Skip to main content

Mindless But Not Entertaining


There’s nothing more sobering for a movie fan than to see a film that truly engrosses and challenges you and then to follow it up with something like Rampage. I saw Indian Horse the other night, and last week a great line-up of A Quiet Place, Journey’s End, The Death of Stalin, and even Best F(r)iends. Rampage, directed by Brad Peyton and loosely based on the Rampage video game series, is a solid reminder of the soullessness in a lot of mainstream releases. I’m not even mad, I’ve just been spoiled lately.
The debris from a failed genetic experiment in space lands on Earth and infects multiple animals, causing them to rapidly grow, experience heightened aggression, and in some cases mutate. One of these is an albino gorilla called George, in the care of primatologist Davis Okoye (Dwayne Johnson). When the government comes for George, Davis with the help of a scientist (Naomie Harris) who worked for the corrupt genetics company behind these experiments, attempts to find a way to cure George and prevent the destruction he and the other creatures could cause.
Clearly this is a very goofy premise and to the movie’s credit, it’s aware of this. All it’s concerned with is being monster-oriented destruction porn. But that’s not very entertaining, especially when it takes a long and incredibly formulaic story to get there. There is not one surprise in this movie. The script, somehow written by four people, is lousy. The light-hearted dialogue is very forced and the characterization really bland. How many villainous duos have we seen that have been siblings where the sister is the powerfully cunning boss and the brother the wormy and pathetic underling? The worst part of the writing is how poor the exposition is. Whole backstories, personal and societal histories, are all brought up bizarrely and in convenient time to advance the plot. It instantaneously takes you out of the movie every time. We’re also constantly told that Davis doesn’t like people, that he’s antisocial and prefers animals, but we never see it. And the fact that Johnson is naturally charismatic and the movie plays to that in his interactions with other characters, it’s increasingly unbelievable that he apparently has these hang-ups.
Johnson does keep the movie watchable, but this characterization flaw keeps you from seeing anything more than just Dwayne Johnson himself. Compared to his last movie, Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle, where he was certainly playing a very different character, he was much more engaging and entertaining. In Rampage he doesn’t give you much of a personality to invest in. Johnson’s certainly not bad, nor is he phoning in a performance, he’s just weakened by a poor production and writing. Harris on the other hand is playing way beneath her talents. Her scientist is a nothing character with a random tragedy in her past that in no way factors into the story. She’s also tasked with delivering a lot of the scientific explanations, and the science in this movie is dubious at best. It wouldn’t usually matter, but this movie draws attention to its science and it just doesn’t hold water. As the over-the-top corporate villains, Malin Åckerman is really cheesy and Jake Lacy downright annoying; Joe Manganiello is in this movie but is completely wasted, and I wish P.J. Byrne had a bigger role. The only likeable character is Jeffrey Dean Morgan’s Agent Russell. He’s a bit gimmicky, but Morgan brings such a charming roguishness to the part that you wish he was the protagonist.
The relationship between Davis and George is okay, though it’s never as endearing as it’s going for. You can tell it wants to be Mighty Joe Young but the chemistry just isn’t there. And a part of that does come from the CGI element. George and the other giant animals aren’t really there and while the effects aren’t terrible, a disconnect is still felt. The few bonding scenes we see between George and Davis are usually either preceded or followed by a joke, which lessens their meaning. George has a very specific sense of humour and Davis has taught him elaborate sign language, including a few very questionable gestures for some reason. The effects overall are of course ridiculous and unoriginal, not helped by the fact that in the destructive Chicago climax Davis is extraordinarily active for someone with multiple wounds.
Rampage reminds me more than a little bit of last years’ Geostorm, in that it’s a movie that would have fit in perfectly in the late 90’s, but now feels kind of dated. It’s not as terrible as that movie though; it’s just a run-of-the-mill bad Hollywood blockbuster that doesn’t deserve your attention as much as some of the other movies still available to see.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

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...
Post a Comment
Read more

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....
1 comment
Read more

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...
Post a Comment
Read more