By Aaron 6/25/2008

Only two months ago I bemoaned the disappearance of the true action heroes and the true action movies like Die Hard and Terminator. Recent disappointments have only made this ache worse but it seems like the light at the end of the tunnel might be coming into sight. The disappointing actioner Hitman comes to mind because it was possibly a new franchise, with a new face, with a popular character. But it failed despite a simplistic action movie formula of hardened killer meets beautiful victim and returns to the forces of good. Two movies by questionable action-hero-prototypes could salvage their careers and the struggling genre. The first, Babylon A.D. (release August 28, 2008; click here for preview) is sort of a Children of Men meets The Transporter, but on steroids. The second, Bangkok Dangerous (release September 5, 2008; click here for preview) is more The Hitman with a Bourne stirred in – almost like if The Matchstick Man was a killer instead of a con man.

Both movies seem to use the same formula discussed above but the previews alone seem a hell of a lot better than Hitman. The previews are a lot of fun – Babylon comes with the intense eerie music of the cliché action thriller (but it works here) and Bangkok expertly uses the Road to Perdition style sentimental action music. Instead of the limp elephant, err, Olyphant, we have Diesel and Nic Cage – both actors who can handle a gun and some comedy, which is a hell of a lot more than Hitman, offered us.

Babylon excites me because it takes just enough science-fiction and a hell of a lot of action to create a different (yet seemingly believable) world. It builds on previous stories (The Transporter for instance) and adds a purpose – a woman who needs protection from a hazardous world (Children of Men). Just like the Riddick movies, Diesel looks like he found a role he can connect to here. Sure there are a fair amount of dialogue clichés – even in the preview – but I’m not looking for a classic – I’m looking for a great blockbuster.

Bangkok interests me because it is the pure assassin flick that for once looks like it could be great. Does anyone remember the movie Assassins with Antonio Banderas and Sly Stallone? It was a lot of fun in the way that I hope this movie will – lots of “jobs” and explosive action and some sentimental crap thrown in to lighten the movie and give it some texture. Except the emotion here looks like real emotion instead of the forced BS in The Hitman.

I know this is all pointless speculation that I usually confine to my Buzz column but I get the sense that no one really knows about these movies or realizes how much fun they could be. When was the last time you saw a great action flick at the movie theatre? The Apatows and rom-coms have washed over us – animated flicks with celeb voices fill in and we don’t really get those hard hitting action flicks anymore. What would McClane say? What would the Terminator say?

If you want to read my mourning of the action hereo, click here. Or if you have other questions or comments for me, don't hesitate to shoot me an email at aaron.saltystix@gmail.com.

Could “Avatar” Win Best Picture?

By Brett Hogan

 

Last week, the trailer for James Cameron’s sci-fi experiment “Avatar” debuted. While initially unimpressed with the teaser, I began to wonder: Could this film win best picture? 

 

Buzz has been generating for this movie for years. Years. The technology to make this movie didn’t exist when Cameron conceived it, so he invented it. When is the last time you heard of a director spearheading the invention of anything? The casting started in 2005. Most movies these days, even epics, are done in half that time. I could go on. 

 

The most important thing to take away from all of this is that people are saying this will be the future of movies. Now, I don’t agree with the idea that CGI will become more prevalent than it already is. But I do believe that this will set the bar miles higher for sci-fi. I mean, that is what Titanic did. And that won some awards if memory serves.

 

I’ll bet you’re asking yourself, how can you even suggest that a film like this will win Best Picture when the initial trailer was nothing better than visual stimulation? Well, there are a couple of reasons. First, the Academy has expanded Best Picture to ten films. This doesn’t guarantee anything other than improved chances for most films on the cusp.

 

Second, after last year’s Oscars debacle, which saw the best film of the year, “The Dark Knight,” not only get shafted in awards but nominations as well, the Academy is pulling out all the stops to appease those with the loudest voices in the film industry, the fanboys. Now, the Academy probably didn’t lose anything because of that other than some viewers of the award show. Perhaps if people are again outraged with the winners or nominees, the heads of the Academy would lose their jobs. So this is all about the Academy protecting itself, which is not so outrageous.  

 

 

Third, there is an economic motive here. I’ve heard this film will cost $190 million, not counting the R&D costs associated with Cameron’s inventions or the cost of getting 3-D cameras into every theater in the country. The Academy will do everything in its power to get people into the seats and make this the next “Titanic” or “The Dark Knight.” But the Academy doesn’t have much power, besides nominating and awarding, so they will slap the “Nominated for Best Picture” moniker onto every commercial and print ad to get the people who didn’t believe the critics to relent and see this movie.

 

Of course, all of this is pure conjecture, and no revolutionary film (Terminator 2, Jurassic Park, etc.) has ever won the Best Picture category because it changed the game. Except maybe Titanic. But still, could this movie actually win? My answer is no but a nomination is certain and who knows what could happen from there. We’ll know more come February 2010.