas. Oh, SOLD!

BEST BIT – Sue accidentally acquiring Johnny's powers and burning her costume off. Heh. Nice. Plus her floating outside the window was priceless. "Sue you're on fire". "YA THINK!"

RATING - ***1/4. An improvement over the mediocre first film but still an average effort compared to the Spidey and X-films. I would now start to worry somewhat as Marvel's initial run of superb films seems to be running a little dry. I'm keeping my fingers crossed that we get Thor and Captain America done based on how cool Ironman looks. Then an Avengers movie is only a matter of time.

Sidenote – Although I've been fairly positive in this review I do have to make a note about how I didn't like Galactus. If you think he looks a bit campy and naff then take a look around you. The whole film, bar the Surfer, looks campy. If you can't make Dr Doom look badass it won't happen for anyone in this series but don't go changing a character entirely just because you don't want giant "robots" in your movie, Tim. It'll only piss people off. And incidentally what the hell was going on at the end of the film? I don't even know. In fact the more I think about the total lack of a respectable ending the more Rise of the Silver Surfer frustrates me. I'll knock it down to a flat *** to satiate my brain.

NEXT – No idea. I'm having to write this before the rentals I'll be reviewing have been sent out and I won't be in town when they arrive anyway. Did I mention how much I hate Christmas?