Point Break - directed by Ericson Core
Starring: Luke Bracey, Edgar Ramirez, Teresa Palmer, Ray Winstone, Matias Varela, Clemens Schick, Tobias Santelmann, Max Theriot, Delroy Lindo, Glynis Barber, James Le Gros
Running Time: 114 minutes
Rated: M - Violence and Profanity - nothing too bad
Here's another remake/reboot/re-imagining and in contrast to say "Mad Max" where the line between the three flavours is invisible this one is very firmly a remake.
Kathryn Bigelow's massively popular 1991 action flick was very much the Fast and Furious of its day.
It is dumb but huge fun.
Who can forget FBI agent Keanu Reeves firing his service pistol into the air in frustration or the scene in which he leaps out of an aircraft sans parachute in pursuit of Patrick Swayze?
It was a slickly shot movie full of colour and good old action flick lines.
Gloriously cheesy and impossible not to love.
Clearly Edgar Wright does as he references it frequently in his comedy homage to the golden age of the action flick "Hot Fuzz".
So a tough gig then remaking a movie like this with a legion of fans to upset if you stray too far or even stay too close to the original.
Which begs the question - why bother then?
The answer to that question generally - for any remake- warrants more time and space than I have here but in the specific case of "Point Break" the thought appears to be to bring it into the here and now.
You know- modernise it for the kids.
In doing so however they have ditched most of what worked and replaced it with a whole bunch of stuff that doesn't.
To begin with the obvious.... the 'look' of the movie.
Director-cinematographer Ericson Core (yes, like Peter Hyams he fills both roles) chooses to use a desaturated colour palette that is in stark contrast to the bright blues and general colourfulness of the original.
Donald Peterman shot Bigelow's film and also did "Men In Black", "Star Trek IV", "Splash" and "Get Shorty" amongst many others.
Core, however provides a grimy, grey and very cold looking film.
The intention seems to be to make a darker, more serious film and it is a bad move.
In isolation it is a perfectly fine idea but combined with an often plot hole ridden script and two leads who aren't in any danger of winning Oscars any time soon it is a mess.
Firstly, Utah this time is played by Australian actor Luke Bracey who looks a little like Patrick Swayze in the 1991 film but in fact plays the opposite character- the 'cop'.
I can't recall having seen Bracey before although he was in "G.I Joe: Retaliation" so I guess I have but he lacks any of the charisma that Reeves brought to the role.
Likewise Edgar Ramirez as Bodhi cements his position as one of the dullest actors working today.
With the exception of (ironically) Kathryn Bigelow's brilliant "Zero Dark Thirty" every single time I've seen him on screen he is staring blankly and mumbling his way through dialogue with the passion one usually only hears from a supermarket checkout girl.
(the recent "Joy" is merely one horrific example)
Watching these two fail to generate sparks off each other is almost painful.
Hope does arrive in the forms of Delroy Lindo (so good in "Get Shorty") and Ray Winstone (good in everything he ever does) but neither is afforded nearly enough screen time to have any positive effect.
Likewise the gorgeous Teresa Palmer who deserves a far better career than she has had to date.
(check out Nash Edgerton's amazing "Bear" - she is great in it- LINK)
They do a couple of interesting things with Palmer's character but again - she is under-utilised in favour of more time with Ramirez and Bracey.
When your two leads cannot generate any sympathy you are in trouble.
But the biggest issue with "Point Break" is the script.
I am getting tired of writing that in reviews.
What hope does a movie have if the very centre of it is off?
Bad movies can be made from good scripts but I have yet to see a good movie made from a bad one.
Plot holes aside (they tend to come with the territory in all but a few action flicks after all) the motivations of all of the main characters is a mystery.
Utah has trauma from a death shown in the admittedly pretty exciting opening motorcycle scene.
He reacts by quitting extreme sports and getting his academic life back on track with high school equivalency and law enabling entry into the FBI Academy.
He is given a probationary badge to pursue a team of men committing daring robberies that he correctly picks as the work of extreme sportsmen (and a woman).
