DOA: a review of "RED"

"RED"
Based upon the comic book series created by Warren Ellis and Cully Hamner
Screenplay Written by Jon Hoeber and Erich Hoeber
Directed by Robert Schwentke
* (one star)

Am I glad that I didn’t see this movie in the theater!

In recent years, there have been certain big Hollywood features with big Hollywood stars that straddle the worlds of action and comedy, and have earned massive box office receipts and hoards of fans and yet, I have actually hated them. Strong word, but yes…HATED. Films like Steven Soderbergh’s “Ocean’s Twelve” (2004) starring George Clooney, Brad Pitt, Matt Damon and all of their celebrity friends in a shockingly uninspired sequel. Then, there was Doug Liman’s “Mr. and Mrs. Smith” (2005) starring Pitt and Angelina Jolie. And there was even the massive box office hit reinvention of “Charlie’s Angels” (2000) starring Drew Barrymore, Cameron Diaz and Lucy Liu, a film which I included in my Time Capsule series as being one of the worst movies I had seen during the previous decade.

What essentially angered me the most aside from the lazy storytelling, if there was any to be found in the first place, and the unambitious presentation overall, was the massive collective of movie star egos defiantly at play as it was obvious that none of them arrived to the set ready to do any actual work. There is something so arrogant to those particular movies as none of them actually try to do anything creatively. Even worse, the stars themselves seem to be snidely thumbing their collective noses at us in the audience as we have paid our hard earned money and have spent our even more precious time to sit in a darkened room and watch these handsomely paid people do…absolutely…nothing. In all of those aforementioned films, I felt that viewing them was like seeing these actors, having already been paid an exorbitant amount of money, throwing themselves an extravagant party that we will get to be marvelled by only by coughing up the ticket price. As if the mere sight of them is good enough. Believe me, dear readers, it isn't.

I had that same miserably sinking feeling as I viewed “RED,” Director Robert Schwentke’s criminally terrible adaptation of a DC Comics series, starring Bruce Willis, Morgan Freeman, Helen Mirren and John Malcovich as a collective of retired CIA veterans dangerously forced out of their quiet lives and back into active duty. Despite their combined star wattage and power, none of that palpable energy was ever seen, in any way, upon the screen, making this nothing more than a giant sized paycheck movie for all of them and a giant waste of time for myself. With its major box office success this past summer, I know under no uncertain terms that I am in the minority with this opinion but when a movie has this little excitement, enjoyment, involvement, and creative aspirations to begin with, my reaction could not be at all surprising or undeserved.

Willis laconically stars as Frank Moses, who has etched out a bored, sleepy existence in a boring, sleepy suburb. His only joy in life is speaking on the phone to Sarah Ross (Mary-Louise Parker), a bored, case worker employed at Frank’s Kansas City pension office who also happens to be a romance novel enthusiast. Late one evening, Frank’s home is invaded by a team of soldiers out to assassinate this seemingly quiet, older gentleman yet the tables are turned as Frank Moses quickly dispatches the entire hit squad, and subsequently goes on the run to Kansas City, where he kidnaps Sarah for her own safety. The twosome then begin to track down Moses’ former associates, including Joe (Morgan Freeman), now carving out his last days in a nursing home (and looking amazingly healthy for an 80 year old with stage four liver cancer); Marvin (John Malcovich) the unhinged, paranoid conspiracy theorist and Victoria (Helen Mirren) a restless weapons expert now tending to the gardening. After their reunion has been made complete, our heroes then embark upon one more adventure, trading quips and shooting bullets, as they attempt to discover the identity of the person or persons who compiled a hit list determined to eliminate them all.

There is a good, and quite potentially, a great movie to be made from this material. While I have not read the original comic series, I can see from the most basic framework of this story, that all of the ingredients are in place to create a truly impressive piece of cinematic work, for the summer movie season and beyond. So, it shocks me that Schwentke, his writers and his cast didn’t grab this concept with all of their hands and shoot for the stars, making “RED” such a wasted opportunity.

One possibility would have been to tell the story completely from the perspective of Sarah Ross. By making her an audience surrogate, we could be pulled along this adventure with her, as well as being able to watch her inner emergence from solitary cubicle worker to the woman who gets to live out her romantic adventure fantasies. It is an approach that worked so beautifully in Robert Zemeckis’ “Romancing The Stone” (1984) and with some great writing, that concept could have been used to tremendous effect in “RED.” But, as it stands, and while that particular idea is hinted at, Mary-Louise Parker is given absolutely nothing to do, a bad move as she is an actress of considerable charm and comedic skill. Her tonal expression remains the same throughout the entire move, regardless of any situation she happens to be placed into. This unfortunately makes for a character you cannot relate to or care a whit about as she has this unrealistic cool detachment to being shot at, drugged, kidnapped and hurtled along from one action set piece to another. And then, seeming as if Schwentke really did not know what to do with her, Parker vanishes from the film for a lengthy stretch. It felt as if her hiatus from her Showtime series “Weeds” had elapsed and she had to get back to that set for duty. Such a shame for an actress so likeable and a character with this much potential.

