|
Bay
Watch
Bigger, faster, louder: Kent Jones on asteroids, egos, and
the secret of Michael Bay's excess.
Don
Siegel's mastery aside, the shoot-outs and standoffs in
Madigan and Dirty Harry, sequences that once seemed complex
and kinetically charged, are now notable for their stark,
not to mention quaint simplicity. Stop to compare them with
any modern action sequence and you might just get a lump
in your throat. Action cinema has taken the strangest journey
since Siegel's heyday, following an urge toward total, near-hallucinatory
confusion and stasis (also present in art films like Dancer
in the Dark or Philippe Grandrieux's Sombre). I get a big
kick out of the film school-lubricated smart-asses who talk
the standard line about how dialogue is for the theater,
while movies are meant to move, to be fast and not slow.
In fact, Hollywood's $100-million-plus extravaganzas of
metal projectiles, burnt-orange firebombs, and monumentally
lit actors minting gold-plated puns are the very opposite
of fast: with rare exceptions (Speed, Mission:Impossible
2), the flurry of images, actions, and sounds leaves the
viewer adrift, weightless, thoughtless, with no sense of
distance or direction. Whereas speed in cinema, the impression
of motion, requires the weight of a Steadicam-free camera,
not to mention plain old spatial orientation. If you're
going to feel the speed, you need to know where you're going.
The
common theory among cinephiles is that the Stephen Hopkins,
Jan de Bonts, and Tony Scotts of this world are preternaturally
impatient and mindlessly hyperactive, which seems ridiculous
when you consider all the calculation behind their films.
An acquaintance of mine pined for the clarity that Hawks
would have brought to the asteroid-drilling scenes in Armageddon,
a crowning achievement and my one 100 percent guilty pleasure.
Indeed, there are long stretches during those scenes when
I had no idea who or what was doing what to what or whom,
when the screen was awash in an ocean of hurtling rocks
and bodies, white smoke jets, scowling faces, asteroid fissures,
uncoiling cables, heavy machinery, and, most delightfully
of all, bullets sprayed from a gatling gun. Me, I sat there
blissfully immobilized. Some have characterized Armageddon,
as well as the director's preceding film, The Rock, which
contains some almost equally spirited assemblages, as a
punishing experience. On the contrary. I found it lulling,
almost tonic. For a brief instant I was transported into
a state of altogether pleasing mindlessness.
Bay's
ruthlessly maximalist approach to the job of filmmaking
has less to do with the destruction of a cherished old idea
of cinema than the construction of a whole new one. It's
comforting to think that the current vogue for spatial and
temporal dislocation is the result of historical amnesia
crossed with some viral form of ADD, nothing a good dose
of Allan Dwan and Raoul Walsh wouldn't cure. But Bay, whose
Armageddon DVD comes with an endorsement from his old film-school
professor Jeanine Basinger, is no na•f. He and his brethren,
both in and out of the Jerry Bruckheimer camp, are like
real-estate developers, erecting new, cheaply fabricated
commercial buildings in place of older buildings that have
gone out of style. They know their history, but they live
by the bottom line. History will undoubtedly prove Bay to
be the prize racehorse on Bruckheimer's stud farm. Let's
face it: Tony Scott may have been in the avant-garde of
his own moment, and his bravery when he made Beverly Hills
Cop III ("I decided to take a risk and up the violence")
won't soon be forgotten. But he is more restrained than
need be in his presentation of male swagger. I also detect
a note of decorous restraint in his use of explosions, a
narcissistic addiction to clarity in his action sequences.
And, I'm sorriest to report, the British-born Mr. Scott
is less than 400 percent uninhibited in the flag-waving
department - he could take a lesson or two from Roland Emmerich
and profit nicely.
Whereas
Michael Bay· ah, Michael Bay: the mere mention of his name
evokes a veritable paradise of splendiferous hyperbole,
rampant triumphalism, and "privileged angles" (his own words).
