Now
what do these two science-fiction movies have in common? One is a low
budget Australian film based on a Robert Heinlein short story, starring
Ethan Hawke and Sarah Snook. One is a big budget studio action
adventure film based on a Japanese novel, starring Tom Cruise and Emily
Blunt. Well, they both have complicated plots involving time travel,
are unusually committed to their heady premises, and both have been
hailed as overlooked or underappreciated titles by various movie fans
taking stock of the genre films of 2014.
"Predestination"
is a film I was more inclined to root for at first. It's a tiny film
made on a shoestring budget, but has such a great idea at its core. It
also has the benefit of a great performance from its leading lady, Sarah
Snook, with a good assist from Ethan Hawke. Hawke plays a Temporal
Agent, a time-traveling law man of sorts, who is sent back to the 1970s
to stop a terrible bombing from taking place. Snook plays a writer he
meets, whose involvement in the crime is not clear. "Predestination" is
set up as a typical thriller, but then turns into something else
completely, something much weirder and stranger. And as much as I
usually love movies that do this, it doesn't' work.
It's
not that the twists are predictable - and they are predictable - but
that they simply aren't executed well. Part of this has to do with the
nature of the story itself, which includes several outlandish elements
that worked well on the page but fall totally flat on the screen. Part
of it has to do with the limited budget and big ambitions. But mostly,
it's the filmmaking that just isn't up to snuff. The characters are
shallow, the dialogue is trying too hard to sound cool, and every one
of the big twists are telegraphed far in advanced. The premise is a
good one, but it needed some expansion to really get us invested in its
outcomes. "Predestination" doesn't bother, too wrapped up in the
mechanics of making sure the audience appreciates how grand its big
ideas are, so those big ideas end up having very little impact.
On
the other hand, we have "Edge of Tomorrow," the action-adventure movie
that can be described as "Groundhog's Day" if "Groundhog's Day" took
place during an alien invasion. The marketing made it look like yet
another by-the-numbers Tom Cruise vehicle in the vein of 2013's ho-hum
"Oblivion." And it completely failed to spotlight the earthy humor, the
great worldbuilding, and most importantly the humanity of the
characters. Tom Cruise breaks from form and plays a main character who
starts out as a scummy coward, and we're happy to see him dumped in the
middle of the battlefield to get his comeuppance. He
eventually becomes the more typical Tom Cruise action hero again by the
end of the movie, but they make him work for it.
Between
writers Christopher McQuarrie and the Butterworth brothers, and
director Doug Liman, the repeating day premise of "Edge of Tomorrow" is
used to its fullest. Cruise's character is gleefully offed many, many
times, we watch multiple variations on the same scenes build up to
satisfying climaxes, and the heroes are forced to earn their victories
the hard way. The action is great and the aliens are wonderfully
menacing - they have to be or the movie simply would not work. And just
when the video game mechanics start to make things seem too easy, the
game changes again. Cruise shows that he can still surprise when
necessary, and Emily Blunt continues her ascension to the A-list. How
is it possible that this woman hasn't been cast in a superhero role yet?
Simply
having a good, interesting high-concept idea isn't enough. Though
"Predestination" shows a lot of promise, it's clear that the filmmakers
didn't have a take on the Heinlein story that was worth creating a movie
around. And though there have been too many Tom Cruise sci-fi movies
that have been disappointments, if you put him with the right talent and
material, you get something like "Edge of Tomorrow," a good reminder of
why we watched so many of those Cruise films in the first place.
---
No comments:
Post a Comment