Join us on Facebook! |
Essentially
the film attempts to be the missing link between both cinema and
video-games by strapping a GoPro camera to the lead actor's head and
filming everything as though it's a first-person shooter. Imagine
that the director was a chef that's tried to combine a main meal with
a dessert. Except rather than trying to create something with elements
of both but which still works on its own, he's simply mushed the two
courses together to make a slightly crappy mess. This isn't helped by
the fact that the main character doesn't actually use a gun for a lot
of the running time and so Hardcore Henry does
occasionally just feel like you're watching an episode of Mitchell
and Webb's Peep Show whilst
jacked on fucking bath salts. I'd tell you the story of the movie but
as far as I could work out there actually really wasn't one.
Essentially some guy called Henry has lost his voice but has been
given a robotic arm and leg to make him about as punchy as a drunken
Sean Penn and as silent as the gagged Madonna that he married and subsequently
battered. Basically Henry wakes up in a lab to discover that
people are trying to kill him and so does a Forrest
Gump and
just starts running. He also teams up with Sharlto Copley who seems
determined here to prove that anybody who said Chappie
was
the most irritating performance he could give were seriously fucking
wrong.
However
as well as there being no real story, nor is there really any main
character whatsoever. Of course this isn't a problem exclusive to
this action film
as
anybody whose ever seen a Steven Seagal movie will know. However
rather than centring the thing around a bland, over-weight man whose
goatee looks as though he's had implants intended for a 1970's
vagina, there quiet literally is no main character here at all.
Henry, like a Milford Boy, is neither seen nor heard, which makes him
only slightly more charismatic than I ever found Paul Walker to be. I
think the intention is for this to make you feel as though you're
quite literally the main character, however, fuck that. I want a person
that I can root for instead of a self-hating, misanthrope that makes
jokes about recently deceased actors... that, let's face it, were never
actually any good. Plus by having a giant hole where the main
character should be, you're essentially asking me to fill it in with
whatever I want, a bit like a religious person when they're faced
with something that they don't understand. In which case I'm watching
an athletic man with prosthetic limbs that's good at killing people.
That's not me.. that's one of Oscar Pistorius's fucking
night-terrors.
In
fact the film actually begins with a surreal slow-motion montage that
graphically depicts the mutilation of dozens of people. Imagine the
opening titles to a Bond film as though directed by the fucking
Zodiac Killer and you won't be too far off. Throats are
slit, torsos are stabbed, and one man gets his brains completely shot
out which would arguably now make him one of the film's target
audience. Honestly, Hardcore
Henry is
a bit crap because it doesn't understand that you can't just cross
two separate forms of story telling and expect them to work without
adaptation. I don't know if anybody has tried any of the recent Call
Of Duty games
but I was playing one of the latest Black
Ops iterations and
it had a similar problem. I put the disk in and it felt like half an
hour later that I was still watching some crappy cut-scene as the
game decided to replace interactivity with its own aspirations of
out-shitting Michael Bay at making terrible action movies. However
whereas that game did occasionally let me push a button, Hardcore
Henry just
continued on for ninety minutes and then the credits rolled.
I
mean, have you ever felt the annoyance of playing 'one life each' on a
shit game with a mate, but by the time it was your turn to play you'd
have to go home? I can guarantee that the director of Hardcore
Henry has
because that'll be the moment he screamed 'Eureka!' and got to work on
this movie. Speaking of which, the IMDB trivia claims that said
director has been referred to as “the next Quentin Tarantino”.
And by that I can only assume that they mean because he's made
something that may seem original to a casual cinema-goer but to us
hardcore elitists, is obviously just a riff on a million other movies.
I mean, it has the same mad-cap insanity as Jason Statham's Crank, however
in
what fucking world would one of The Stath's films be improved by
keeping him off-screen? Sadly, and considering the POV element is
designed to make you feel part of the experience, it also seems to
have adopted the misogyny of Crank
too. If there's a woman here then it's because she's a manipulative
bitch, a damsel in distress, or simply because the movie wanted some
window dressing and they come as a package with the tits. So the
movie wants you to feel as though you're the main character, unless of
course you were silly enough to possess a vagina instead of a cock, in
which case you can jog on. I'm sure the Wachowski's will be gutted.
Presumably
the GoPro thing is also meant to make the action seem more kinetic,
however the reality is that you just don't see anything at all. Sure,
the film is absolutely non-stop from start to finish but that's true
of The Raid too.
However
I don't remember seeing the phenomenal fighters attempt to kill each
other in The Raid
and wish somebody could replace the balletic choreography with just
one of the fighters attempting to twat the camera-guy. Plus
video-games and Peep Show aside,
the entire selling point of seeing a live-action FPS scene in a movie
was done in the 2005 film Doom.
At
least when Tarantino rips other movies off he picks some good ones
like Lady
Snowblood or
City On Fire.. who
the fuck thinks it's a good idea to steal from one of The Rock's
shitter movies? I suppose you could argue that there's a certain
admirability in the way that Hardcore
Henry has
decided on its gimmick and then stuck with it all the way to the
end, but with the exception of a few decent car stunts, the concept
doesn't really work at all. In which case fair play for seeing the
whole thing through to the end but if I bite into a meal and discover
it's made of shit then it's not much of a consolation to discover
that I've been treated to such a large portion.
So
to conclude, I wouldn't say that Hardcore
Henry
is unwatchable, and it's not without its fleeting moments of interest, although the same could be said of a sex-show that I once saw in
Amsterdam for a joke and I can't say that I exactly liked the
experience. Nor is the film entirely free of enjoyment and it
wouldn't be wrong to refer to the movie as being a roller-coaster
ride. However like a roller-coaster ride, the fun does only amount to
a few seconds after a fucking hell of a long wait. Although if
we're comparing the two things then in Hardcore
Henry's favour,
I'd say that if anything does go wrong then watching this film is
less likely to end with your legs being amputated. I'll even give the
movie credit for at least experimenting with something vaguely new in
regards to the entire thing being filmed as a point of view shot, though the Nazi's performed experiments all the time and all we
learnt from a lot of those is that we don't ever want that kind of
thing to happen again. Having said that, I did take a chum along to
see this movie with me and he fucking loved the thing. But he also
claims London Has
Fallen is
now one of his all-time favourite movies and so I just took his
approval as confirmation of this film's shortcomings. So thanks for
reading, motherfuckers, and see you next time.
No comments :
Post a Comment