When the soundtrack CD for this film was released, some folk on the internet expressed surprise that Michael Convertino was now scoring videogames. The cover – and title – certainly gave that impression. And this poster art is also seen on the American DVD. Not only is it a bad idea to have a film look like it belongs on an X-Box, but with skeleton-faced cartoon soldiers and evil spirits in the sky, it’s a genuine contender for worst poster in years. In many ways, the film itself can’t recover from it. You can’t, of course, judge a film by its poster. But the problem here is that the film is highly confused about what it wants to be, so having such a misleading poster starts it on a wrong foot that the film can never shake off.
You can also glean all kinds of insights by reading the back of the DVD box. I’m sure they were written by a ‘major element’ of the production itself. From the USA DVD: ‘With the perfect combination of horror and action... a haunting and powerful war film that is unforgettable.’ Hmmm... we’ll be the judge of that. From the UK DVD: ‘On a deeper level, a whirlwind of feelings will overcome you... as it propels the psychological make-up of the soldier’s characters and forces them on.’ Holy cow. I’m not sure what film deserves such a write-up, but needless to say it isn’t this one. I found a review online that was very similar to this kinda thing too. I’m just saying.
Anyway, having said that, I feel awful saying a single negative thing about it. It’s clear that a lot of love and dedication went into this. But you can say all that about Glen or Glenda. Oh, it’s not that bad, but there’s definitely a whiff of Edward D. Wood Jnr about the whole enterprise and the subsequent promotion as some kind of emotional powerhouse. And, like an Ed Wood film, it has been blatantly edited to paper the cracks with quick nonsensical cuts, etc. Stunts, death scenes, etc, look awful. Even a $200 million blockbuster will skimp on the occasional special effect and hide it behind some clever editing. Here it’s totally cackhanded. The budget has been badly handled with certain things which would help it on video shelves (flamethrowers, David Warner) being utilised at the expense of getting some very basic shots. Another Ed Wood-esque element.
Anyway... what’s it about? A World War II film, with Thin Red Line flashbacks and some ‘horrific’ imagery that, taken together, are just confusing. Is the soldier remembering his past or the past of the dead? How does this tie in with the poster? It all leads to two American soldiers being holed up in a building with a bunch of orphans. The twist... Nazis want to break into the building as there are art treasures there. Hmmm... sounds like the script needed plenty of more work. Especially as the looting Nazis blast the building with tanks which would either a) destroy the art or b) seal up the access. Which sadly makes a complete joke of the entire enterprise. One of the leads is even killed by tank fire whilst standing right in front of said building (in a really bad bit of editing – they didn’t shoot the thing properly). Did no one think to just pick up a gun instead? For Picasso’s sake?
Performances are forgettable. Yes, the lead has a thousand yard stare, but it all feels like amateur dramatics and never really the work of proper actors. You have death scenes that are straight out of the A-Team, a script that needed much more work (or, perhaps, a proper writer), and something that is never more than a contrived emotional experience. There’s a misguided notion that making films on a big subject (the horror of war or dead orphans, let’s say), means the film is automatically of merit. You can see this in action most obviously in first films from actors turned directors desperate to show they’re serious. I couldn’t believe when I read Edward Norton was making his debut on a comedy about religion (Keeping The Faith). Didn’t he know the rules of the game? The film was a load of old balls though and he didn’t direct again, so maybe the likes of Robert Redford and Angelina Jolie were right all along. Jolie has just made her debut about the war in Sarajevo. More specifically a rape victim in that scenario. Talk about covering the bases.
The DVD
There is an hour long documentary on the USA DVD, which is quite exhaustive. Writer / Director Jeff Burr’s life and career are explored and it broke down like this: he is a jobbing director, making sometimes awful horror sequels. Then his dad died which a) made him think about what he was doing with himself and b) meant he had a bit of spare cash. Sadly (in my opinion), all this passion and money was misdirected into a project which had ideas way above its station. If I’m right though, it’s clear that everyone in the production team think they were involved in Citizen Kane (as did Ed Wood’s posse). I admired their love for the project. And so wished it was a better film than it was.
Burr looks significantly older on the post-film interviews than he does on the location footage. From the commentary, it turns out that there was almost 5 years between principal photography and the DVD release. And sadly the documentary jumps from principal photography straight to the film opening, bypassing editing and scoring. Convertino doesn’t appear and isn’t mentioned, although his score looms large over the entire documentary.
The commentary makes it clear that James LeGros was cast as the soldier killed early on so that the audience would think ‘If they can kill the lead, they can do anything’, a la Janet Leigh’s early exit in Psycho. Well, just to add my own viewing experience to the mix – as LeGros was the famous face on a film which had undead soldiers on the poster, I assumed he’d be back as a Zombie. The marketing, not for the only time, made this viewing experience a lot worse than it could have been (and it was already way up against it).
The commentary does include a hilarious anecdote about Burr trying to cast someone in the David Warner role without realising the actor had passed away. The actor’s own agent didn’t know either!
From about 1hr5min on in the commentary, talk turns to the score for a few minutes. The director claims everyone wanted to score it who saw the final cut, but they went for Convertino (described as ‘kinda strange... in a good way’) and that Convertino was screened Sorcerer and Aguirre, Wrath of God to indicate what kind of score he was looking for. Burr also mentions Mark Isham as being atop his wish list, and his admiration for Cliff Martinez’s spectacular score to Soderbergh’s decidedly unspectacular Solaris remake.
A short film Burr made as a kid is also included. It underlines everything else – he’s a passionate guy who loves film. But to be in the Hollywood game properly, he’s going to need to work with a script that matches his passion (written by a genuine screenwriter perhaps), and with a First Assistant Director who wont let him faff around with effects without getting the basic dramatic shots. These are the very basics.
At the end of the commentary, Burr describes the film as ‘a noble failure’ and that he didn’t achieve what he wanted to emotionally. It generates an awkward silence from his producers, like the mass hypnosis has suddenly been broken. Then again, Burr actually signs the film at the end of the credits – we’re told he only does this with his, erm, ‘proper’ films - like it belongs in the Louvre. Where are those tanks?
No comments:
Post a Comment