Showing posts with label Frank Grillo. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Frank Grillo. Show all posts

Monday, 30 January 2017

Adaptation: Minority Report



The A-word.
It's the bane of cinephiles, everywhere.

That book you love; the comic you remember; the show you used to watch; the game you lost an entire summer playing? Oh, someone's adapted it and it's getting made into a movie! Whether a cause for pre-emptive celebration or foreboding caution, it leads to only one thing: expectation. And expectation is the death of the 'clean' movie-viewing experience; no matter how closely the film sticks to its source material, or how much it tries to distance itself, it will be faced with the hurdle of comparison.

And while the movie industry loves the pre-built marketing buzz of 'now a major motion picture!', they loathe the comparative references which will be made from the first review onwards. Because many punters will expect to get exactly the same reaction from a completely different medium, to a story they already know. And therein lies the problem.

In this monthly series, we'll look back at some of the most respected and best-loved properties which have made the perilous journey to the big screen; often with some controversy, and almost always with far too much hype. This isn't so much a review of the films themselves, more an appraisal of their suitability as an adaptation.




Minority Report
Minority Report
Philip K. Dick (1956)

And so we begin with Philip K. Dick's Minority Report, the 1956 short story of a man caught in a system of 'Precrime', whereby a monitored trio of precognitive mutants read the imminent future for cases of murder and treason. The details are then passed on to a dedicated police unit (with an identical set of results passed to the military as a set of 'check and balances'), who are dispatched to arrest the offender before they have a chance to commit the crime. Although in some cases, the offender isn't yet aware that they intend to murder their victim(s). Precrime are almost literally the thought-police.

That's right, I'm starting 2017 by reading about institutionally-sanctioned prejudice in a book from 61 years ago. But I digress…

Bearing in mind that my default approach to sci-fi and speculative fiction is cinematic (rather than literary), my first thought was that the initial setup of the story seems reminiscent of Robocop , with The Establishment focusing more on a pre-emptive deterrent, rather than in-situ engagement of criminals. Not withstanding the obvious flaw in the system (we'll get onto that), the fact remains that with a system of punishment in place that addresses the 'crime' while leaving the victim still alive, Precrime would indeed act as a first-stop deterrent. For murder, at least. The narrative seems to suggest that reports of theft and assault are automatically filtered out of the system, and are presumably picked up by the authorities in the regular manner.

Dick's philosophical time-cruncher is only a forty-two page short story, and - like all the best speculative fiction - isn't so much concerned with the advancement of technology, but more the non-advancing nature of the humans with access to it. At the core of the story, the machines which facilitate the scrying are only tools connected up to the people (albeit 'mutants') at the centre. But then, people are only biological machines, after all. Minority Report is more a brief study of the illusion of free-will, and the margin of error involved when anybody tries to second-guess someone's true motives. Again, cf 2017.

Most of all, I love that the thought-analysing machines in this future state are still printing off slips of card. Can we hold on to that, please?

The central figure one John Anderton, the developer of Precrime and a police commissioner about ten years or so from retirement (so not a young protagonist, something worth bearing in mind for a movie adaptation, I'm sure). In a system where the last recorded murder was over five years ago, its inventor has convinced everyone - including himself - that constant surveillance and preemptive intervention is for the public good. And it's all the more baffling since the one obvious flaw in punishing someone for a fixed crime in a fluid timeline is something which doesn't seem to have occurred to him until he ends up accused of murdering someone he hasn't yet met. Once this happens, the penny seems to come clanging down with ironically startling rapidity.

Even for a 'short' story, Minority Report takes its time in getting round to this caveat, although when it does, Dick's writing is reassuringly self-aware. The tale unfolds into corporate conspiracy, rather than personal vendetta, and the already unclear waters of right and wrong are muddied with the pollutant of 'for the right/wrong reasons'. And while it's nicely compact, this is a story just crying out for expansion.

The book (I'm going to call it that) is good fun and far more accessible than I've found Philip K Dick on previous attempts. I can't help but wonder how 'out of reach' this non-specific future would have seemed in 1956, because in the 2017 of consumer algorithm profiles and social media tracking, Minority Report feels closer than ever...







Minority Report
Minority Report
Steven Spielberg (2002)

Oh, I see the Murder Cards™ have been replaced with carved, wooden lottery balls. Makes as much sense as anything, I suppose…

Given an entire plot makeover and with Steven Spielberg, Tom Cruise and Colin Farrell, the budget for this adaptation is clearly larger than the starting concept. Thankfully, the film's always more than being A Tom Cruise Movie™, event though the translation's still more generic that it should be. And sure, it's more heavy-handed in its message than the written-version, but that's probably a combination of the larger narrative and the visual storytelling method. The film is less of a philosophical thriller, and more the arch action movie that the cast-list would suggest.

