Action Speaks Shallower than Words

I've never been a big fan of the action genre. Don't ask me why but while all my friends were harking on the virtues of 300 I was more interested in seeing The Queen. In fact, if it was up to me I would have seen The Queen instead of 300 one spring afternoon. But due to the fact that our movie selection was at the whim of other teenagers 300 ruled. I ended up seeing both and while The Queen now sits on my DVD shelf I haven't so much as given a second though, or viewing, about 300 after reviewing it. In fact, looking at my DVD shelf most of it is filled with drama and most action flicks I have are cross genre.

So how does a teenaged boy grow resentment towards a genre that is almost entirely aimed at pleasing him? Perhaps it was my long running fascination with sitting quietly in a corner and reading books for years that made me less interested in gunplay. Maybe it was my mother forbidding me to pretend to shoot people for years. More likely is the fact that I never grew up on any action films. In any case I've never been enraptured with the genre, so much so that I've only seen one Bond film, Casino Royale.

What exactly do I not like about the genre? Before going further let me make a general disclaimer. I'm excluding superhero, sci-fi and fantasy action films because these are totally different kinds of films at their core than the mainstream high caliber action flicks. There's a lot and I've a whole slew of grievances which I'm addressing in an upcoming review of Mission: Impossible, but one I'd like to flesh out is the lack of consequences or reflection of any kind.

The action film is a tedious and predictable beast. No matter how many die and how much damage is done the ending is always the same. Our hero triumphs and we get a short epilogue to wrap up loose plot ends. Then the credits roll. There's rarely, if ever, repercussions for the hero's actions. Even worse is that often main characters die and are never acknowledged at the end of the film. Not only does this make for an irreverent film but it also means that all the actions of the heroes and villains are more artificial than the computer generated effects that surround them because they have no impact on the world.

Even worse is the tedious action sequences are about spectacle after spectacle without any reprieve from the sheer noise of it all. If there isn’t someone shooting or something blowing up the sound is plagued by lengthy expositions or quippy one liners. Films of this caliber simply don't have the time or patience to stop for a moment and reflect, or give us a poetic visual moment. My favorite scene from the entire Star Wars series is the iconic shot of Luke looking out at the twin suns setting. It's a simple moment, the only sound John William's score. Yet the modern film has no such time for something that slow and thoughtful. It's a thrill a minute and instant gratification is the name of the game.

Yet not every action film suffers from these flaws and the ones that overcome these obstacles. The first one that comes to mind is my, and many others, favorite action film, Raiders of the Lost Ark. In this rough and tumble universe actions have real consequences. Jones actions can often lead to the peril and death of those around him. Furthermore, the film stops to give us reprieve from the action. The map room and the digging during the sunset sequences both come to mind as moments of complete cinema as opposed to simple spectacle. Both consequences and reflections cumulate about halfway through the film when Indiana Jones is drinking in a bar after his reckless actions have caused the death of a beloved character.

But that was back in the day when blockbusters were in their infancy. One has to wonder then if there are there any other action films that take up this kind of tone? Only one other comes to mind and that's the recent Bourne Trilogy. One could even summarize the entire film as a reflection on the nature of being a killer. Much like his 80's counterpart Jason Bourne's actions have real impact on the people around him. People die because of Bourne's actions and while the films end on a high note there's a real sense that Bourne will be forever plagued by his past actions. Likewise, some of the best moments of the film are not the action sequences but the moments where Bourne breaks down or is confronted by his past once again.

Crossing genres this lack of consequences and reflection becomes less of a problem. Superhero films often play on the consequences of being a superhero and a normal person. Peter Parker's heroic adventures often lead to misadventures and an apparent lack of commitment in his life as a nerdy photographer. Likewise, almost every superhero goes through a moment of reflection as the hero is faced with a hard choice between returning to normality or embracing the nature of their alter ego. Science Fiction action films have even less of a problem with these challenges. The entire genre is seen by many as at its core a reflection on the human condition.

