*the following article was originally published on junie.net under the title "Brain Spew: Thoughts on 80's Action" in
In the wake of movies like Jaws and Star Wars, the movie industry began to change its strategy of scoring at the box office. Studios came to a realization that high-concept spectacle could attract a much broader audience than the stark melodramas of the seventies. Such was proven further with the success of films like Raiders of the Lost Ark, a rough-and-tough throwback to genre pictures of the 30′s and 40′s, and First Blood, a Stallone vehicle that took the lone gunman/anti-hero trend of the fifties and sixties and put it in a post-Vietnam context.
However, rather than perceiving this spike in the box office as a result of well-thought-out thrill-seeking and ingenuity, the suits of Hollywood developed an internal philosophy that would continue into the blockbusters of today: The bigger the budget, the bigger the bombast, the bigger the profit.
For better or for worse, action films of the eighties could often be summed up in one word: EXCESS. This was the period in which American audiences started developing a taste (perhaps even an expectation) for big guns, bigger explosions, and amazingly cheesy dialogue at the movies.
Action heroes like Stallone and Schwarzenegger were in their prime in both physicality and popularity. Bare bones storytelling deep fried in testosterone, with a particular amount of glistening polish that only the eighties could pull off.
Being the film snob that I am, I’ve seen enough movies to understand that not many of the films from this era of action cinema could be considered “good “. You simply can’t put something like Rambo: First Blood part II next to its predecessor and say “Oh yes. That second one is a far superior cinematic experience.”
First Blood is a gritty, relatively subdued film that relies on realistic tension before resorting to straight-up action, and also provided some light cultural commentary on the treatment of Vietnam war veterans. Granted, it’s less brutal in tone than the novel it is based on, and the protagonist is much more sympathetic throughout the course of the story than author David Morel had originally envisioned; but it is still a great action movie with a surprising amount of dramatic depth despite its easy-to-follow narrative, sporting several breathless setpieces and solid performances, particularly from Stallone (Academy Award-nominee Sylvester Stallone? Yeah. Him. Go figure.)
Then comes the sequel, which, when all is said and done, bastardizes the intentions of the original story and trivializes the absurdities and emotionally-crippling effects of war. What once was a gripping portrait of a damaged veteran became a pulpy “man-on-a-mission” piece starring a being of great physical finesse. And boy, is it fun.
There’s the key word.
These films are “leave your brain at the door entertainment” of the best kind. They may not be the most insightful things you’ll ever see; but hey, at least they take advantage of the fact that they’re movies. Even if there are far better examples of what an action movie can be (more on that later this month), the era's care-free aura and sheer amount of energy allows it to trigger its own brand of thrills.
As far as guilty pleasures, would you rather have an hour-and-a-half mess of poorly-written dialogue and flat, uninspired characters? Or, an hour-and-a-half mess of poorly-written dialogue, flat characters AND a visually-delightful, unashamed disregard for the laws of physics?
Maybe it’s just my man-based point of view, but nothing kills time like a solid action spectacle where good and evil are black-and-white, and the only way to solve a problem is through one’s own wits and instinctual power…and maybe some bullets, which rarely seem to run out!
This element of action has been the driving force behind many an entertainment, and has occasionally pushed beyond its simple-minded beginnings and resulted in higher-quality, more intelligently-structured thrillers (see Die Hard, Speed).
In the wake of movies like Jaws and Star Wars, the movie industry began to change its strategy of scoring at the box office. Studios came to a realization that high-concept spectacle could attract a much broader audience than the stark melodramas of the seventies. Such was proven further with the success of films like Raiders of the Lost Ark, a rough-and-tough throwback to genre pictures of the 30′s and 40′s, and First Blood, a Stallone vehicle that took the lone gunman/anti-hero trend of the fifties and sixties and put it in a post-Vietnam context.
However, rather than perceiving this spike in the box office as a result of well-thought-out thrill-seeking and ingenuity, the suits of Hollywood developed an internal philosophy that would continue into the blockbusters of today: The bigger the budget, the bigger the bombast, the bigger the profit.
For better or for worse, action films of the eighties could often be summed up in one word: EXCESS. This was the period in which American audiences started developing a taste (perhaps even an expectation) for big guns, bigger explosions, and amazingly cheesy dialogue at the movies.
Action heroes like Stallone and Schwarzenegger were in their prime in both physicality and popularity. Bare bones storytelling deep fried in testosterone, with a particular amount of glistening polish that only the eighties could pull off.
Being the film snob that I am, I’ve seen enough movies to understand that not many of the films from this era of action cinema could be considered “good “. You simply can’t put something like Rambo: First Blood part II next to its predecessor and say “Oh yes. That second one is a far superior cinematic experience.”
First Blood is a gritty, relatively subdued film that relies on realistic tension before resorting to straight-up action, and also provided some light cultural commentary on the treatment of Vietnam war veterans. Granted, it’s less brutal in tone than the novel it is based on, and the protagonist is much more sympathetic throughout the course of the story than author David Morel had originally envisioned; but it is still a great action movie with a surprising amount of dramatic depth despite its easy-to-follow narrative, sporting several breathless setpieces and solid performances, particularly from Stallone (Academy Award-nominee Sylvester Stallone? Yeah. Him. Go figure.)
Then comes the sequel, which, when all is said and done, bastardizes the intentions of the original story and trivializes the absurdities and emotionally-crippling effects of war. What once was a gripping portrait of a damaged veteran became a pulpy “man-on-a-mission” piece starring a being of great physical finesse. And boy, is it fun.
There’s the key word.
 |
Dat tag line… |
These films are “leave your brain at the door entertainment” of the best kind. They may not be the most insightful things you’ll ever see; but hey, at least they take advantage of the fact that they’re movies. Even if there are far better examples of what an action movie can be (more on that later this month), the era's care-free aura and sheer amount of energy allows it to trigger its own brand of thrills.
As far as guilty pleasures, would you rather have an hour-and-a-half mess of poorly-written dialogue and flat, uninspired characters? Or, an hour-and-a-half mess of poorly-written dialogue, flat characters AND a visually-delightful, unashamed disregard for the laws of physics?
 |
| this... |
 |
| Or this? |
Maybe it’s just my man-based point of view, but nothing kills time like a solid action spectacle where good and evil are black-and-white, and the only way to solve a problem is through one’s own wits and instinctual power…and maybe some bullets, which rarely seem to run out!
This element of action has been the driving force behind many an entertainment, and has occasionally pushed beyond its simple-minded beginnings and resulted in higher-quality, more intelligently-structured thrillers (see Die Hard, Speed).
But the craving for a simpler, intentionally-absurd kind of escapism persists to this day, and those who are willing to deliver such goods (especially with a touch of self-awareness and nostalgia for said glorious period) will be commended by myself and many others.
No comments:
Post a Comment