Thursday, November 18, 2010

HEAR MY TRAIN A COMIN': a review of "Unstoppable"

"UNSTOPPABLE"
Written by Mark Bomback
Directed by Tony Scott
**1/2 (two and a half stars)

I tend to get quite the kick out of movies that reveal their fullest intentions within the confines of their titles. Entirely within the moniker, you know and understand exactly and completely what the film is about while boldly announcing and promising what it will deliver. The first film that comes to mind is Director Renny Harlin’s “Cliffhanger” (1993), the Sylvester Stallone icy mountain action movie. Just last year, I believe there was even a low budget B-level feature entitled “Fighting” featuring Channing Tatum and Terrence Howard and there is even an upcoming action film with Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson emphatically titled, “Faster.” Of course, there is no way that I could possibly forget two terrific entries in this sub-genre, “Speed” (1994) and “Twister” (1996), both directed by Jan de Bont. Through all of those titles alone, audiences knew right up front that they were going to experience a high octane, edge of your seat, white knuckle motion picture and more often than not, those films succeeded. Throwing his Directorial hat into the ring is filmmaker Tony Scott, who arrives with “Unstoppable,” a serviceably taut, muscular thrill ride that certainly makes good upon the promises of its title but somehow, it just doesn’t stick to the ribs, making the entire proceedings fairly lackluster. Frankly dear readers, this film is unstoppably speeding its way straight out of my memory…so, I’d better write this quickly.

The plot of “Unstoppable” is the definition of “bare-boned.” Frank Barnes (Denzel Washington), is a train engineer and 28 year veteran of the Pennsylvania railroad industry. On this most fateful of days, Barnes is joined by rookie conductor Will Colson (Chris Pine). As their day progresses, the two men, along with railroad yardmaster Connie Hooper (Rosario Dawson) via phone line, become the main participants in stopping a runaway train carrying several cars of hazardous, toxic material which is speeding towards the heart of the highly populated Stanton, Pennsylvania. Will Barnes and Colson halt the train before it vaporizes the city to kingdom come and will both men survive this terrifying adventure?

That is the plot in less than a nutshell and for a movie such as “Unstoppable,” that’s all you really need. Scott produces the goods by keeping his film lean, mean, and briskly paced while exhausting every opportunity to place this train into one potentially cataclysmic situation after another. Scott produces the goods by keeping his film lean, mean, and briskly paced while exhausting every opportunity to place this train into one potentially cataclysmic situation after another. The action sequences of “Unstoppable” has its roots firmly placed in some of history’s earliest cinematic images, like the damsel in distress tied to the tracks as the speeding train approaches, as well as some of the more comedic visual athletics presented by Buster Keaton. Scott also crafts a decent and slightly procedural thriller along the lines of Director Ron Howard’s “Apollo 13” (1995). “Unstoppable” is a film that celebrates the potential of societal goodness when people band together towards a common goal, a quality that gives the film’s title an additional layer as the film’s heroes are as resilient as that relentless train.

Other than the petulantly lazy railroad employee Dewey (Ethan Suplee), who causes this entire disastrous mess by not connecting the air hose to the train, thus making the air brakes completely ineffective, the only real villains in “Unstoppable” are the white-collar elite as represented by Oscar Galvin (Kevin Dunn), the railroad VP and some generic members of the blue blooded, heartless, golf-playing constituency. Their sole function is to cruelly stand in the way of Barnes, Colton, and Hooper’s valiant efforts as they bemoan potential financial losses instead of the devastating human cost if the train is unable to be stopped. It is an element that is simultaneously heavy handed, clumsily presented and yet it is a bit clever. Through coincidence or fate, “Unstoppable” arrives now in theaters after the nation has had a front row seat to the environmental disaster of BP oil crisis and the disgustingly classic moment when BP C.E.O. Tony Hayward misguidedly expressed that he just wanted to get his life back. In its own way, “Unstoppable” is the ultimate blue collar action film, a wish fulfillment fantasy where the working class heroes are able to grab the unstoppable forces keeping them subjugated by its tail and wrestle it to the ground through dogged ingenuity and a sheer force of unshakable will.

Armed with his own filmmaking sense of dogged ingenuity and sheer force of will, Tony Scott is truly one of the few filmmakers working today that could possibly have orchestrated a film like this so convincingly. That said, I do have to say that I have not always been the biggest Tony Scott fan. For me, his films do tend to be emotionally empty hearted, and a little dumb. Also, I tend to appreciate and enjoy some of his brother Ridley Scott’s more ambitious features greater (1979’s “Alien,” 1982’s “Blade Runner,” and 1991’s “Thelma & Louise” for instance).