Male swagger? You would never have imagined that one man
could get so much of it into a single film (reaching its
apex with the glorious moment when Bruce Willis gives the
following instruction to his Armageddon crew: "Let's chew
up this iron bitch!"). Explosions? Bay uses them the way
that Bresson uses doors - liberally. Clarity? By Bay's lights
an outmoded concept, fit for nursing homes. And flag-waving?
My hand has flown to my heart just thinking about it. You
don't have to know the stories about Michael Bay's North
American landmass of an ego to get a clear picture of the
man. You needn't have listened to his nasal voice on the
commentary track for the Criterion Armageddon DVD, lovingly
discussing his "style." Few filmmakers have revealed themselves
so fully through their work. Bay is the filmmaker par excellence
for the age of the CEO as hero - he is the Jack Welch of
cinema, downsizing narrative coherence and capitalizing
on his audience's urge toward mental statelessness, a renunciation
of the ability to effect change in the world, let alone
follow a story, or even an action. What other filmmaker
is as mindful of his responsibility to his parent company's
stockholders? What other filmmaker would have the guts to
wonder aloud (on that glorious commentary track) why Kodak
sends you a case of Korbel instead of Dom Perignon when
you shoot over a million feet of film? Or to recall the
moment when he screamed at his line producer to "get the
fuck down here right now, because we've got a big fucking
problem"?
Here
are some of the secrets to Michael Bay's success.
1.-)
If It Works, Do More of It.
Why end just every fifth scene on a note of triumphant uplift?
Why not every scene? Why reserve that special Morning in
America burnish, painstakingly cultivated amidst the drudgery
of making commercials, for special moments? Why not apply
it to the overall visual scheme? And if a villain is going
to be strung up by his feet, don't do anything so mundane
as having him dipped into a pool of water. Instead, have
your big star douse said villain's pants with a flammable
liquid, set his feet on fire, and then drop him into a pool
of really dirty, chemically tinged water.
2.-)
Don't Waste Your Time Reinventing the Wheel.
Creating new and interesting characters is okay for the
French, but why bother when you have the money to spend
on stars who have already appeared in other movies playing
characters that suit your needs just fine? It only gums
up the works. Let Nicolas Cage, Sean Connery, Steve Buscemi,
Ben Affleck, Owen Wilson, Ed Harris, Billy Bob Thornton,
and the rest of them simply keep on doing what they've already
done so well in other people's movies. Less work for you,
less work for them. In this case, less really is more.
3)
If You Can Imagine It, You Can Do It.
Don't fret about plausibility - it only gets in the way
(after all, Hitchcock counseled against it). At the climax
of the "celebrated" chase sequence near the beginning of
The Rock, Bay keeps an exploding trolley car in the air
for a breathtakingly lengthy interval before it falls to
earth and almost crushes Nicolas Cage. Why a trolley car
should explode after crashing into a car, or how its conductor
could survive, are of no concern to anyone. It doesn't matter.
Any more than it matters why the Armageddon crew has that
gatling gun up there in space. It's there because it gives
the viewer that much more. That it actually happens to be
there because the market research indicated that vehicles
with big guns make for cooler toy tie-ins is immaterial
- this is one of those rare moments when the realities of
business and the demands of a personal vision are one.
Why
is Armageddon Michael Bay's finest hour? Why is it superior
to Bad Boys, The Rock, or Pearl Harbor? The first is simply
too small a vessel to contain the grandeur of Bay's talent
(about Pearl Harbor, more later). As for The Rock, it has
its fans. But I'm sorry - a renegade marine general stealing
three biochemical warheads and carting them all the way
to Alcatraz so that he can train them on San Francisco and
thus obtain leverage to extract reparations from the government
for the families of the unheralded fallen heroes of Desert
Storm just isn't grand enough. Nothing less than a team
of macho oil drillers sent into space to detonate a nuclear
device in the core of an earth-bound asteroid, thus averting
the extinction of humanity, will do. It's a joy to watch
Bay enlarge on certain themes and motives he's previously
explored in The Rock, his first mature work. Rather than
just one expert thrown into perilous conditions, Armageddon
has a team of them. And whereas the girlfriend-waiting-in-the-control-room
is nothing more than an afterthought in The Rock, Liv Tyler's
girlfriend-waiting-in-the-control-room in Armageddon is
a geyser of love and devotion. The Rock girlfriend is merely
sad when the decision is made to abort the mission and bomb
Alcatraz (thus setting off the biochemical warheads anyway?-
See Secret #3). In Armageddon, when the decision is made
to abort the mission and detonate the nuclear device by
remote control from earth, Liv Tyler actually knocks over
Billy Bob Thornton and screams, "That's my family up there!"
