Skip to main content

Pacific Rim Sequel Doesn't Rise Up


I didn’t particularly like Pacific Rim -Guillermo del Toro’s 2013 homage to kaiju movies. It had a few likeable elements: some creative world-building, nice production design. and decent effects, but felt overall like a hollow rehash of other mecha fiction, particularly animes like Neon Genesis Evangelion. It’s sequel, Pacific Rim Uprising, loses del Toro as director (he’s busy making Oscar winners) for Steven S. DeKnight, who lacks the vision del Toro had, but manages to make this film no worse ….or better.
Ten years after the war ended, Jake Pentecost (John Boyega), the son of Idris Elba’s Stacker from the first film, is a former Jaeger pilot now scavenging parts from defunct mechas to sell on the black market. After an incident with a teenage girl called Amara (Cailee Spaeny), he gets recruited back into the Jaeger Corps as a trainer, reuniting with war hero Mako Mori (Rinko Kikuchi) and his former co-pilot Nate (Scott Eastwood). But an attack from a rogue Jaeger forces Jake back into action as he and his friends defend themselves and try to figure out where it came from and what it’s hiding.
One thing I’ll say for this movie is it has a surprisingly good cast. John Boyega, who’s also a credited producer interestingly enough, has to work through some poor dialogue, but still manages to be charismatic and engaging. His character is certainly a little flat, but he elevates the role through his performance, the sign of a good Hollywood leading star. Kikuchi does alright as a familial figure to Jake, however she’s clearly only in the movie as a supplement to his character arc, rather than her own. After how important a part she played in the first movie, it can’t help but feel wasteful. This is the third time in a little over a year I’ve seen Jing Tian be one of the best parts of an otherwise bad movie, and like in The Great Wall she’s very good at being a commanding presence in spite of her age. She plays the head of a drone corporation, with her business partner being one of the few returning characters: Charlie Day’s Dr. Newt Geiszler. Charlie Day and Burn Gorman’s comic relief scientists were my favourite part of the first film, and there are scenes they work off each other great in this movie too; but the direction they take Day’s character isn’t one he’s particularly well suited to play. He’s already barely believable as a scientist, this new layer they give him especially doesn’t work. It’s nice to see Gorman get a larger role though and more opportunity to play an over-the-top fussbudget. Even Eastwood is pretty good as a very stereotypical orthodox prefect character, who you know is going to reconcile with Jake over the course of the movie. Acting-wise, the only shortcomings are the teenage cadets, who aren’t able to overcome their poorly written stereotypes. The result is some fairly annoying characters, and whenever the plot focussed on them I was reminded how much better the young cast of the comparable Power Rangers movie was.
The plot is a really convoluted means of getting to the big Jaeger fights, and when they do come they quickly become numbing to watch. Giant titans destroying cities as they try to kill each other isn’t the novelty it once was, and because the action scenes of this movie have few creative ways of relating these sequences, they’re very tiring a lot of the time. And the stories between them don’t work either. The mystery of the rogue Jaeger doesn’t unfold compellingly, and the plot device that brings the Kaiju back into the fold is messy sci-fi at its worst. There’s meant to be a connection between Jake and Amara too, but they don’t have much chemistry, largely due to the script not allowing them more than a few scenes of bonding. It’s worth noting too that much like Charlie Hunnam’s character in the first movie, Jake is talked back into the Jaeger Corps with astonishing ease. The pacing isn’t very good as well, with the climax for instance (which offers an especially dumb threat of apocalypse) transitioning into a rushed ending and sequel bait. And the opening was weirdly edited like a Guy Ritchie movie.
If you liked the first Pacific Rim, you’ll probably like this sequel fine, and if you didn’t you won’t. It’s got more or less the same amount of problems. While it may not have del Toro’s finesse, it has more good performances. There’s no Ron Perlman, but it stars John Boyega. It’s not as cut and dry but it is overly complex. It’s a dull and onerous mecha flick and if there is a third one, my expectations won’t be high.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Strange History of the American Spoof Movie

Parody movies have been around for a lot longer than we tend to think of them. Even from the earliest days of Hollywood there were movies meant to satirize a particular subject or genre. In the silent era, Buster Keaton was responsible for a few. And in the early sound era, almost as soon as the monster pictures took off did you see comic versions of them -Abbott and Costello hosting a few. But parody movies tended to be subtle for most of cinema history, or parody came in conjunction with another goal of the comedy. It really wasn’t until the 1980s and 90s that it took off and became popularly understood. And there is perhaps a line to be drawn to the counterculture comedy explosion that began in the 1970s through avenues like  Saturday Night Live , which frequently parodied from even its earliest years popular movies and cultural properties of the time. But that is still a way’s back. To my generation though, ‘parody movie’ is perhaps a less known term than the more blunt ‘s...

Notes on the Title Cards of The Lord of the Rings

It might be sacrilege for one who both considers The Lord of the Rings  trilogy to be one of the greatest triumphs of cinema and has been an avid lover of the films since adolescence, to declare that the original theatrical cuts of the films are better than the much beloved extended editions. Easily it’s my most controversial opinion regarding these movies. Don’t get me wrong, I do like the extended editions quite a lot, especially as someone who just enjoys spending time in that universe. They flesh it out more, add extra flavour, and in increasing the length by about an hour really emphasize the epic quality of these films. But I find that the original cuts are generally more cleanly paced, more seamlessly edited, and much more accessible to audiences. All the stuff there is to love about The Lord of the Rings  is there in the original versions, the plethora of new and extended scenes merely add to that for fans. And of those, they fall into three camps for me: 1....

Back to the Feature: New York, New York (1977)

New York, New York  is a two hour forty minute musical movie largely about a toxic relationship and I understand why it was Martin Scorsese’s first big flop. Some have blamed its poor reception on the kind of movie it was, of a style and tone Scorsese wasn’t known for, but I find that hard to believe. Even after only five films, he’d proven himself an extremely versatile director, and Alice Doesn’t Live Here Anymore  found an audience. Sure this jazz musical love letter to New York City was following up Taxi Driver and its’ far more cynical take on the city, but then it’s also ‘from the director of Taxi Driver ’ which itself was a big hit. Was it a matter of public appetite for musicals, or mere word of mouth and early critical reception that dissuaded viewers? Irrespective of that, I was stunned to discover this movie was the origin of the titular song, which I’d assumed was much older (it’s definitely got the sound of something that might have come out of the Jazz sce...