With the exception of particularly strong features like "True Romance” (1993), "Crimson Tide" (1995), "Enemy Of The State" (1998) and the brutal "Man On Fire" (2004), Tony Scott is primarily a craftsman, an exceptional craftsman, who gives all of his films a high polish sheen and undeniable professionalism. Think of his films from the 1980s like "Top Gun” (1986) and “Beverly Hills Cop 2” (1987). His movies practically shimmer from the screen. In recent years, he has carved out a visual style that falls somewhere within the hyperkinetic imagery of some of Oliver Stone’s most hallucinogenic and troubling works (1993’s “JFK” and 1994’s “Natural Born Killers”) and the impersonal, crass bombast of Michael Bay’s films (1995’s “Armageddon”). Scott has fallen into the type of ADD styled of filmmaking I cannot stand or stomach. Films where there can never be enough edits or swooping cameras and the soundtrack cannot be loud enough. Sometimes it works to its advantage like in “Man On Fire” yet most of the time, it is lackluster as seen in his so-so remake of "The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3” (2009) and most horrifically, the unwatchable “Domino” (2005).

For "Unstoppable," Scott has thankfully tempered his worst cinematic habits and ultimately found a certain middle ground between Stone and Bay. Where Stone is an artist and Bay is an unabashed and unapologetic Master of Ceremonies of endless, heartless oblivion, Scott is a storyteller. For better, worse or indifferent, Scott always sticks to the story and additionally, his films are typically constructed beautifully. Unfortunately for all of the razzle dazzle on display in his oeuvre, I never much cared about anything that really occurred in Scott's films and sadly, that same emotion crept up during my viewing of "Unstoppable." it barrels along full speed ahead but I was never invested in it. In fact, it seemed to be one of those movies that feels like nothing more than an extended version of the two minute trailer...and the trailer ultimately made for a better movie.

There never seems to be any well-worn cliché Tony Scott is afraid of and “Unstoppable” certainly has more than its share. There's one howler of a moment when Hooper feverishly utters the line that describes the severity of the situation. “This isn’t a train!” she bellows. “This is a missile, in the shape of the Chrysler building!!!” “Unstoppable” is that kind of movie, it makes no apologies for being so and I guess it shouldn’t. But I would have been more enthusiastic if it delivered even more than what I received and to fully explain, I have to take you back to "Speed."

“Unstoppable” is a film that reminds you just how terrific a film "Speed" actually was. Yes, it lived up to its title profusely through it endless action set pieces that utilized every possible scenario they could place that bus into. Plus, Jan de Bont gave us the intense opening bomb scare sequence as well as the climax on a subway train to boot. But, it was the the personalities of Keanu Reeves, Sandra Bullock, Jeff Daniels and the late Dennis Hopper that anchored the entire proceedings and gave it a certain authenticity, making for a film that was ferociously paced, happily exhausting to sit through and undeniably memorable. You not only experienced the film as an amusement par ride, you cared about what happened to these people.

With “Unstoppable,” not so much. Denzel Washington and Chris Pine, show much comfort and easy rapport with each other and each actor is allowed to play to their strengths. Unfortunately, neither of them are given that much to actually do and it actually didn't even seem be necessary that these two actors had to play these particular roles. Anyone could have played these parts in this way.

Washington, now marking his fifth collaboration with Scott, remains heroically steadfast while possessing one of the greatest smiles in the history of the movies. Pine, the emotional hothead, simmers, stews and broods appropriately, just itching for the moment to blaze into action. That's all fine and dandy but neither of them make that much of a lasting impression as both of their characters are paper thin at best. You don’t much care about either of them or their troubles (Frank Barnes is the latest casualty of company layoffs and while Will Colson is estranged from his wife, who has even issued a restraining order against him). Only Rosario Dawson, Ethan Suplee, Kevin Corrigan (who portrays a railroad inspector) and Lew Temple (who portrays Ned, a railroad welder) seem to be able to break out of their respective role confines and offer slightly deeper personalities than were written or even allowed to show.

Does this hurt the movie as a whole? Well…yes and no. But, then again the movie is called “Unstoppable” and it is not designed to be a character driven chamber piece. Its not a bad film in the least. Just not a terribly significant one. For all of its sound and blistering fury, it signified very little once it ended and I left the theater.

“Unstoppable” certainly had more than enough power and juice but it needed several more containers of boiling blood to make this film a real pulse pounder.

No comments:

Post a Comment