Sunday, November 30, 2008

Transporter 3

By Vadim Rizov

[Transporter 3 is now playing in theaters.]

When XXX came out in 2002, a popular theme for entertainment journalism trend pieces was to note that—with the rapidly approaching end of the Schwarzenneger, Stallone and Seagal era—there was a gaping hole where a new generation of action star should be. Vin Diesel was supposed to take up the mantle, but, his career having subsequently gone too far in some direction or other, Jason Statham made for a plausible second contender. Cf. a far-seeing Manohla Dargis reviewing 2002's The Transporter: "the actor certainly seems equipped to develop into a mid-weight alternative to Vin Diesel."

It's a strange movie—a Besson production designed to appeal to every European with a yen for trashy action, directed by Cory Yuen in a hyper-melodramatic style suggesting he thought he was making a real Hong Kong action-drama, rather than just synthesizing everything Besson liked about those movies in a faster package. There's some stellar fights and some HK grace notes (Statham's opening drive to classical music is the kind of shock you'd expect to see in a clean action package from the 90s), but mostly it succeeds by pummeling you with constant, mostly plausible havoc. 2005's Transporter 2 is something else altogether, a gleeful celebration of the possibilities for action set-pieces once you decide to ignore physics. Ditching the first film's rote romance for asexual machismo and inventively absurd choreography, Transporter 2 delivers guilty fun on schedule. Statham came into his taciturn own, embodying macho self-confidence with a touch of the archetypal wounded wanderer without playing any of the elements too heavily. His persona didn't get in the way of the fun.

Unfortunately, someone decided that what audiences really cared about weren't the constant absurdities, but the psychological nuances of Jason Statham, like whether he'd get laid or not. So Transporter 3 is full of a lot of talking—more talking overall than chasing or explosions—and, most ingloriously, a seduction scene that feels about 10 minutes long, wherein a Ukrainian woman (Natalya Rudakova) bullies and coaxes Statham into an ad hoc-striptease/copulation session. I know Statham has his gay fans, but did anyone really want to stop for that long to look at his chest? Statham's pretty good at a low-grade, steely-eyed unflappable macho kind of mode; to bog everything down by tokenly humanizing him (to an even greater extent than the first film did) is roughly as bad an idea as thinking The Good, The Bad And The Ugly would be improved if Clint had some hot sex scenes.

A lot of Transporter 3 is wasted on talk and character bonding between Statham and the Ukrainian. Occasionally something happens to deliver on the ostensible premise: a well-choreographed jacket fight, with Statham making use of his wardrobe to throw people around. There's also a market chase scene which—for mostly logical reasons—requires Statham first to make like Indiana Jones in the marketplace, then jack a bike and use dumpsters as ramps for a ride over sweatshop tables, and finally crash through the car window and throw someone out (the car, of course, being precisely stopped outside the sweatshop window). This is why I come to watch Transporter movies.

The Ukrainian woman comes in handy exactly once, when—as prelude to a surprisingly mundane car chase—she pops some leftover ecstasy from Ibiza, which at least suggests a new strategy for enjoying yourself at these kinds of things. Maybe I just haven't seen a blockbuster in a multiplex in a while, but Transporter 3 is relentlessly loud, a constant roar, and director Olivier Megaton—a self-important former graffiti artist who apparently thinks he has a vision—cuts everything to coherence's breaking point. (Transporter 2 understood that to be completely over-the-top, you also need to be clear on what exactly is happening.) In its dreary "characterization," Transporter 3 forgets what I (and presumably everyone else) came to see: not the time-filling drama of bad network TV, but the limitations of movement in Earth's gravity defied every two minutes.
_______________________________________________
Vadim Rizov is a New York-based freelance writer. His work has appeared in The Village Voice, The Onion AV Club and Paste Magazine, among others.

4 comments:

rob humanick said...

I'd decided that this might be a nice reprieve from the at-best inconsistent stack of awards screeners on my bookshelf; after Armond White dropped the line "Steven Spielberg should be taking notes", it became an instant must-see. I'd weigh in more if it weren't still on my blind spots list, but between the previews for both this and the new Punisher, it would appear that "videogame" aesthetics are taking a much stronger hold on the cinematic medium than ever before.

I guess my question is: what do we call these weird fusions, then? Lazy critics have been saying "Movie X is like a videogame" for over a decade, usually without much substance to the argument (no surprise, then, that a lot of these critics haven't done much in the way of actual game playing). The first time I encountered a merited comparison was in Keith's thoughts on Children of Men.

Jake said...

In its dreary "characterization," Transporter 3 forgets what I (and presumably everyone else) came to see: not the time-filling drama of bad network TV, but the limitations of movement in Earth's gravity defied every two minutes.

Exactly!

This was the worst Transporter film and the worst Statham fim I've seen thus far. The people who made this need to go back and watch the Transporter 2 and learn what made that film so fun. Yes, fun. The exact element missing from this movie and its number one draw. Crank up the soppy drama and limit the action sequences and you'll have a mess on your hands.

I really didn't want there to be any romance between Statham and the Ukranian gal. But it happened. Oh did it happen, and it was painful every second. Why he couldn't ditch her on the side of the road and start handing out unwarranted, random asskickings was beyond me. When she dangled the keys away from him and demanded he strip, I just wanted to scream "Just give him the fucking keys already."

Now I'll have to think twice before wanting to see another film like this for fun.

John Lichman said...

I dunno, Rob. Depending on what you're talking about, "Movie X is like a videogame" can be a better description than a lazy critical slur.

When you're looking at "'videogame' aesthetics," I'm confused about what it means. Car chases? Multiple prop fights? Speed blurs? Bald Shirtless Men?

These have been around before the Atari 2600. (Ok, maybe not speed blurs.)

I don't think these are fusions. I think they're just continuations of what's on film and what's recorded. Not to mention, I don't think Vadim could thematically tell a video game from a puppet play--unless we're talking Guitar Hero or Rock Band, mind you.

(no offense, vlad.)

Vadim said...

Eh I'm not entirely ignorant of video games. I've lived with various people who played them incessantly (and I do remember the mild hubbub when the movie version of Doom apparently went into first-person-shooter-POV for a few minutes; never saw it, but that's the only real example I can think of). I don't think any real game would allow itself to be this hard to navigate.

I grudgingly concede that I'm intrigued by Armond's claim that the action "is given comic-book efficacy and cubist energy." I guess he might be thinking of stuff like The Bourne Supremacy, which apparently people are going to copy pointlessly. What Greengrass did in that movie (I think) was choreograph the chases not in space but in time; you couldn't tell where everyone was in relation to everyone else, but you could somehow tell how close to them they were and how much time it would take to catch up. When Megaton tries it, though, I think it's just a hard-to-follow but barely legible blur.

Btw, since it's Sunday and I'm bored: I didn't mean to imply that I'm immune to the charms of Vin Diesel, whose growly-voiced schtick in XXX is kind of hilarious and who is actually kind of a good character actor, as demonstrated in the underrated Find Me Guilty. I'm actually surprised no one ever tried to get Brendan Fraser to step up and take the reins; his timing is a decent sub-Robert Downey Jr., and if he wasn't so into fighting whatever fucking CGI thing he's gotten sucked into this time, he'd make a pretty good Bruce Willis type.