Pages

Monday, June 9, 2014

In Which Tom Cruise and Emily Blunt Try to Save Hollywood

WordMaster


             Unintended metaphors stick out from Edge of Tomorrow like machine guns from clunky metal exo-skeletons. On one hand, the movie mirrors the career of its aging lead, a once-formidable superstar struggling to cling to the last vestiges of his fame and hurtling through action extravaganzas as though he wasn’t now past 50 years old. One early scene shows our hero William Cage, a spokesman and officer in the United States Army Reserve, reacting with incredulity to the news that he will be sent into combat for the first time in his military career, and it’s hard not to see that moment as tongue-in-cheek, Tom Cruise poking fun at his own cushy celebrity status. After all, though tarnished, his image is still apparently enough for studios to keep shoving tent-poles at him. He still looks as handsome and bright-eyed as ever – damn near indestructible.

             The movie could also represent the precarious position of contemporary filmmaking. We’ve all read enough think-pieces lamenting the demise of cinema and rolled our eyes in jaded exasperation at the announcement of yet another superhero reboot. Yet as clichéd and overblown as the cynicism may be, going to the theater does sometimes feel like déjà vu, a never-ending cycle of carbon-copied battles and catastrophes. We’re like Cage, throwing ourselves into the turmoil again and again, hoping that this time, it will be different, only to be continually disappointed.

             On paper, Edge of Tomorrow seems like a continuation of the same pattern, just another disposable blockbuster that will be forgotten in a week. Even the title (once upon a time the endearingly ridiculous All You Need Is Kill) screams “generic”. Yet somehow, despite the name and the hackneyed premise, it works. Of course, this being a moderately budgeted science-fiction spectacle, a decent chunk of screen-time is consumed by elaborate set-pieces involving bright lights, loud noises and quick editing. But what the action lacks in ingenuity, it makes up for in efficiency; at the very least, it makes sense and helps to advance the narrative instead of stalling, overwhelming or distracting from it. Although the plot carries echoes of numerous other movies (it’s essentially Pacific Rim crossed with Source Code), director Doug Liman has such a blast playing with the central gimmick that it doesn’t feel like a simple retread; in fact, it surpasses both of the aforementioned films, buoyed with enough humor to eschew the pompous melodrama of the former and enough energy to ward off the staid repetitiveness of the latter. The whole thing is just enough cheeky, absurd fun that you can forgive its more familiar moments and logical failings, at least until the letdown of an ending.



             Also, perhaps more crucially, the end-of-the-world stakes here actually feel like, well, stakes. Whereas so many recent blockbusters (aka most superhero movies) have crumpled under the weight of their apocalyptic scopes, drained of any concrete suspense, Edge of Tomorrow supplements its heroes’ quest to save humanity with something more personal. It helps that Liman keeps the focus tight, limited to Cage’s point-of-view, so we get to know him as a person rather than just as a pawn in a larger scheme. We don’t want him to succeed because we care about the survival of mankind; we want him to succeed because we care about him. There’s a gem of a sequence halfway through the movie, which consists of nothing except two characters talking in a car, observed by a static camera. It may not sound like much, but amid the chaotic battle scenes and hyperactive plot, just one moment of peace and quiet can be a revelation.

             There lies the movie’s biggest achievement: that even with all the CGI monsters and explosions, the frenetic, time-hopping plot, it occasionally pauses to let its actors act. And they do – thrillingly. These aren’t the kind of performances that garner awards attention, but in terms of sheer presence and charisma, you can’t do much better than Tom Cruise and Emily Blunt, who show, yet again, that being an action star requires more than having a pretty face (sorry, Henry Cavill). The latter arguably gets the showier role as a mysterious, hard-nosed super-soldier who thrives on combat even as she wearies of it, and after years of being woefully underused by Hollywood, Blunt doesn’t disappoint. She’s nothing short of a powerhouse, her lean, muscular physique reminiscent of Sigourney Weaver in Aliens, an era when women didn’t need to be sexy in order to kick ass, and her eyes a riveting maelstrom of expression – one instant ice-cold and the next smoldering with quiet fury. Hopefully, it’s only a matter of time before she nabs that starring vehicle she so richly deserves.

             As for Cruise, as much as I wish he’d change things up and stretch his abilities (in other words, do anything that doesn’t involve guns or stunts), I can’t deny that he is really freaking good at what he does. Even now, even when playing bland, everyman heroes, he’s fascinating to watch. Something about his smile and slightly manic body language, the way he always seems to be himself but also performing himself, simultaneously natural and affected, ageless yet hopelessly mature… It’s impossible to pinpoint, which is probably why there’s no other actor in the world quite like him. He’s a movie star, and if movie stars are dying, I’d like to enjoy their light while it lasts.







Links:

No comments:

Post a Comment