Subject: Review: Armageddon (1998)

From: "Ted Prigge" <[email-masked]>
Date: 20 Jul 1998 05:17:42 GMT

ARMAGEDDON (1998)
A Film Review by Ted Prigge
Copyright 1998 Ted Prigge

Director: Michael Bay
Writers: Jonathan Hensleigh, Robert Roy Pool, Tony Gilroy, Shane Salerno,
J.J. Abrams (story by Jonathan Hensleigh and Robert Roy Pool, and
uncredited extra writing by Paul Attansio, Ann Biderman, Scott Rosenberg,
and Robert Towne)
Starring: Bruce Willis, Billy Bob Thornton, Liv Tyler, Ben Affleck, Will
Patton, Steve Buscemi, William Fichtner, Peter Stormare, Owen Wilson, Keith
David, Jessica Steen, Grace Zabriskie, Udo Kier, Laurence Tierney, Anthony
Guidera, Charlton Heston

"Armageddon" is probably the cinematic equivalent of the 1976 Who concert
where the band played at record-breaking and ear-shattering decibels,
leaving behind a record that most rock bands were and still are afraid to
break.  "Armageddon" is close up there, with so many loud explosions that
drummer Keith Moon would be impressed if he were still around today, and in
a way is pretty much as over-the-top as that concert probably was. 
"Armageddon" is as flashy and glossy as any film comes, and it does pretty
much anything it can to make us like it, including giving us characters we
just plain like because they're being portrayed by good actors, bringing us
a love story, and providing us with so much action that after awhile all of
this becomes pretty numbing.  Kinda like the Who concert probably was.  I'm
sure everyone heard the first hour or so, but after that only heard
distortion and a couple explosions from Keith Moon's drum set.  Same with
this movie.

"Armageddon" is the second comet/asteroid-colliding-with-earth film we've
had in a two month period, following the "On the Beach"-wannabe "Deep
Impact."  While that one featured people trying to cope with the
possibility of the end of the world, this one is a little more aggressive. 
Both feature a group of miners and astronauts attempting to blow the
comet/asteroid up, but this one dwells prominently on them, and instead of
just one long sequence of them working and failing like in "Deep Impact,"
this one features one really, really, really long action sequence where
everything goes wrong that could go wrong and these guys keep going like an
Energizer bunny on uppers.

It's an event movie, which means it's pretty much a formula film where what
worked in the past crops up again.  This one is a disaster film but without
much of the drama of the people actually living on earth waiting for
potential extinction, and more on the "drama" of the people working to
destroy it.  Of course, you've all seen the previews: an asteroid is
heading towards earth, and it's up to Bruce Willis to destroy it.  Willis,
the token gruff action boy of late, plays a cynical miner chosen to destroy
the asteroid by the head of NASA, Dan Truman (Billy Bob Thornton, cashing
in on "Sling Blade," I see), along with a couple of his own men and some
other astronauts.  While "Deep Impact" took place over about a year or so,
this film puts itself in a corner immeadiately: we have about 16 days
(!!!).

The first hour of the film is easily the best.  We're introduced to the
situation, given some ways of fixing it, and then introduced to the
characters who will be going up and staying down.  The film establishes
Willis's daugher, Grace (Liv Tyler - is Bruce REALLY that old?), as the
martyr as her father AND her fiance, the buff A.J. Frost (Ben Affleck...oh,
I mean, OSCAR WINNER Ben Affleck, sorry), are both going up to space to do
battle with the large rock, setting up the film for some real heart on
Tyler's part, and giving the film a chance to cash in on the fact that
Liv's father is none other than Stephen Tyler of Aerosmith (yuck).  The
second half of the film is a rollar coaster ride of problem after problem
after problem etc etc etc, all making sure that after the film has
completed, you're totally drained.  And you are, trust me.

It's obvious by the way it was advertised as well as by simply looking at
it that this film is not at all concerned with being intelligent,
thoughtful, or even, in all reality, entertaining.  It's meant to make
money, and has been designed so much like that that an entire article in
this month's Premiere magazine shows the many steps it took to make this as
formulaic and therefore profitable as possible.  And yes, it's better than
other formula event pictures (need I mention the crapfest that was
"Godzilla?"), but it still has several problems, so many that if I were to
mention all of them I'd just be being picky.  But some are just too
unmentionable, such as the lackluster second half in comparison with an
entertaining first half, too many cheap "human" moments, and worst of all,
what has to be a quarter-assed love story that is so underdeveloped that
it's distracting every time it crops up.  Does A.J. even realize Grace
exists for half of the movie?  Why else would he talk about how he's coming
back and then later on risk his life for sheer cockiness?  I understand
that they felt they needed a romance angle in this film, what after
"Titanic."  But they really needed to put a little more umph into it, or at
least just a bit of umph.

So why am I recommending this film?  Why did I enjoy a film that has
numerous plot holes, too many explosions, and the IQ of a house plant? 
Because most of these bad qualities are used luckily to make for a really
entertaining experience.  I enjoyed the whole gung ho-ness of it all, the
way that it took the time to set up its characters in a similar way to that
testosterone-classic, "The Dirty Dozen"...then sends them on their way to a
suicide mission.  They're not deep characters, in fact they're pretty much
characateurs not characters, but the film actually makes us care about them
anyway, not the least by casting a bunch of good actors who've made it in
the indie/art house film world, not only Thornton, Affleck, and Tyler (and,
in some respects, Willis), but also Owen Wilson (who was brilliant in
"Bottle Rocket"), Peter Stormare ("Fargo"), and Steve Buscemi (pick a
film), all who are allowed to overact to sheer delight.

Willis, in fact, hasn't been this good in awhile.  His past few
performances, even in "The Fifth Element," have seemed to be on autopilot,
more or less, but here he brings us a sorta older version of his beloved
John McClane character.  Willis is a good comic actor when he wants to be,
and here he's back as his old self, making wise-cracks and generally
winning over the audience just like he used to.  Of course, he's upstaged
by Buscemi (can we just give this guy an Oscar already...or at the very
least a Lifetime Achievement Award?), who plays the resident comic relief
and still stays fresh even when the second half of the film finds him
diagnosed with "space dimentia" (okay...).

"Armageddon" was directed by Michael Bay, who directed "Bad Boys" and the
wonderfully entertaining "The Rock," a film that, like this, doesn't take
itself totally seriously (sometimes this does, but then it pulls itself
right out of the ditch it creates), and features the infamous use of
hyper-hyper-editing.  No one shot lasts more than 5 seconds, creating a
glossy-as-hell film that could easily be denounced as "crap on a stick,"
but for some reason works.  Maybe it's because the characters are likable
enough that when they're sent out to be martyrs we worry about whether or
not they're coming back at all, and for some reason not as worried about
the people on earth (save for Thornton and Tyler...and maybe that stripper
that Buscemi meets...). And also because Bay's MTV-style direction creates
an experience that is numbing yet still enjoyable and even a little
admirable.  Look at his crash-on-the-asteroid scene: have you seen this
much confusion and general fright-of-the-unknown since "Aliens?" 
"Armageddon" prides itself in being glossy but has no real delusions about
what it is and what it isn't, and while this isn't totally commendable,
it's still mildly distracting for 2 1/2 hours, and admittingly very
entertaining, which is something which is pretty good for us every now and
then.

MY RATING (out of 4): ***

Homepage at: http://www.geocities.com/Hollywood/Hills/8335/