As a plot-device and overall concept, Precrime seemed more practical in the book version of this. Equally overblown and with the same moral stumbling-block of course, but less ostentatious. While the how of the story remains largely the same, screenwriters Scott Frank and Jon Cohen take significant liberties with the who and why. All for the good of the feature-length adaptation, of course.

On the plus side, this is exactly the kind of exploration than the story needs. Although if anything, the film's far longer than it needs to be at just under 2h20m. Minority Report hits the ground running with a show, don't tell methodology, but the extended narrative time means there's a lot of exposition in here, over and above what's really needed. And it's perhaps ironic that for a sci-fi movie, Anderton's newly-added 'broken cop' backstory could have been written by a computer. In what could be the film's signature sequence, it displays the morbid fascination with eyeballs that occurs in other adaptation of Dick's novels (more of those in future entries to this series), but which is absent from the source book (a bit I was looking forward to, if anything).

This film version is set (ie captioned) in 2054, which puts a specific future-date on things, this time round. Although bizarrely, if Cruise's hand-wave-operated computers with translucent holo-displays don't date the movie enough, the Nokia-logo product placement and COPS referencing certainly do.

Overall though, not a bad movie by any means, even if it's a slightly unremarkable one, in the long-run of cinematic history…




Is the original thing any good, though?
It is, although it's more like an idea in longhand; the first, bare-bones draft of a novella. It also feels in places like it was written in an afternoon.


Is the film-version any good, though?
It is. The creative team behind the film have fleshed out the initial idea (warts and all) in ways which allow it to be expanded more fully. Okay, this leads to the potential setbacks of the system being more glaringly obvious, but it's not like everything in the real world's been thoroughly foolproofed, either.


So, should I check out one, both or neither?
As much as I enjoyed the paper-version, you won't really get much more out of it than just watching the movie. Although, perhaps uniquely, it'll probably take less time to read the book.


Oh, is there a Wilhelm Scream in it?
I didn't hear one.
Although I wasn't listening out for it, truth be told.
.


Yes, but what's the Star Wars connection?
Level 1: Well apart from those police-cruisers which look an awful lot like Jango Fett's Slave 1 ship from Attack of the Clones (2002), the city-scape and assembly-line chase sequences which bear more than a passing resemblance to Attack of the Clones (2002) and John Williams' score which bears more than a passing resemblance to his work on Attack of the Clones (2002)… Lor San Tekka's in this (from the Star Wars in 2015, admittedly).





DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.
• Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.
• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organisations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.

Saturday, 27 August 2016

Review: The Purge - Election Year





The Purge: Election Year
Cert: 15 / 109 mins / Dir. James DeMonaco / Trailer



Once again, the passage of time and semi-detached retrospect conspire to raise my eyebrow, as I re-read old reviews and marvel at how much I enjoyed the first Purge film and really didn't care for the second. And I'm only surprised because The Purge: Election Year is - against all expectations - quite a lot of fun.

The film takes place nineteen years into the annual Purge*1 where a progressive US senator, who wants to see the legalised crime-spree abandoned, is targeted by the powers who would rather it continue in perpetuity. Here be carnage…

Now, assuming you've watched the previous movies (and writer/director James DeMonaco is very much making that assumption), two things have changed this time around. Firstly, the screenplay doesn't actually bang on about the in-movie reason The Purge happens (Patriotic™, guilt-free, cathartic cleansing, etc). This is only the third entry in the series and already everyone concerned knows they're playing strictly to their established audience. Secondly, the screenplay doesn't spend time banging on about the perceived morality (or lack, thereof) of The Purge, which has been thusfar rendered even more patronising given how much the core-concept Just Wouldn't Work™*2. As a result, The Purge: Election Year quickly becomes a fairly effective survival-thriller, evoking The Walking Dead in its better moments, and a gleeful revenge b-movie in its lesser ones.

The overly smarmy conspiracy theory motif rears its head by the third act, of course, excitedly laying-in to conservative, capitalist conformity with all the gusto of a movie which isn't produced by one of the largest film studios in the world and hasn't charged you an exorbitant rate to sit and watch it ;) That said, it's part of an actual plot-point rather than the heavy-handed setup used on previous occasions, so it's forgivable. And sure, the film's climactic battle descends into ridiculous macho brawling, but the gunfire and melee are actually what the film does best, so again: no foul.

Best line: an ageing (ie Wise™) woman watches a TV report about young people visiting the US with the sole intention of taking part in The Purge. "Murder tourism… what's happened to our country, Joe?" she asks, apparently forgetting that The Purge (which has always been about All The Murders™, remember) is about to enter its nineteenth year. Like this is only a problem when All The Foreigners get involved...

All in all: far better than I expected it to be, largely because the series has stopped taking its own premise so seriously.

Anyway, if The Annual Purge takes place in March as noted on-screen, how come these movies are released in the Summer months (in the UK, at least)? What the hell kind of bullshit marketing is that?



So, watch this if you enjoyed?
It's a little bit Hostel, a little bit Walking Dead.


Should you watch this in a cinema, though?
Only if you really can't wait the requisite three months for the DVD/BRD.


