Action cinema appears to have lost its way a bit.
Here are our suggestions for setting it back on the right course…
Both films, though, are the tip of a proverbial iceberg.
Because action cinema has a bit of an identity crisis.
What trend should it follow?
What kind of action movies should be made?
What kind of action do people want to see?
Here are some of our answers to those questions…
The worst, for me, was the opening ofQuantum Of Solace,and it still is.
It was choppy to the point of making it unwatchable.
Contrast that with how Paul Greengrass put hisBournemovies together.
In recent times, things seem to have relaxed a little, although the problem is still there.
And this remains a major challenge for action cinema.
Weve just touched on theBournefranchise, and it seems appropriate to chat about it again here.
As such, the current trend in Hollywood remains to try and recapture the style and approach of theBournemovies.
Just look at John SingletonsAbduction.
Remember, too, the impact ofThe Matrix,and the explosion of wire-fu that followed?
Money
The thing about action cinema is that it doesnt have to be expensive to be impressive.
I blameThe Perfect Storm,amongst others, for this.
I fell for it.
I bought a ticket off the back of that.
The thing is, a good action sequence should just work, and fit the film.
Its a simple, idealistic approach, certainly.
It doesnt always require the need for posh computers, for massive stunts, and for inappropriate camerawork.
Sleeves that were bursting under the pressure of the ripping muscles underneath, of course.
Id argue that this was massively helpful for the genre, too.
Granted, the level of dross was quite extraordinary at times.
Do we get that, though, with straight to DVD?
Because there really seems to be something a gulf there.
But wheres the next level down?
Wheres the market that can find us the next Cynthia Rothrock?
Even on their off days, they were believable where it mattered.
Step forward Carl Weathers, Cynthia Rothrock, Christopher Lambert, Chuck Norris and Michael Dudikoff.
But modern action cinema, nonetheless, has a real shortage of bona fide, proper action heroes.
Matt Damon is more an actor in action movies than anything else.
The same too for Daniel Craig, and for Jeremy Renner.
In fact, for most headliners in action movies.
The Rock seemed to turn his back on action for a while, althoughFast Fivewas promising in that regard.
It depends what decisions he makes.
The case for Statham is obvious.
Hes a magnetic action force, whose films consistently entertain.
Her film choices are regularly geared towards action, and shes an underrated force in the genre.
She could use some better films, though.
But few others spring to mind.
Abductionis a film that might just about hang together with a younger Jason Statham at the core.
Whether you like the film or not, how about the audacity of some of the work inFast Five?
What about thoseBatman BeginsandThe Dark Knightaction sequences where the CG is kept to a bare minimum?
How about the old-fashioned vehicle chase inTerminator 3(again, not a great film)?
Those are all sequences that, whilst bonkers in some cases, at least feeltangible.
Throw in some of the work inCrankandShoot Em Up,too, if you want further examples.
Occasionally, they work.
More often than not, it simply feels like theres something missing.
Go and watch aTransformersmovie if you dont believe us.
Wheres The Fun Gone?
One further ramification of theBournemovies is that they were major contributors in turning action cinema so serious.
This isnt a bad thing, of course.
But surely it doesnt mean that we cant have some fun, too?
It was also willing to construct a bit of action around comedy, too.
The 3D cinema moment caused the audience I was with to erupt with laughter, and rightly so.
Action movies are often switch-off fun, andThe A-Teamplayed right to the heart of that ethos.
That used to be okay with people in the 80s.
Can we start telling Hollywood film executives that its okay again now, yo?
But it shouldnt be like that.
The first film should throw as much as is appropriate and necessary at the screen.
If it works,thenyou can worry about doing a follow-up.
Where Have The Bad Guys Gone?
At one stage, you could choose from a carousel of British thesps for your villain of choice.
It always seemed like a winning combination.
When was the last time you saw an action movie that had a villain worthy of the fuss?
Yet at the start of that film?
I bought the fact that he was a nasty character, wanting to do wrong.
I could understand why Tom Cruises character would not warm to him.
Remember Castor Troy inFace/Off,too.
Thats the standard were after.
That present a challenge.
Thats not really happening right now, sadly.
Schwarzenegger and Stallone, for starters, broke out into one-joke comedies, sending up their action persona.
To do that once works.
To repeat the formula?
That it was a last, rather than first, resort.
Let it prove that action is a broad church, certainly.
And I hope thatThe Expendables 2is both a massive success, and a strong film.
Action cinema always needs to evolve, and move on.
But it should never be afraid of re-exploring its many, many roots.