Even worse is how “RED” chooses not to deal with the story’s main conceit of mortality and insignificance, especially as these four aging warriors are pulled back into fighting force in a new, younger world. There could have been a strong element of dark thematic forces at play in this film, as these four characters are ones that will defiantly not go quietly into that good night. “RED” is a film that desperately needed more rampage, more raucousness, perhaps a bit of nastiness and gumption but definitely more two-fisted vigor of the emotional quality, all elements that would have given considerable weight to the endless pyrotechnics. Seeing Helen Mirren arm a machine gun, in and of itself, is a great image but it’s not enough by a long shot.

As Schwentke and his crew never seemed to discover a proper tone for “RED” as a whole, it seems as if they eventually decided to not have one at all. “RED” is just middle of the road, inoffensive summer movie blandness. Some friends of mine who did see “RED” during the summer described this film to me as being “cute.” Somehow, I really don’t think that “cute" is what the originators of the comic book series had in mind. While “RED” did not need to be a European tinged, methodical dirge about mortality, it did need some gravity to enhance the action, comic book origins, and to give the film a texture to play with. It could have been done. Look at Pixar’s “Toy Story 3,” and how those same themes were humorously and honestly incorporated into what is essentially a children’s movie. But, again, Schwentke did nothing and just let his film sit there like celluloid wallpaper.

“RED” is a toothless experience that is not at all aided by the awful screenplay and dialogue which, again, makes all of the actors equally toothless. 2010 has not been a good movie year for Bruce Willis as I just cannot remember if there was ever a time when he looked as uninterested and uninvolved on screen as he does in this film as well as in Kevin Smith’s horrendous “Cop Out” (honestly, if he is not going to try, then he just needs to stop). I even contend that Helen Mirren was cast for gimmick's sake alone. And please explain to me why Morgan Freeman was even cast in this film at all. I am sure that they enjoyed being around each other and receiving hefty payments for not doing terribly much, but that contains no enjoyment for me as a viewer looking forward to some exciting, frisky entertainment.

Beyond that, there is a deeper issue. Just within this month on Savage Cinema alone, I have spoken at length abut a variety of 2010 films that exuded wonderful displays of language, arming their respective films with mountains of creative verbiage that allows the actors to breathe succulent life into their characters, opportunities which contributed to the vibrant movie going experiences as a whole. The dialogue of Will Gluck’s “Easy A,” David Fincher’s “The Social Network,” Tom Hooper’s “The King’s Speech,” Lisa Cholodenko’s “The Kids Are All Right” and The Coen Brothers’ “True Grit,” are all films in love with language and how that language is utilized in the art if character development, motivation and storytelling. They are as much joy to listen to as to view, a difficult feat certainly, but an attainable one nonetheless.

The language contained in the screenplay for “RED” is the definition of “bland” as it is language that contains absolutely no color, no nuance, no vibrancy and therefore no emotional value whatsoever. For a film that carries a plot designed to possess a light footed sense of urgency, “RED’ is tragically languid as all of its heroes, especially Willis, sluggishly stand around and say the most basic, obvious things to each other…and questionably, extremely slowly as well. After a while of listening to this blank dialogue, it dawned on me that possibly this may have been a corporate business decision to keep the language so dumbly simple as “RED” also need to find an audience overseas to assist with the box office receipts to offset the production costs. If the dialogue is kept to a minimum, simply written and unhurriedly delivered, then the eventual translation process would be that much easier, potentially making the film more profitable in other countries.

Perhaps that is why the studio chose Robert Schwentke to helm this film as he has been a filmmaker that is kind of faceless in his cinematic personality and his films tend to have a tonal blandness that undercuts any deeper themes inherent in the material itself. All of his directorial choices in "RED” are MOR, non-controversial and sadly, very boring. All of the action sequences look and feel like action sequences you have seen thousands of times before…and better. Even the film’s music backdrop is a waste as the unimaginatively chosen rock songs (like Aerosmith’s “Back In The Saddle”—get it?) and pseudo ironic/hipster score do nothing but to only recall infinitely better films like Quentin Tarantino’s “Jackie Brown” (1997) and Soderberg’s “Ocean’s Eleven” (2001).

Previously, Schwentke directed the 2009 adaptation of The Time Traveler’s Wife, a film to which I also gave a harshly negative review, and for many of the same reasons I disliked “RED,” mostly that it was a missed opportunity and took very romantically tragic and dark material and drained it downwards to an MOR PG-13 world. Maybe to make films simpler, non-challenging, non-threatening, and accessible to the masses worldwide, studios feel that filmmakers like Schwentke are needed to increase their bottom line, which in the case of ‘RED” worked very well.

If that’s true and commerce has overtaken art once again, what a loss it is for us as audience members and consumers. For when we are all disrespected as people who deserve high quality entertainment and art, and are, over and again, treated like product, the only losers are all of us in the theater seats.

“RED” is indeed a film that possess no artistry, no entertainment, no emotion, no excitement, and no reason to exist in any form beyond its one sheet poster. If you have not seen the entire film, then just look at that poster. That image is the entire film and you can get that for FREE!