LEAK LETTERS #38

Anyways. "Dumb Action Films."

I’ve read many of your columns, articles, news pieces, messageboard posts and so forth for many years now, some agreeing and sometimes getting my buttons pushed wrongly due to a phrase or thought. I’ve never spoken up because none of the topics were of particular interest. However, given that Action Films are basically my goal in life (writing and directing) and given there were some points I felt discussion-worthy, I kinda figure hey, maybe I oughta say something for once.

The interesting thing that I’ve begun to notice about action films and the "summer popcorn flicks", from now and even back to the older days of exploitation cinema (and so on and so on), is how amazingly subjective it is for the viewer in terms of what they actually desire from the film and what they take from it. I, myself, try to get a little of everything given my desire to become a filmmaker and wanting to learn from every single aspect possible. Obviously, in most cases, people have other things they focus on. Sometimes they want action that makes them feel a certain way, maybe a certain motion they like or a vibe of intensity. Sometimes it’s a creative storyline/premise, sometimes a certain type of performance, and of course "interesting characters" that engage the viewer in the story at hand, getting a personal human connection. There’s many facets and aspects of the action film that people want in it or appreciate about it or even have aversion to. (I know someone, for instance, who’s not a fan of martial arts-based action movies) Because of this, although there are things that many groups of people agree on, it’s difficult sometimes to truly figure out what makes a "quality action film". Just looking at the thread spawned from your article alone gives at least a theoretical confirmation of that and is part of where I drew this line of thought from. So my point there is, yes, this is all opinion-based.

Now I try to continue on from where I’ve begun by mentioning a factor I find interesting, which is the worth of every single film that is made. There can be a film that most say is "pointless" that a few people find absolute brilliance in. Given a recent (and very difficult, I might add) friendship with this person I know, I’ve come across many cases where she and I disagree as to the worth of a film, because she’s a writer and I’m a filmmaker, so we differ greatly. Whereas I’ll say some film was well-directed, she’ll hate it for being emotionally disconnected or some other thing. The point I’m trying to get to, which I’ll just out and say since this beating-around-the-bush is getting irritating, is that in many cases, I find myself finding value in a film that others think is ridiculous. I don’t doubt I’ll hear lots of complaints about MI3 from people I know for the next year. I saw it myself and although I do love parts of it and enjoyed it on the whole, I do agree there’s some amazing problems with the relationships, the depth of characterization, and the storyline. (the third act just killed it for me, honestly) But, the thing is, I found value in it, given my perspective as a young filmmaker, trying to find tricks and elements I could use (like the constant intensity and low amount of slow-motion), and find what could be fixed with the bad aspects (such as not having the balls to waste the wife). And I don’t doubt this will happen again with X-Men 3, Miami Vice, and whatever "may not be great" film that’s coming out, especially in the action film genre.

I get the feeling I’m losing my point and getting sidetracked on some personal tangent here…but the one thing this also kind of applies to, though, is also the fact that due to the subjectivity of the way action films are and given the different ways in which people value art, is that it’s going to be difficult to have a change in the way action films are made (at least from the perspective you seem to have shown in the article and your reviews of films within this genre). As sad as I am to admit it, perhaps you’re right that the genre needs to die out for awhile in some fashion or another, or at least not take center stage as the end-all be-all for studios. I hated the dead period of "no action films" basically from `98-`00 (with the only major exception being The Matrix) when I was a teenager, but it would be nice to see some good dramas, low-key sci-fi films, and unique thrillers start coming out and gaining mass appeal. I do heavily agree that thought-provoking, or at the very least conversation-stirring, films don’t get enough credit from audiences these days. The only thing that seems to spark discussion with myself and my fellow geek-friends is mediocre films that we disagree on or feel the need to complain about and I don’t doubt it’s the same for a lot of people. I’m not going to ask the question of why is this happening, but I will say – yeah, it totally sucks that we don’t have great films that’re worth talking about for hours.

Anyways. I guess it’s time to sort of correlate the above paragraphs and gather together my main point, the one I was kinda rolling with when I decided to write up this mess of an email. This will get it back to the personal approach though.

As a filmmaker who absolutely loves action movies and hopes to make them, the "dumb action film" factor has been interesting in its evolution with my own work, since for a long time I wrote scripts that pretty much hinged on action sequence staging and ideas, but were without a lot of heart and soul to it. Sometimes there were some pretty good storyline ideas (well, different story ideas anyway) but it was a lot like the messy scripts that’re getting made today, films that lack the logic and believability of a realized world, ideas tossed out just because it seems cool, and full of unnecessary special effects. (in my case just pipe dreams, of course)

Then, I finally decided to make my first live-action film, a horror film, and things began to change, mostly in part thanks to that picky writer friend of mine, but also because I began to realize how the difference of "dumb action" and "thoughtful action" made me feel, so much so that when my dad (another fellow geek) and I went to see Underworld 2, he really dug it and I damn near despised it. Suddenly, character, emotional connection, and interesting psychology became important to me in my work and has been so ever since in a higher degree. Which is not to say I don’t still find those good elements to use from dumb action films or learn what not to do from the newest Van Damme or Seagal DTV film. What the change has meant, though, is that I’m now focusing on telling stories with characters and originality, using action scenes to drive the conflicts along.

Okay, so WHY mention this change, then? Well, to answer that, I must say I’m gonna come off as one of those hopeless romantic optimists, but the hell with it, it’s what I am and I’m not going to apologize for it. But here it is – because the change in my mindset and approach is partly a reaction to the current crop of action films being made right now. When I go see Underworld: Evolution or Ultraviolet or MI3, then get pissed off at this or that, I get inspired to go forth and try to kick ass in my own work, which is something I do hope to take to the big time someday. And I already covered the "find what’s good to use and find the bad to fix" factor. Furthermore, there are others like me, that I know and that probably exist, who will at some point arise to create a new breed of action film that rocks people’s socks in a good way again, spurned on by both a love of the old and a love of what was done in this decade. Maybe sometimes mediocrity must occur to educate the filmmakers of the future.

So does the fact that stupid films with bad characters keep getting made and doing well suck? Of course. But as much as we don’t want to value that which we find offensive to our sense of cinematic taste, there can be great value in these films being made when younger folks like myself and others decide, "that’s good…but we can do better".

Anyway….that’s my half-asleep rant of teenaged stupidity for ya, sir.
If you read this, I thank you for giving it the time. No need to reply, I guess I just wanted to speak out, even if unheard. Just hoping I didn’t make an ass of myself.

On a side note, over on IMDb, there are nine films from 2006 in the bottom 100, not to mention films like Big Momma’s House 2 and Stay Alive, which came awfully close. More than half of the hits to come out this year have earned terrible reviews with some of the best films have missed expectations, (V for Vendetta and Slither, for example). The reason for this is simple, if you want to watch a good movie it is better to wait till it comes out on DVD and watch it with your Home Theatre system than it is to watch it in the theatre.

At home you don’t have to deal with people talking, cell phones ringing, overpriced snacks, ads in front of the movies, etc. If you need to listen to the dialogue to follow the plot, then these things are major problems. On the other hand, if you consider the dialogue, ‘that boring bit between explosions,’ then it doesn’t matter. Also, it is cheaper to buy the DVD than it is for two people to go to the movies, once you add in gas, snacks, etc.