Frankly I don't care about your action sequences unless there are human emotions behind it all. One of the fundamental truths of human existence is that our actions have consequences. As long as the action genre ignores this simple truth of living I will have a hard time coming to grips with it. I'm not saying the a great action film must contain such sensibilities but that for me personally I'll much sooner watch Raiders or the Bourne trilogy for their human elements than watch any action flick for it's entertainment value. It's too simple-minded for me to mentally engage in, too shallow for me to immerse myself in and too showy for me to find entertaining.

Theological Tuesdays: WALL●E and Wanted

This is my first post of this nature so I'll briefly explain it. Every Tuesday I play to write up a post that discusses the thoughts, ideas and themes behind one or two films. I will generally default to the theatrical release I see but if don't have one on a given week I'll pick the one I think has the most worth talking about. I won't go into extreme depth but I'll assume you've seen the film and I will be spoiling the films, often including their endings. So if you haven't seen the films I've talked about I'd probably steer clear of these posts. That being said lets dive right into it.

Spoiler Alert: Major plot points of WALL●E will be discussed in depth.

First off most critics seem to think this is some environmental tale about what happens when people quit caring about the environment as the earth is covered in so much trash that the human races abandons it. Not only do I think this claim is bogus and a result of everyone looking for environmental messages under every rock but also writer/director Andrew Stanton shot down this idea in practically every interview it has come up in. What he said he believes that aspect is about is a cautionary tale of the danger of becoming an overly consumerist society. Furthermore, he says most of what people see as the environmental message rose out of narrative necessity and not idealist beliefs. He needed a reason for the humans to leave the planet and something for WALL●E to clean up. Furthermore, he says he has no intensions of being preachy at all with this film.

Moving on Stanton has said that he believes that at its heart WALL●E is a longing for love and I'm inclined to agree. Romance involving robots in noting new to the sci-fi genre but it generally has taken on more sexual connotations. Here there's no such animalistic approach to love. WALL●E is the last robot on earth in longs for companionship from another robot. He actually first develops this longing from a betamax copy of the musical Hello, Dolly. To him he sees the display of love as holding hands as he watched a pair of lovebirds in the music.

WALL●E also has an interesting social commentary on the advents of modern technology. As we develop better and better technology we run the risk of becoming so complacent and lazy that we become vegetables forced to move around by hoverchair. Also, as we create better ways to communicate with each other but communicate less in what we have to say. Face to face conversations become obsolete when everyone is just a holocall away. Is the film saying that technological advances are bad? No. All it's saying is that we have to be careful how much we rely on that technology before it takes over our very existences. Already we see individuals practically tied to their cell phone as they spend many of their waking hours talking, texting and sending photos.

Spoiler Alert: Major plot points and the ending of Wanted will be discussed in depth.

Fate. This seems to be the core ideology behind Wanted. In the middle of the film Sloan shows Wesley the machine that decides the targets of the organization. It's a giant loom that uses a binary code (yea it's cheesy) to spell out a person's name. It's said fate controls the name the loom spits out in order to achieve a balance in the universe. Understandably Wesley doesn't quite buy into the notion, so much so that he fails to execute his first target. Then Fox tells an effective story about her father being killed by a man whose name came up on the loom weeks before he murdered her father. Convinced by the story Wesley buys into fate and kills his target.

Then comes the twist. It turns out that Sloan's name came up on the loom one day. Wishing to save his own skin Sloan hid the evidence and reconfigured the loom to input names that would benefit him. Fate, it seems, has been twisted and is simply Sloan controlling the machine. The individual's potential to chart their own destiny is the final conclusion of the film. Wesley's character goes from being controlled by his sorry girlfriend, sorry boss and fear to becoming so cool and calculated that he is in control. The film leaves the back door for fate open but ultimately the film concludes fate is a ruse as Wesley takes control of his own life and kills Sloan.