Lockout
2/4
Starring: Guy Pearce, Maggie Grace, Vincent Regan, Joseph Gilgun, Peter Stormare, Lennie James
Rated PG-13 for Intense Sequences of Violence and Action, and Language including Some Sexual References
"Lockdown" is a sci-fi version of "Air Force One." It's got a lone good guy going up against an airborne vessel full of gun-toting psychopaths. That's not such a bad thing; the premise is dynamite and if you're going to borrow, you might as well borrow from the best. The problem is that it's a wussified, dumbed down copy. There's no tension or excitement to speak of, and because the film borrows (in this case, it's outright theft) from the superior Wolfgang Peterson thrill-ride, it makes this seem lamer than it actually is.
2079. The United States has created a maximum-security prison orbiting the Earth. The President's daughter, Emilie (Grace) is on a goodwill mission to make sure that the technology used to induce "stasis," the way they keep the prisoners locked up, has no ill-effects against the prisoners. While there, the prisoners escape and Emilie is held hostage. Now, a wrongfully convicted CIA-agent has the chance for freedom if he goes in and rescues her.
The amount of plot elements that this movie steals from "Air Force One" is startling. There's the brutal takeover, the heavily accented villains (Irish this time, not Russian), the threat of executing hostages at regular, timed intervals, the escape pod, a massive in-air battle...and let's not forget the lead's strong ties to the presidency. Quite frankly, it's surprising that Columbia Pictures didn't sue Europa Corp (the production company behind this movie).
Compairing "Lockdown" to "Air Force One" is impossible not to do, and it makes this film look that much worse. "Air Force One" was an exercise in white knuckle suspense and adrenaline on overdrive. "Lockdown" is a faded echo. The desire to get a PG-13 rating couldn't be more obvious (gunshots sound like capguns, the most intense violence occurs off screen, and there's not much claustrophobia), and that is it's greatest failing. Some stories need an R rating to work. "Sin City" is one of them (can you imagine a neutered version of that movie?), and so is this. It needs the intensity and punch that a PG-13 movie won't allow. Even the prison movie genre is traditionally R-rated.
The performances are as good as they could be, but it feels like everyone is holding something back. For his part, Guy Pearce seems to enjoying himself playing the sarcastic ne'er-do-well. He has a few great one-liners. Maggie Grace, doing her second action movie produced by Luc Besson (the other being "Taken"). She's uneven, but usually pretty good. She's certainly better than in the other film, mainly because she's not a 26 year old playing someone ten years younger. Vincent Regan makes for an okay villain, but he pales in comparison to Gary Oldman. Far more colorful and interesting is Joseph Gilgun, except that his accent is so thick that it's hard to understand anything that he says. Lennie James is lifeless and Peter Stormare is simply showing up for the paycheck.
Directors James Mather and Stephen St. Leger clearly know what they're doing. I'm not faulting them for the wimpification of their film. It's not their fault, it was the studio. They know how to choreograph action sequences without shaking the camera. Sure it's dumb and absurd, but so was "Air Force One." The problem is that the studio didn't have the guts to allow the film to be what it needed to be.
Starring: Guy Pearce, Maggie Grace, Vincent Regan, Joseph Gilgun, Peter Stormare, Lennie James
Rated PG-13 for Intense Sequences of Violence and Action, and Language including Some Sexual References
"Lockdown" is a sci-fi version of "Air Force One." It's got a lone good guy going up against an airborne vessel full of gun-toting psychopaths. That's not such a bad thing; the premise is dynamite and if you're going to borrow, you might as well borrow from the best. The problem is that it's a wussified, dumbed down copy. There's no tension or excitement to speak of, and because the film borrows (in this case, it's outright theft) from the superior Wolfgang Peterson thrill-ride, it makes this seem lamer than it actually is.
2079. The United States has created a maximum-security prison orbiting the Earth. The President's daughter, Emilie (Grace) is on a goodwill mission to make sure that the technology used to induce "stasis," the way they keep the prisoners locked up, has no ill-effects against the prisoners. While there, the prisoners escape and Emilie is held hostage. Now, a wrongfully convicted CIA-agent has the chance for freedom if he goes in and rescues her.
The amount of plot elements that this movie steals from "Air Force One" is startling. There's the brutal takeover, the heavily accented villains (Irish this time, not Russian), the threat of executing hostages at regular, timed intervals, the escape pod, a massive in-air battle...and let's not forget the lead's strong ties to the presidency. Quite frankly, it's surprising that Columbia Pictures didn't sue Europa Corp (the production company behind this movie).
Compairing "Lockdown" to "Air Force One" is impossible not to do, and it makes this film look that much worse. "Air Force One" was an exercise in white knuckle suspense and adrenaline on overdrive. "Lockdown" is a faded echo. The desire to get a PG-13 rating couldn't be more obvious (gunshots sound like capguns, the most intense violence occurs off screen, and there's not much claustrophobia), and that is it's greatest failing. Some stories need an R rating to work. "Sin City" is one of them (can you imagine a neutered version of that movie?), and so is this. It needs the intensity and punch that a PG-13 movie won't allow. Even the prison movie genre is traditionally R-rated.
The performances are as good as they could be, but it feels like everyone is holding something back. For his part, Guy Pearce seems to enjoying himself playing the sarcastic ne'er-do-well. He has a few great one-liners. Maggie Grace, doing her second action movie produced by Luc Besson (the other being "Taken"). She's uneven, but usually pretty good. She's certainly better than in the other film, mainly because she's not a 26 year old playing someone ten years younger. Vincent Regan makes for an okay villain, but he pales in comparison to Gary Oldman. Far more colorful and interesting is Joseph Gilgun, except that his accent is so thick that it's hard to understand anything that he says. Lennie James is lifeless and Peter Stormare is simply showing up for the paycheck.
Directors James Mather and Stephen St. Leger clearly know what they're doing. I'm not faulting them for the wimpification of their film. It's not their fault, it was the studio. They know how to choreograph action sequences without shaking the camera. Sure it's dumb and absurd, but so was "Air Force One." The problem is that the studio didn't have the guts to allow the film to be what it needed to be.
Comments
Post a Comment