![]() |
|
|
The Peacemaker | |
esides
sounding like The Pacemaker, which would be a lot less
interesting movie, I'm not sure why this film wasn't more
successful. It looks great, has two big stars, and wasn't that
poorly-reviewed. Yet it only made
$41m when released in 1998.I didn't see it then, and I didn't see it on video. I only saw it when it was on one of the major TV networks in early 2002, but I found it compelling enough to sit through the commercials and keep watching it, which is very unusual for me. It's basically a James Bond movie with less going on that's therefore a lot more realistic. There are stolen Russian nukes, attempts to smuggle them to some other unknown country, high tech intercept efforts, chases around the world, arguing commanders, and the eventual cat and mouse nuke chase around NYC. It does not have the glib humor (or attempts at it, anyway) of the typical Bond film, and there's no sex or charismatic super villain. I actually preferred the villain they had, since he was nuts and haunted by inner demons of his slaughtered wife and child, and the bad guys didn't have a secret base with private moon shuttle flights, or own half the world, etc. They were small timers working on their own, trying to make a huge thing happen against the odds. The good guys had the resources and the battle was on their home turf; a much more realistic scenario than the typical James Bond thing with him alone in some underground metropolis entirely-filled with the bad guys' henchmen. The main conflict, besides the nuke-smuggling terrorist, is between Clooney and Kidman. She's a by the book high-ranking intelligence official. He's some sort of special forces army colonel, very "cowboy" and wanting to just take off and do things. He has past history with the head bad guy terrorist's security officer, so there's a personal angle there as well. There is the inevitable scene where Kidman has to give the okay to launch a big risky mission that Clooney really wants to charge off on. And she goes against her training and is won over by his enthusiasm and the seriousness of the situation. It turns out to be somewhat of a disaster, in an example of the relatively intelligent script/plot. Overall, the movie was a lot smarter than the average spy thriller. Not a series of improbable and physics-defying escapades like a Bond movie, and not just one lone guy able to do anything and everything.
I did not know the movie was on, and only happened upon it in a rare
moment of channel surfing. I clicked to it when there was a car
chase, more like a car battle, in some quaint city square in Italy or
some country that looks like it. There were two or three cars of
bad guys chasing Clooney and Kidman in their one car. What caught
my eye was not the screeching tires, but that the scene starts with
Kidman diving between the front and back seat, for no apparent reason. The car scene was interesting since it started as a chase, but ended as a demolition derby, with Clooney destroying both of the terrorist's cars in semi-realistic fashion. Through the whole movie Clooney's character was well done. Very strong and competent and street smart. Able to take full advantage of the technology and opportunities he had available, and using realistic tactics and technology, rather than some magical gizmo, like Bond. There is a nice scene at the end where they are after the terrorist in NYC. They spend some time figuring out that he's actually in the country, how he might have gotten in, talking about the lack of sufficient radiation detectors to pick up the nuke in NYC, etc. They get to his hotel room just after he's left, which Clooney figures out by feeling his plate of room service eggs and seeing that they are still warm. Nice touch. Then
ensues a frantic chase as they try to spot the guy and his cargo
somewhere in Manhattan, as he's approaching the UN. It's well done
with cars of cops and military everywhere, streets being closed off just
a minute too late, huge traffic jams, multiple snipers scanning the
masses of people, and the eventual mad chase after he's spotted.
The biggest failing of the film is that Nicole does nothing. She
wears a lot of suits and snaps off orders, but why hire one of the most
beautiful women in acting and put her in pants suits for two
hours? She does have that one mini-skirt in the car bit, but that
was clearly a stretch. No shower scenes, no ripped dresses,
none of the normal movie invention to show off the sexy female. A nice touch at the end was that she, not Clooney, is the nuke
expert, and she does the dirty work to disarm it before the ultimate clichι,
the red number countdown, reaches zero. They dive through a
stained glass window, all disaster is averted, and the movie fades to
black with them hugging each other, all scratched and at last feeling
bonded, after butting heads the entire time. You think the movie
is over, and without a bit of Nicole-skin. Bah. But no! The black fades, and we see an underwater shot of a woman swimming
over in a black one-piece suit. Yes, it's Nicole, milky thighs
a'flashing, in the most tacked on and gratuitous display of female flesh
you'll find this side of of the SI
Swimsuit Issue. Tragically she's not wearing a suit worthy of
inclusion in that magazine (more like Lands'
End) but hey, at least they got her into a suit of some kind.
I laughed my ass off at the time, since I'd spent the last hour trading
sarcastic ICQs with a female friend, mostly bemoaning the ratio of long
pants to Nicole's legs. The movie ended, it faded to black, and
just as all hope for some skin fades, when it's darkest before the
dawn... salvation. The scene is dumb on several levels. Nicole is there swimming
laps, and Clooney walks in wearing his full dress uniform, medals and
epaulets galore, and stands on the side of the pool while Nicole swims
towards him. They have a "well I'm glad that's all over
with" conversation, and then he sort of asks her to go get a beer,
and she says okay but she's got like 10 laps to go first, and swims
away, giving the camera a slight look at her butt. The point of this little recount is that you should never forget men
run Hollywood, and create the movies to be what they want to see.
No matter how serious and professional and competent the female
character is, if she's hot we'll almost always see her in a swimsuit or
panties or the shower, sooner or later. And if not the male half of the
audience will be muffling curses and complaining about it on ICQ.
*cough* Imagine if the ending had an underwater shot of George swimming in a
Speedo, and Nicole walked out in her smart cream pantsuit and eyeballed
him, and asked him out on a date? And the camera lingered over his
washboard stomach, manly pecs, and Speedo bulging like he was smuggling
golf balls... No, I can't imagine it either. Just because it
would never happen in a Hollywood film, at least not while heterosexual men are
running things, and making movies as they want to see them, and thinking
that they are their own biggest audience. Skin or lack thereof aside, the film was pretty good, a lot better
than I expected, and I would recommend it. |
||
| Originally posted in the update April 7, 2002. Expanded and archived here October 21, 2002. |
|
All site content copyright "Flux" (Eric Bruce), 2002-2007. |