[ad_1]
Permit me this short review of Skyscraper starring Dwayne Johnson, not currently billed as Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson: If you think there's a chance you'll enjoy Skyscraper you will be. If you think that there is very little chance that you enjoy Skyscraper you will not do it.
The most important thing to know about the plot of this often delightful nonsense is that the movie has a conspiracy, nominally speaking. Action Dad Will Sawyer (Johnson) is a security systems consultant who comes to Hong Kong to inspect a new skyscraper (GET IT?). Owned by Zhao Long Ji (Chin Han), it is a record architectural piece of what we suppose is the near-future phallic period, topped with a magical and mysterious sphere . Sawyer brings his family – his wife Sarah (Neve Campbell) and twins Georgia (McKenna Roberts) and Henry (Noah Cottrell) – so that they can be put at risk for reasons of history.
Unfortunately, this trip was arranged by a friend of Will played by Pablo Schreiber, and if you do not know it means you have problems, you have not seen Pablo Schreiber recently. Blah blah blah, devilish machinations ensue, and it does not take long to reach our true starting point: Will is away from the building when his family is trapped a few stories above from a fire. The bad guys are also in the building, and Will needs to save his family from the giant burning tower.
Remember how, for a moment, everything was " Die Hard in a [blank]"? In a bus, on a plane, on a boat? Well, it's a bit like Die Hard in a big building. If you think that sounds a lot like … just Die Hard then you're not wrong, although there's a longer story going back to The Towering Inferno, who is probably as old as the fear of being stuck in a very tall building when something bad happens.
Side note: This film will not be the right one for those who still can not watch people trapped in the fire on the upper floors of a large building as part of a movie film. Action fun. This is not an unreasonable position to take.
But. But. If you decide to make this trip, let me tell you precisely what I told the publicist during the screening after seeing it, in these terms: It's extremely stupid, but very amusing. It's a movie to do with a hoarse crowd that quickly reaches a tacit agreement that laughing and talking are both allowed, where you can make a "HA" loud! noise when something particularly shocking to the laws of physics occurs. (You and this crowd will be noticing the physical realism on a steep curve.) It's best with people who can respond to an inspiring and rocky line with a hearty "Are you serious?", As the woman next to me. It's best with people who will applaud with determination every time The Rock does not die. It's a movie where you want to be sitting next to the "Awwww, [profanity]!" Lady. What I was.
And I was happy.
One of the things we often forget in blockbusters is that there is a difference between an action movie and a slaughter movie. For example, one of the reasons why the film White-House-is-down Olympus Has Fallen is so bad (so, so bad) is that it's not a movie action – it's a slaughter movie. It has a huge number of bodies, with so many innocent people broke that they become insignificant and fungible, noticeable only in groups, and that represents far too much of the alleged "action". What makes Die Hard a great action film, is that violence is specific in just about every case, and the killing of innocents is limited. The most abominable murder occurs precisely so that the stakes can be relieved, and the cruelty of the thieves revealed, without 50 people being killed with the machine gun.
Skyscraper ends somewhere in the middle. There is a sequence that flips into gratuitous violence to the point where it distracts, but for the most part, the movie does not use the killings of innocent people just to create tension. The action is what action can be when it is clumsy and unhindered by reality: running, climbing, jumping, swaying, hanging by a finger. A good action movie does not really need a lot of killing yet it has enough to avoid being killed. After all, the clever and clever escape will always be more exciting than making your way.
The stakes come mainly from the presence of Will's family, including Neve Campbell, whom I have not seen much recently (she spent some time on House Of Cards ), but who is strong here Tough Mom who plays an important role in saving her and her children, even though she is firmly the second banana of the first Rock. It brings warmth but also skill, and the role it plays in the third act, though predictable, is appreciated.
About this Rock: Dwayne Johnson is a charismatic actor. Not necessarily a great actor but an actor who arouses so much interest in the screen just by being there that he can get by with a lot. Here they judiciously conferred on him a physical vulnerability that can theoretically be exploited: Will had his lower leg amputated from an earlier injury and wears a prosthetic leg
Let's give: this would be a much more interesting entry into the pantheon of action to have a actor with a prosthetic limb playing a character with a. It would also be a boon for actors who use prostheses. But that does not look like a movie where the alternative was to cast an actor who is an amputee; It looks like a movie where the alternative was probably The Rock without the prosthesis. (Writer and director Rawson Marshall Thurber has already worked with Dwayne Johnson in the 2016 action comedy Central Intelligence .) The Rock is the center mbad of this film, even more than the guitarist -sky. From a narrative point of view, the prosthesis plays the same role in Skyscraper that barefoot Bruce Willis did in Die Hard : it presents some additional challenges, but nothing of an action hero can not handle. And, to the credit of the film, the leg comes into play creatively, surprisingly and even spiritually. (Really.) If you are going to do this move and do it as respectfully as you can with this actor in the role, it can not be an unpleasant sympathy game; it must be an action game in keeping with the rest of the movie. And here it is …
Look: There is little rhythm here, in the sense of stories, that will surprise anyone. The villain is completely disposable (I had to look up to know that he was calling Bota and that it was played by Roland Møller, I only remembered that it was diabolical and that it was He was after a Precious Thingy). There is inventiveness in the action and sometimes in the direction, although there is also at least one fight in a confined space that is edited in this very irritating way where it becomes impossible to say what's going on. But I have encouraged – internally or externally – several times. Do not cheer like "YAAAAY!", But cheer like, "JUN-GLE! JUN-GLE!" or "LAD-DER! LAD-DER!"
It's so stupid. It's really stupid. But it's a good time. On a hot day, in a nice theater, with friends, a drink and precious free hours to let everything go? Yes. Yes, it is recommended.
9(MDA1OTI3MjQ5MDEyODUwMTE2MzM1YzNmZA004))
[ad_2]
Source link