In attempting to find its own voice this movie has the criminals as not merely spiritual hippie types like Swayze and co but more like the sort of bores that no doubt fill their Facebook feeds with idiotic inspiration messages over pictures of sunsets and fad diets and exercise programmes.
They are pursuing something called the Ozaki 8 - a series of man vs nature tests devised by some sort of uber-Greenpeace man who was rundown playing chicken with a Norwegian whaling ship.
And no- I am not kidding.
They manage to find the time and money (none of the stolen loot is kept) to perform the amazingly dangerous robberies.
Some of these come off more like acts of terrorism to be fair and the lives of people like cops, truck drivers and bystanders are apparently less important to the crims than their credo that they must 'give more than they take'
Palmers character Samsara (ugh- that name) explains that this could be something as simple as planting a tree.
Give me strength.
So for me these characters are merely annoying even though I am supposed to be looking at the screen nodding at the amazingly insightful things that they are telling us about the meaning of life.
So, I pretty much hated a lot about this film but it is not all bad.
There are at least four action sequences that I found much to enjoy in.
The opening scene with the motorcycle jump across a canyon is well done and shows the first of many shots where 3D is very nicely employed.
A glide suit sequence is damned good too and uses Junkie XL's score nicely.
There is a very effective avalanche sequence and a tense (albeit ludicrous) rock climbing scene where Utah and Bodhi scale the Angel Falls.
(Don't check Wikipedia for the actual height of this spectacular landmark because the feat of climbing and the climax at the end of the scene will make no sense but as I said- I am not going to pick plot holes)
"Point Break" is actually almost a pretty good movie.
Its problems can be counted on one hand but sadly because they include script, acting and the 'look' and tone there is too much to be fixed.
It just isn't much fun.
I would love to see what Kathryn Bigelow would have done remaking her own film.
That is a movie that I would like to see.
It all reminds me of those awful social media campaigns where people take pictures of themselves allegedly not wearing makeup or tipping ice water over their heads and everyone pretends that it is doing a damned thing to help anyone other than themselves.
RATING: 65/ 100
CONCLUSION: There may be a good way to remake a movie like "Point Break" but this isn't it. Lacking in fun and with only a few good extreme sports sequences and one action scene to recommend it this one is best avoided.
Running Time: 114 minutes
Rated: M - Violence and Profanity - nothing too bad
Here's another remake/reboot/re-imagining and in contrast to say "Mad Max" where the line between the three flavours is invisible this one is very firmly a remake.
Kathryn Bigelow's massively popular 1991 action flick was very much the Fast and Furious of its day.
It is dumb but huge fun.
Who can forget FBI agent Keanu Reeves firing his service pistol into the air in frustration or the scene in which he leaps out of an aircraft sans parachute in pursuit of Patrick Swayze?
It was a slickly shot movie full of colour and good old action flick lines.
Gloriously cheesy and impossible not to love.
Clearly Edgar Wright does as he references it frequently in his comedy homage to the golden age of the action flick "Hot Fuzz".
So a tough gig then remaking a movie like this with a legion of fans to upset if you stray too far or even stay too close to the original.
Which begs the question - why bother then?
The answer to that question generally - for any remake- warrants more time and space than I have here but in the specific case of "Point Break" the thought appears to be to bring it into the here and now.
You know- modernise it for the kids.
In doing so however they have ditched most of what worked and replaced it with a whole bunch of stuff that doesn't.
To begin with the obvious.... the 'look' of the movie.
Director-cinematographer Ericson Core (yes, like Peter Hyams he fills both roles) chooses to use a desaturated colour palette that is in stark contrast to the bright blues and general colourfulness of the original.
Donald Peterman shot Bigelow's film and also did "Men In Black", "Star Trek IV", "Splash" and "Get Shorty" amongst many others.
Core, however provides a grimy, grey and very cold looking film.
The intention seems to be to make a darker, more serious film and it is a bad move.
In isolation it is a perfectly fine idea but combined with an often plot hole ridden script and two leads who aren't in any danger of winning Oscars any time soon it is a mess.
 |
| Edgar Ramirez as Bodhi (left) and Luke Bracey as Utah (right) |
I can't recall having seen Bracey before although he was in "G.I Joe: Retaliation" so I guess I have but he lacks any of the charisma that Reeves brought to the role.
