Basic

I first watched this film about a week and a half ago, just before leaving for a short holiday in Tassie. It started off okay and looked like being a mildly enjoyable military thriller. It reunites John Travolta and Samuel L. Jackson, with Travolta walking this performance in with a mixture of cool and annoying arrogance and Jackson screaming and being a nasty bastard during what little screen time he has. There’s some talk, some action, some talk, some action, it’s a comfortable mix for an idiot like me. Unfortunately, even for an idiot like me, it then tries to be far too clever about half way in and never recovers.

I..can..almost..see..my..brain..

Thinking that maybe I wasn’t following the plot very well because of some kind of defect in my overclocked noggin CPU, I decided not to review it at that point, and instead return to it later for a fresh approach. You see, I only want to do the best possible job I can for my loyal and discerning readers. If that means I have to watch a film at least once - possibly even twice - before I write my assessment, then that’s what I have to do. You guys are everything to me. I love you all dearly. You make me feel whole.

So, putting the DVD aside, I went to Tassie for a week long break away from you demanding ungrateful sods. I had a good time, the driving around was nice, the weather good, the people friendly and the grass a nice shade of green. What more could I ask for in a state not worthy of being attached to the mainland? Upon my return, mentally I was feeling fresh, alert and focussed. I put the DVD on again and gave the story another go. I sat up, I paid close attention, I avoided alcohol, I tried to understand the deeper implications of the dialogue, I tried to ‘become’ the characters in my mind. Anything to make sure that I stayed with the story and got a proper indication of its true worth.

My notes from this new, second viewing, read roughly as: “Is Hollywood funding research into baboons writing screenplays as a source of lowering production costs?�

DUDE! Your tell your d*ck to turn it's headlights off!

Seriously, have they financed a secret study in Hollywood into the feasibility of having semi-intelligent mammals create scripts for feature films? This film is good evidence that such a project exists. It’s also evidence that the program is doomed to failure. Baboons just don’t cut the mustard. They really should move on to elephants or gazelles. Now they’d have stories to tell. Baboons just sit around all day wondering what crawled up their arse and trying to pick whatever it is out again. That doesn’t make for a good movie. Just ask Baz Luhrmann, I heard he tried to make a musical out of it.

As for the plot, recalling it seems pretty useless, and I’m almost tempted not to, partly because it will save me some time writing this review, but mostly because it’s rendered redundant by the idiotic and senseless twists. But Amy has demanded that I spend at least 20 words per review actually explaining the film before I shoot off on irrelevant and not particular well thought out tangents, so here goes anyway: Samuel L. Jackson leads his squad of Army Rangers into the jungles of Panama for a training exercise, but he is killed along with most of the soldiers in mysterious circumstances. Well, maybe not mysterious, seeing as his chest has been excavated with a grenade. That bit is pretty straight forward. What’s at question is who did the chestal excavation. We learn later that Jackson was a nasty piece of work and possibly had it in for one of the soldiers, so maybe he was asking for it. Lots of flashbacks will confirm this, he was indeed a nasty-pasty… or so we think! Ah HA! Ahem, sorry, I’m getting ahead of myself...

DO YOU HAVE A PROBLEM WITH MY GLASSES M*THAF*CKA?

Just two survivors make it out and back to base, and they will only speak to another Ranger. The Army calls in John Travolta, who’s a Scientologist, pilot, breakdancer and, most importantly, an ex-Power Ranger. I think he was a purple one. He retired when his spandex outfit couldn’t contain his bulging gut anymore. Travolta’s also under investigation for dubious activity, but he’s regarded as someone who can do the job, so they overlook his shady past. Fools! Trust me, all these little details are a waste of time anyway, but they make it look like I really paid attention. Frankly, Travolta might have been a Smurf as well, but I’d never know it the script is that badly written. He teams up with Connie Nielsen who also works for the Army. She has this ill-defined grudge against having to work with Travolta because she’s a feminist, and he’s a sleazebag with a Tarantino film under his belt and she’s only worked with grumpy-bum Russell Crowe. She also thinks she’s capable of doing the investigation job herself, or something like that. Together they unravel conflicting stories of events that night from the two separated soldiers.

From that point on, I have absolutely no idea whatsoever what the hell happens, because they throw up one idiotic and pointless plot twist after another, and each one just makes you more and more confused and angry. Although the setup sounds simple enough, and you think that it will be a ‘by-the-numbers’ thriller with the odd twist in the tale and maybe a few “AH HA!� moments, what this story does is simply inexplicable. It’s kind of like if they told you at the end of The Usual Suspects that Kaiser Soze was actually Robin Williams’ character. You’d go “What the f*ck? Robin Williams isn’t even in The Usual Suspects!� See? And this is worse than that.

John suffered from frigid nipples on the cold set.

So I’ve decided for your benefit that the best way to view this film is to watch either the first half or the second half separately, but never at any time watch both halves at the same time. Like this, each half makes for a fairly enjoyable mini-movie, kind of like big-budget versions of JAG but without the sexy Catherine Bell prancing about in a bikini, or was it only on the 'net I saw those pictures? Whatever. But make the mistake of viewing the whole film in one sitting and I’m willing to bet you’ll feel like me: confused and slightly pissed off for having had your time wasted. It’s also quite possible that watching the whole film and drinking the right Mexican alcohol could generate such intense brainwaves of confusion that you could cause a tearing of the very fabric of space and time wiping out all life on Earth. That’s just a theory of mine, why not try it and let me know how it turns out?

To finish, I’m just gonna type up my notes from about the last half hour of the film, because that’ll probably give you a better idea of how I felt about the film than anything I’ve dribbled above:

1:12:00 – It’s official, I don’t care what happens in this film anymore.