(It must be gallantry that keeps him from screaming back,
"That's my species out there!") Moreover, since it's not
just piddly San Francisco but the entire world that's at
stake, pretty much anything goes in Armageddon: you get
asteroid fragments leveling New York, Shanghai, and Paris
with digital splendor; you get an orgy of lustily full-bodied
playacting from the cast, with some genuinely amusing gallows
humor from Buscemi and an attempt at an actual performance
from Thornton; you get strippers, you get a treasure trove
of final goodbyes and heroic sacrifices, you even get a
heavy quotient of "real people" from around the world, in
the kinds of images you see on Sunday morning commercials
for financial institutions, where the atmosphere always
seems to have been pumped with air freshener ("I love the
feel of these shots," murmurs Bay on the DVD). And, of course,
you get the gatling gun.
Where
could Michael Bay possibly go after Armageddon? Speaking
for myself, I would have been satisfied with nothing less
than a team of astrophysicists led by Stephen Hawking (Matt
Damon) sent back in time to the Big Bang, using a new, untested
piece of equipment to neutralize a black hole that threatens
to destroy the universe, as Liv Tyler, Angelina Jolie, and
Winona Ryder watch from the control room. Unfortunately,
he's taken the more predictable course of reducing the scope
of his ambitions and shackling himself to history. "It must
be said that this lacks the Žlan of Armageddon," whispered
Gavin Smith as we watched Pearl Harbor together, and I could
only nod in agreement. Pearl Harbor is Bay's least personal
film, simply because it is his most restrained. The editing
is slowed down to a trot, and the imagery has the stately
look of a commemorative stamp. Most disappointingly of all,
the action is, generally, all too coherent. Bay manages
a few flashes of chaos and disorientation during the actual
bombing, and I did perk up a little when I realized that
I had no idea who was on which boat. But these proved to
be nothing more than fleeting instances.
I
have no desire to add my voice to the chorus of critical
disapproval that's already greeted the film. As Bruckheimer
himself put it so eloquently, "We made it for people, not
critics." I will only say that the change-up from lusty,
romantic, fashion-glossed, boy's life-adventure yarn, to
Saving Private Ryan-like memorial solemnity, and then back
again, makes for an all but indigestible cinematic meal.
All I wanted was to ooh and aah over the swelling metal,
the flying bodies, and the torpedo-POV shots, but I was
hampered by the weight of history. I will add that Josh
Hartnett is no Ben Affleck. And that Kate Beckinsale, far
too subtle an actress for Bay/Bruckheimer, is no Liv Tyler
- her girlfriend-waiting-in-the-control-room scene is a
complete bust.
As
I watched the sorry spectacle of Pearl Harbor, I kept longing
to get back to the asteroid, where Michael Bay has enjoyed
his greatest triumph thus far. Like Tony Scott, who stumbled
into a fascinating, strangely disquieting form of airlessness
with his long-lens doodlings in Revenge or The Fan (watching
those films feels like being whiplashed through a series
of vacuums), Bay has bullied, hectored, and assaulted his
way into something exciting: a singular, abstract mental
image buried deep within all of those colliding images and
sounds, some kind of digitally generated, platinum-lined
gateway to nirvana. I look forward to much, much more of
the same. Some have complained that Bay's budgets are too
high. I think they're too low. Just imagine what this guy
could do with a billion dollars, NASA at his beck and call,
and the state of Arizona at his disposal.
Kent
Jones is Film Comment's Editor-at-Large.
©
2001 by The Film Society of Lincoln Center
|