Likewise Edgar Ramirez as Bodhi cements his position as one of the dullest actors working today.
With the exception of (ironically) Kathryn Bigelow's brilliant "Zero Dark Thirty" every single time I've seen him on screen he is staring blankly and mumbling his way through dialogue with the passion one usually only hears from a supermarket checkout girl.
(the recent "Joy" is merely one horrific example)
Watching these two fail to generate sparks off each other is almost painful.
Hope does arrive in the forms of Delroy Lindo (so good in "Get Shorty") and Ray Winstone (good in everything he ever does) but neither is afforded nearly enough screen time to have any positive effect.
Likewise the gorgeous Teresa Palmer who deserves a far better career than she has had to date.
(check out Nash Edgerton's amazing "Bear" - she is great in it- LINK)
They do a couple of interesting things with Palmer's character but again - she is under-utilised in favour of more time with Ramirez and Bracey.
When your two leads cannot generate any sympathy you are in trouble.
 |
| Teresa Palmer as Samsara - horribly underused (and mis-used) |
I am getting tired of writing that in reviews.
What hope does a movie have if the very centre of it is off?
Bad movies can be made from good scripts but I have yet to see a good movie made from a bad one.
Plot holes aside (they tend to come with the territory in all but a few action flicks after all) the motivations of all of the main characters is a mystery.
Utah has trauma from a death shown in the admittedly pretty exciting opening motorcycle scene.
He reacts by quitting extreme sports and getting his academic life back on track with high school equivalency and law enabling entry into the FBI Academy.
He is given a probationary badge to pursue a team of men committing daring robberies that he correctly picks as the work of extreme sportsmen (and a woman).
In attempting to find its own voice this movie has the criminals as not merely spiritual hippie types like Swayze and co but more like the sort of bores that no doubt fill their Facebook feeds with idiotic inspiration messages over pictures of sunsets and fad diets and exercise programmes.
They are pursuing something called the Ozaki 8 - a series of man vs nature tests devised by some sort of uber-Greenpeace man who was rundown playing chicken with a Norwegian whaling ship.
And no- I am not kidding.
They manage to find the time and money (none of the stolen loot is kept) to perform the amazingly dangerous robberies.
Some of these come off more like acts of terrorism to be fair and the lives of people like cops, truck drivers and bystanders are apparently less important to the crims than their credo that they must 'give more than they take'
Palmers character Samsara (ugh- that name) explains that this could be something as simple as planting a tree.
Give me strength.
So for me these characters are merely annoying even though I am supposed to be looking at the screen nodding at the amazingly insightful things that they are telling us about the meaning of life.
 |
| The action scenes are sometimes decent but lack the excitement of its 25 year old predecessor |
There are at least four action sequences that I found much to enjoy in.
The opening scene with the motorcycle jump across a canyon is well done and shows the first of many shots where 3D is very nicely employed.
A glide suit sequence is damned good too and uses Junkie XL's score nicely.
There is a very effective avalanche sequence and a tense (albeit ludicrous) rock climbing scene where Utah and Bodhi scale the Angel Falls.
(Don't check Wikipedia for the actual height of this spectacular landmark because the feat of climbing and the climax at the end of the scene will make no sense but as I said- I am not going to pick plot holes)
"Point Break" is actually almost a pretty good movie.
Its problems can be counted on one hand but sadly because they include script, acting and the 'look' and tone there is too much to be fixed.
It just isn't much fun.
I would love to see what Kathryn Bigelow would have done remaking her own film.
That is a movie that I would like to see.
Writer Kurt Wimmer is better than his resume would suggest and he hasn't lived up to the promise shown by the early movie he also directed "Equilibrium".
His script for "Point Break" is a misfire.
It needs a serious injection of humour and less time with the dull as dishwater leads talking about the meaning of existence and the importance of 'giving back'.His script for "Point Break" is a misfire.
It all reminds me of those awful social media campaigns where people take pictures of themselves allegedly not wearing makeup or tipping ice water over their heads and everyone pretends that it is doing a damned thing to help anyone other than themselves.
No comments:
Post a Comment