1:18:59 – Right, this is just stupid. Did they let everyone on set come up with a clichéd twist then tell them to take a number and wait for a chance to get it on screen?

C’mon, there’s gonna be another twist. Probably after the credits or something. Probably when I take the DVD out of the player, the screen will come to life with just one more desperate attempt to surprise me. Try me, you scumbags...

1:22:30 – You bastards...

1:28:12 – DIE JAMES VANDERBILT! DIE! (he’s the scriptwriter)

1:28:17 – John McTiernan is the ANTI-CHRIST for agreeing to make this crap.

1:28:27 – Must advise readers not to waste money on this DVD.

1:28:40 – I’m going to bed.

1:29:13 – Mmm, I could go a tomato sauce sandwich right now actually.

Shampoo
Eggs
Baby food
ham
those white things for the cupboard
milk
stamps from the post office

Of course, those last items were a shopping list for the next day, but anytime I have to think about what toiletries I need while still actually watching a film, it’s a sure sign that there are issues that need to be dealt with. On the flipside, my mind was pretty focussed when checking out the visual quality of the film. If I had to sum it up, I’d have to say that if you don’t like dark, blue looking films maybe you should go watch a Barney DVD or something, because this is dark and considerably blue looking. It’s not a flaw or anything, just a stylistic choice. The picture is mired in heavy shadows which will make for hell on reflective screens. On the flipside, the quality of the image is excellent, sure as heck throwing up a clean and attractive picture to give you something to look at when your mind wonders from the incoherent plot. It’s framed at a nice and wide 2.40:1, not particularly using the framing that interestingly, but it’s enhanced for 16:9 eyeballs. There are some dodgy rear projection type effects in the beginning as they chopper into the jungle, the clarity here making it look ever so fake, but that’s about all worth pointing out. Thumb up here.

Remember when I said the story was talk-action-talk-action? The sound is the same. Quiet talky bits, THEN LOUD SHOUTY ACTION BITS, then quiet talky bits, THEN SOME MORE LOUDY SHOUTY ACTION BITS! These loud bits sound bloody great, with lots of rain and wind and thunder filling my room and placing me right in the middle of the jungle as the flashbacks happen. Beware that if you play the audio for the talky bits loud, the first time a flashback occurs you’ll probably crap your pants with the way it suddenly changes. Maybe wear an extra pair of jocks for this one just to be safe. Also, for some reason there aren't any subtitles, English or otherwise, which is odd, and other than some dialogue that was a bit too low for my likings from time to time, no other problems here, so a thumb up again.

Righty, right up front just take note that you shouldn’t watch any of the extras before watching the film, because they give away some of the plot. Besides, would you eat dessert before dinner? No? Then why watch the extras first? It’s the same thing isn’t it? Are you here for the movie or the extras? Actually, in the case of Basic, maybe that’s not such a silly question. In fact, just skip the film and the extras completely and go have a nice big bowl of ice-cream instead. I like a good quality vanilla ice-cream with a shot of espresso poured over the top. If I have it, a shot of Frangelico liqueur thrown in for good measure is always a nice touch as well.

The Writer's Story
The scriptwriter, James Vanderbilt, says in this featurette that he hopes to have succeeded in fooling an audience who have become adept at picking twist endings. This is a silly thing to hope for, really, because he’s only been able to arrive at his surprise ending by forcing us to ignore everything up until that point in order to make it work. He goes on to claim that some scenes were deleted because they would have bogged down the plot for four or five minutes. Frankly, the plot needed some bogging down because it was trying to move so fast to keep six steps ahead of the audience that you didn’t have anytime to take anything in at all. He’s an idiot, and he seems so f*cking proud of himself. Normally, I’d be envious that someone managed to get Hollywood to make their story into a movie, but seriously, when you’ve jerked the paying audience about so badly and incompetently, you deserve all the shit you get. James, you’re a dickhead. I wouldn’t be surprised to see you writing episodes of The Bachelor soon.

Trailer
The most interesting thing about this is that it shows the film minus all the moody blue colouring with natural hues instead. I wonder what the film might have been like if it was coloured that way instead? Would it have been better? Worse? No different? Do you think I really care? I’m just padding out the review now.

Director's Design
Bugger the audience, even the people working on the actual film can’t agree what kind of story Basic is meant to be. Mike Medavoy (read his book You’re Only As Good As Your Next One, it’s a good easy read) claims that McTiernan has for the first time joined commercial and art together to create an ‘artistic sense’ with Basic. He’s shitting me, right? Basic as art? ‘Commercial art’, even? Come off it, Mike, you’re really reaching on that one. This film is about as purely commercial a product can get, that’s the only reason it got made. No Travolta, no Jackson, no film. Yeah, it was funded for its artistic sensibilities. Sure, Mike, sure. The most interesting fact is that Travolta didn’t like his character so had the story changed, which didn’t help things one bit, I bet. But I’m sure Travolta feels good about himself now. Fat Rove-loving disco-dancing cult-whore. And I mean that in a nice way.

Commentary with John McTiernan
He sounds so reluctant to speak at times, and when he does he’s so quiet and slow and Christ he makes me want to go to sleep. Screw it, I can’t be bothered wasting another hour and a half watching a stupid film that makes no sense just to hear some guy tell me how good Travolta and Jackson were and why every decision he made was the right one. I refuse to waste anymore time on this DVD. I’ve paid my dues. Cut me some slack, man.

There’s no doubt that the picture and audio are far better than the actual film. If they had removed the plot and just made an action film, this would have been a ripper DVD, but as it is, it’s completely avoidable in a market with much to choose from.

It’s a pity, because there are some effective moments in the film, but I promise you that by the very end you’ll be feeling cheated and abused and somehow dirty for having let them play with you like they have.

Don’t give them your money.