Does the film achieve what it sets out to do?
This one actually does, yes.


Is this the best work of the cast or director?
Cast: hopefully not, although it's solid enough work.
Director: could well be, yes
.


Will I think less of you if we disagree about how good/bad this film is?
I will not.


Yes, but is there a Wilhelm Scream in it?
There is not.


Yes, but what's the Star Wars connection?
Level 2: That Frank Grillo's in this. And if you remember, he was in that Captain America: The Winter Soldier along with Sam 'Windu' Jackson.


And if I HAD to put a number on it…


*1 I think it's nineteen. The "fifteen years later" flashback in the trailer is replaced with an "Eighteen years later" card in the final movie, implying that The Purge has been taking place for nineteen years (providing this earlier scene occurred during the first Purge, which isn't explicitly stated to be honest). Either way, that's a metric shit-ton of The Murder™ on an annual basis. Who's doing all the paperwork? I mean, I'm not saying I'd be great at that job, although I am and I would. Just leave me a message in the Comments, we'll go from there…

*2 Short version: all crime in America is legal for 12 hours. As if all the crimes which could be committed within a 12-hour period could be just swept under the carpet the following morning. It's a Friday Afternoon concept if ever I've heard one...


DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.
• Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.
• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organisations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.

Tuesday, 29 July 2014

Review: The Purge - Anarchy

World of Blackout Film Review

The Purge: Anarchy Poster

The Purge: Anarchy
Cert: 15 / 103 mins / Dir. James DeMonaco
WoB Rating: 2/7



Let's not dick around, The Purge: Anarchy is hammily written, exploitative, straight-to-video, button-pushing, revenge pron, based around a concept which didn't quite work last time, and is no more or less convincing in the sequel. The arch sermonising of last year's introductory episode has all but disappeared, and the exploration of guilt, resentment, peer-pressure and pack-mentality has scarpered along with it. All that's left behind are the victims of violence, its perpetrators, and a group of radicals who are going to beat the system by joining in (no, seriously). Director James DeMonaco also hopes you've seen the first Purge film, because he doesn't waste a lot of time in here with the whys, hows and wherefores; he kind of assumes you're here for the murders.

Scattered over the top of this 100-minute melee is some good old-fashioned Capitalism-Fuelled Paranoia™, the likes of which I haven't seen since Society or They Live. Ironically it's not out of place, since there was a feeling throughout the movie that someone behind the scenes was enjoying this far more than me. Do you remember how it felt when you watched Saw II, and noticed that the writing had taken a back-seat while the set-pieces and loud bangs were doing the driving? That. The fact that this un-numbered sequel has landed 12 months after the first one also hasn't escaped my attention, and doesn't bode well for the future.

The only saving graces of The Purge: Anarchy (and even these are debatable) are that 1) whereas the first act suggests that James DeMonaco has some serious issues with both women and ethnic minorities, this is later expanded to him apparently hating all of humanity; no-one, irrespective of race, creed or class, escapes this debacle unscathed, and 2) the screenplay's dearth of ambition creates a morality-free enclosure which it's quite happy to sit contently within; because if you're not trying to make a good movie, you can't really fail, right?

Leaving aside the mechanics of the purge itself, this could be any low-budget, machine-gun-toting actioner with cardboard characters it can't quite bring itself to care about (so why should the audience?). Even with the people and situations we're presented with, there was a better film to be made here, although I'm sure that DeMonaco will keep flogging this particular horse for its sins.

If I seem like I'm being unduly harsh, it's because I'm genuinely quite disappointed. The Purge wasn't a perfect film, but had some interesting ideas and at least asked some pertinent questions about the world we live in. The only question 'Anarchy' asks is 'how much longer can this go on for?'



Is the trailer representative of the film?
That's about the size of it.


Did I laugh, cry, gasp and sigh when I was supposed to?
I jumped when there was a protracted silence followed by a telegraphed deafening noise; does that count?


Does it achieve what it sets out to do?
If it does then it's a worse film for it.


Pay at the cinema, Rent on DVD or just wait for it to be on the telly?
This will be in the £3 basket in Asda in less than a year. You can wait until then.


Will I think less of you if we disagree about how good/bad this film is?
Strangely, I probably won't. And I have no idea why.


Will I watch it again?
Doubtful.


Is there a Wilhelm Scream?
I didn't hear one, which makes no sense as it's one more scream (and there are a LOT) that the film-makers would have had to source from elsewhere.


And if I HAD to put a number on it…


And my question for YOU is…
Does the Purge take the USA's time-zones into account? I don't think I've seen this addressed in either film. Because couldn't you like, hop over the border for an extra hour's killing come 7am? What happens if you're on the side of the border where it's 6:15am, but you shoot someone on the 7:15am side? What about the US embassies in other countries? They're classed as American soil, right?
No wait, James, answer my questions!
ANSWER ME.



DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.
• Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.
• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organisations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.