Movie Review: Fireball (2009)

It's not a bad idea to mix Muay Thai and basketball, but only in equal parts, please. Conceptually imbalanced, Fireball has too much Muay Thai and not enough basketball, and way too much shaky cam. Problems arise mainly from the plot: Tai, recently released from prison, finds out his brother has been left in a coma by a rival team of underground roundballers. He decides the only way to get back at them is to join another team for the upcoming tournament. So far so good. Once the tournament gets underway, however, we are introduced to the rules of this hybrid sport: 5-on-5, anything goes, first to score or last team standing wins. That takes away the most significant dramatic device available in basketball: the clock. Without it, there's no real drive to the "games," no narrative urgency, no countdown to keep things moving, and all four contests shown in the film involve a lot of mindless martial arts and conspicuously little basketball. It's like a poor man's Ong Bak, except the guy who substitutes for Tony Jaa gets to hold a basketball while he strikes his opponents. You only have to make one shot to win the game, yet nobody seems able to get a decent layup or short jumper. Also, why even dribble the ball if there's no rules? Why worry about traveling when lead pipes can be brought in off the bench? Sure, the Muay Thai itself is not bad, but the novelty of the concept unquestionably lies in the integration of Muay Thai techniques with those of basketball. Because the game has no rules, and only a single basket can end the game, offensive and defensive strategy mainly involves beating the stuffing out of someone else and then trying to dunk the ball, only to be rebuffed at the last minute by a running knee or a spin kick because nobody playing in these games understands the fundamentals of ball movement. As a result of such contrivances, much of the editing during the fight scenes is choppy and discontinuous, and the ball, inconsistently documented, warps around the court seemingly without rhyme or reason. It's rarely clear who is about to score, or even how close they are to the basket, so the whole thing comes off as a series of big fights that end when someone simply finds the nerve to sink a five footer. Even the fight scenes lack the kind of spirit or inventiveness of Jaa's best work, and this is not helped by the headache-inducing cinematography that blurs most of the moves beyond recognition, to say nothing of appreciation. There's really nothing in Fireball to recommend. In this case, it's not the ingredients that make for a bad flavor, it's the recipe.

Movie Review: Fast & Furious 6 (2013)

Despite my evergreen enthusiasm for trashy action movies, this is my first encounter with the Fast & Furious films. I more or less managed to ignore them for the last 12 years: but mid-afternoon boredom, coupled with a few decent reviews and a respectable aggregate score on Rotten Tomatoes, prompted me to give this one a chance. And, for the most part, I was glad I did.

One of the more plausible sequences, for real.

As a rule, franchises don't mature easily. Except for James Bond, most either limp into their toddler years and/or slowly embrace the starless and cash-strapped straight-to-video market. Yet here we are with Fast & Furious 6: more expensive and star-studded than ever despite being old enough to start kindergarten. To its credit, this is one series where prior knowledge of the previous movies is practically unnecessary. In fact, it may actually be beneficial. Just know that Vin Diesel plays a former ex-con street racer done good, a regular Robin Hood with hydraulics, and his merry band of thieves includes buddies like white boi Paul Walker, Tyrese, Ludacris, Sung Kang, Michelle Rodriguez, and Jordana Brewster. In their last adventure, our gang toppled a capitalist's empire and made off with the loot, scattering across the globe to enjoy the good life. Dwayne Johnson plays a super buff military man in need of Diesel's assistance: turns out one of the crew has seemingly returned from the dead to work for a smuggler, and for some reason INTERPOL desperately needs the help of these street racers and import fanatics to take him down. They agree in exchange for amnesty and full pardons, naturally.

Thankfully, there's little time wasted in developing the story beyond that. Johnson shows up in the first 10 minutes, gives the group their marching orders, and then off they go into a world of CGI-fueled chases and car hops. For the first hour of the film, I was very pleased with this breakneck pace. Extended, expertly planned, gravity-defying driving sequences make the time fly right by, even though the artificiality of the special effects is sometimes too transparent. They are bracketed by necessarily exposition-laden scenes that at least have the good taste to be funny, and even if it's mostly childish humor (a recurring bit centers on the size of Tyrese's forehead), it's a welcome thing indeed to see a movie so aware of its stupidity and willing to exploit it. Speaking of which, there are some chase sequences in here that should be kept forever in the annals of excessive movie stupidity, particularly the entertaining tank heist near the end that features more than a single instance of Superman-style carjacking, a thoroughly impractical method that is intellectually and kinesthetically pleasing. Unfortunately, a tepid, hammy Act II really slows the pace down with plot, of all things, but once that's out of the way, it's right back to cars fighting much bigger vehicles in all kinds of wacky, unexpected situations. For summer popcorn, this is a good time.

Guy Pearce Double Feature: Lockout (2012) and Lawless (2012)

There is almost something charming about how cliche the trailer of this movie is: The president's daughter has been kidnapped but there is one "loose cannon" crazy enough to try and save her. Every attractive young female needs to be put in distress and every B.A. renegade needs such motivation in order to take action, lest any display of actually caring puts his B.A. apathy credentials in question. Despite what is is, Guy Pearce plays his part convincingly, or at least in a way that kept me interested. He is paired with Maggie Grace of Taken fame, who also gets the job done.

For full disclosure, it's been over four months since I watched this movie, and it wasn't particularly memorable. The US president's daughter is visiting a prison colony in space and there is a breakout. In order to preserve his freedom, the state forces Snow (Pierce), a CIA agent, to go to the colony and rescue her. Snow agrees, and the bulk of the movie is him doing this as well as making a contact with an inmate who has information about a briefcase that proves Snow's innocence. There are some good action scenes, but overall I didn't find the film particularly engaging; why should I care about this woman? What's really at stake should Snow fail?

In the end, Lockout is a slightly above average sci-fi action movie that did its job of entertaining me during an international flight. I have no desire to watch it again, but just recall it with B.A.-like indifference.

Despite all of the big names in Lawless, I'm not sure the film has much content of artistic value. Its main accomplishment seems to be how skillfully it can show progressively escalating and increasingly shocking acts of violence. I suppose this helps tell story. But if there is anything of redeeming "social value" that this film has, I believe it is reminding us of the inevitable consequences of prohibition.

The economics of prohibition follow a predictable pattern. It leads to less competition among producers (or, more accurately, it encourages undesirable forms of competitiveness: instead of competition coming in the form of reducing prices or providing a higher quality product, it comes primarily in the form of who can best apply violence to maintain market share and settle disputes). Why? Because its black market nature cuts off access to legal forms of redress; you can't exactly resolve your dispute with your drug dealer in court. Also, since there is really no identifiable victim, law enforcement can much more easily turn a blind eye to it  (for a price) without much outcry. This is where Guy Pearce comes in. And he does a great job of making you hate him.

Local law enforcement doesn't have the power to stop the Bondurant family from selling moonshine, but why should they want to since they get a cut of the profits? Pierce comes into town as a federal law enforcement official and promptly demands a much higher take of the Bondurant's revenue. This leads to the aforementioned escalating acts of violence, until it meets an inevitable resolution. And that is an adequate summary of the movie.

There isn't much else beyond this besides watching Shia Labeouf and Tom Hardy attempt to woo various women. I just don't feel like it told much of a story and therefore would have a hard time recommending it.