August 31, 2010: The Expendables
I had been looking forward to The Expendables for months as a guilty pleasure, though I knew I couldn’t count on it being good. I didn’t exactly grow up on the action films of the 1980s but I certainly enjoyed my share of them, and when a retro production like this manages to pack in so many of the testosterone-charged stars of the past few decades, it’s gotta be a spectacle whether it’s coherent or not. I may be going against the popular opinion, but I thought The Expendables was a decent little timewaster. I won’t argue with claims that it failed to capitalize on its massive potential, and maybe I shouldn’t be so lenient there, but it seemed to be genuinely trying.
With enough action stars on the bill to actually fill entire subway station poster advertising campaigns, the specific story of The Expendables is understood to be neither here nor there, as long as it can service some big action scenes. But to have any weight, the film requires these late-middle-aged guys to do some reflecting on their past and the meaning of it all. Writer/director Sylvester Stallone is of course the central character, turning to his old friend played by Mickey Rourke when he comes upon a moral question about a new mercenary job he may take. Rourke provides some surprising insight about how at the end of the day, if you find yourself alone then it probably wasn’t worth it. There is a woman involved in the story, of course, because that permits the typical 1980s and 1990s action structures to play out, but it is wisely kept non-romantic in the end which cuts down on the creepiness factor, since the woman is of course in her 20s. Eric Roberts is one of the shining stars of this effort, going over the top and being just as slimy as he’s always been since I first took note of him as Dorothy Stratten’s controlling and murderous husband/manager in Star 80 (1983). The violence is ridiculous, just the way the audience wants it. The film has greater depth than I expected, showing real camaraderie and history among these manly men, who are able to credibly talk among the group about their feelings and their insecurities in a way that you never would have seen on screen 20 years ago, and indeed as perhaps men of 35 can’t do while men of 55 can. This was the element of the film that I most respected.
But there’s plenty wrong here as well. Wall-to-wall rock and roll classics played over the prep/training/invasion/explosion sequences muddled the intent of the film. Is this supposed to be tongue in cheek like AC/DC’s Back in Black over the opening sequence of Iron Man (2008), or is it supposed to be an honest expression of the energy of the sequences? This issue of this muddled intent keeps coming up as much of the small-talk humour comes across as forced, perhaps betraying the actors’ confusion about how they were supposed to be playing it. The sensitive moments which add so much to the film are almost drowned out by trying too hard during the quiet times. As written, I can see how some of it would have looked good on the page, but a lot of it it really doesn’t translate well to the screen. And the Bruce Willis and Arnold Schwarzenegger cameos, in a scene together with Stallone, are so awkwardly played that any value provided by the presence of these two titans is completely eroded away. That’s a real shame.
I clearly can’t recommend The Expendables, though anyone who wants to see it would ignore my opinion anyway. Stallone is underappreciated in general, but he’s taken some pretty big missteps here. Decent action can be found anywhere these days. The emotional resonance arising from the history that the audience has with these men is what should have made The Expendables great, but it isn’t done right.
Disappointing, but not without its merits.
Post a Comment