Safe House

[IdolEyes787]

"When a CIA-operated safe house is targeted by a group of unidentified origin, the facility's inexperienced house-sitter is tasked with the dangerous job of moving the criminal who is being hidden there to another secure location".

Denzel Washington in full bad-ass mode,Brendon Gleeson,Ryan Reynolds,,Great South African locations, a vaguely Bourneish feel and a great choice of music(No Church in the Wild),what's not to like?

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1599348/

[megabyteme]

Thanks for the heads-up. Denzel has shown he can pull off similar roles in the past, and Reynolds isn't wearing tights. Will keep an eye out for it.

[Quarterquack]

Looks like an awful opportunity for Denzel to pull yet-another-public-service-stunt, with an awkward, totally predictable, and borderline conspiracy theorist conceptualized ending.

Seriously, is anyone at this point amused by the quality of action movies? This is the equivalent of transformers without robots. Sit in room; something happens; run outside; everyone's against you; go back to room or friend; start shooting because he sells you out; keep shooting back outside; the story ties up nicely because the lead actor was part of the scheme, not rogue as he thought he was; the government is watching you is the conclusion; the end. No symbolism, no proper metaphors, no emotions. Just adrenaline and guns. What's the viewer supposed to get out of it?

It's movies like this crap, and salt, and pretty much any similar movie in the last 10 years that have killed the action genre, and allowed things like the Transformers movies to even be regarded as cinema worthy. Utter crap.

[clocker]

Seriously, is anyone at this point amused by the quality of action movies?... Utter crap.

The problem with the "action" genre is..."action".
There's too damn much of it.
More specifically, there's too damn much unexplained action.

I blame this on Bollywood and Asian martial arts movies.

Bollywood has reduced film to the circus level of spectacle...everything is a bigger, grander, more hypercolorful eyefuck randomly suspended on whatever plot trope came easily to hand.
Bollywood is the spiritual womb of Avatar, which, by grossing more than any movie ever, proved that a film written with the most rudimentary of plots only needs spectacular visuals to succeed.
(This is something that planetariums and Pink Floyd have known for years...)

Martial arts movies popularized and codified two weaknesses of the action genre.
First, they boldly decided that the choreographed fight scenes wouldn't just be highlights, they'd be the entire point of the movie.
If fight scenes are all you're doing, the body count has to increase...so "action" becomes "killing/maiming" exclusively.

Second, because no one really cared why the carnage was going to happen (see: NASCAR and professional wrestling) and only the basest of motives was required, "revenge" became the go-to (and eventually, the only) reason that shit happened.
Revenge as a motive allows the hero act like a psychopath (with whom we empathize because it makes perfect sense to devote your entire life to murdering the people who ruined your childhood...and everyone within a few square miles too, because they deserve it!)) and the body count to escalate.
Which is the whole point (see: Columbiana).

Endless and predictable violence performed by automatons wound up with ganglial motives is boring, insulting and stupid.
I can be like that all by myself.

[IdolEyes787]

Blah,blah,blah action movie. No symbolism, no proper metaphors, no emotions. Just adrenaline and guns. What's the viewer supposed to get out of it?

Sometimes pretense to aspire to being anything greater than a straight-ahead ,well plotted ,well paced film is exactly what ruins an action movie.

Lists of greatest " Action moves" always include Raiders of the Lost Ark,Die Hard,Speed,Aliens,Terminator:Judgement Day. Lke those are intellectually challenging?

If the creative team can add something more substantial fine but if you think that the "adrenaline rush" isn't the truest purpose of an "action film' then I'm afraid that you are missing the entire point. Fuck even in something like Leon the Professional or Jaws or Kill Bill every "metaphor ' or "symbolic scene" is secondary to the central ,driving force of the picture that being the action.
The French Connection isn't an "action movie " btw,it's a drama with action.

If you wish to damn Safe House for being derivative ,fine but to cite it for being sort on of symbolism is just wank.
Also having never actually seen the movie how the fuck would you know whether or not there is lack of any emotional resonance to it?

OK there's Ryan Reynolds but I mean besides that.

[IdolEyes787]

Columbiana[/I]).

Citing something that is simply on every level bad as an example to try and make a point about the failings of an entire genre is also wank.

[clocker]

Unless it happens to be true.

[IdolEyes787]

The main problem with Columbiana wasn't that revenge was the sole motivating factor or that the heroine wasn't likable or everything was too convenient or poorly done or ridiculous or that the creators chose the course of action over plot. The main problem as with a lot of movies and not just the "action" ones is that you just don't really care what happens to anyone.
I mean seriously if you aren't invested in the outcome what's the point of even watching til the end?

If you look at all the diverse examples I gave, the one unifying thing( minus Speed whoa) is that the main character(s) are pretty memorable. Maybe you already alluded to this but the probelm with "action movies" isn't that there is "too much action" but rather that it isn't personal enough.
Sort of the difference between watching someone ride a roller-coaster and riding it yourself.

[megabyteme]

How do you guys feel about Sin City. Personally, I thought Marv's character was quite interesting, and well-done- yet he is everything being complained about above...

[clocker]

the probelm with "action movies" isn't that there is "too much action" but rather that it isn't personal enough.
Sort of the difference between watching someone ride a roller-coaster and riding it yourself.

You say "not personal enough", I say "unexplained action"...tomato/tomahto, pot/kettle, etc.
You just put more succinctly what I gasbagged into incoherence.

The French Connection isn't an "action movie " btw,it's a drama with action.

You could say the same of Bonnie and Clyde, right?
Seems like a bit of a cop out though as the "drama" you cite is a result of realistic and logical character/plot development, which is what (we all seem to agree) is lacking in examples like Columbiana.

How do you guys feel about Sin City. Personally, I thought Marv's character was quite interesting, and well-done- yet he is everything being complained about above...

Indeed, but Marv wasn't the only (or even main) character in the movie, was he?