"Universal Soldier: Day of Reckoning" - The weirdest and best film in the series.

*This article contains SPOILERS.

I always wondered what one of the truly great, original directors would do with a Van Damme movie. Sure, he’s worked with some renowned action directors here and there, but what would Kubrick have done with a Van Damme movie? Of course that’s an impossibility, and it’s very unlikely that any director of Kubrick’s ilk (PTA, Scorsese, Aronofsky, etc.) will ever work with Van Damme. But that doesn’t mean a skilled imitation can’t happen; in fact, it already has. Writer-director John Hyams has made the closest thing we’ll likely ever get. His Day of Reckoning feels more like a unique director’s vision than any other Van Damme movie. The comparison that came to mind as I watched was Nicolas Winding Refn. The general look of the film, a mostly quiet protagonist, striking images of sex and ultraviolence, and the general mysteriousness of the film make it very much like Refn’s work. To be clear, I don’t think Hyams was copying Refn. I just thought of Refn as I watched it. Day of Reckoning is simply the product of Hyams being able to do whatever the fuck he wanted, and I am so glad he did.

Universal Soldier: Unleashed

The Universal Soldier series (the Van Damme entries) is truly strange. The first film is pure ‘90s action fun. The sequel attempted to recapture that feeling, but failed (at least commercially; I actually like it in a guilty pleasure kind of way). Then director John Hyams entered the picture and made Regeneration one of the most surprisingly awesome DTV movies of all time. That entry was much darker than the first two films, but Hyams was just getting started. Hyams wanted to do something special with the series, but he also did something very simple: take the idea of the UniSol program to its logical, violent, insane conclusion. Let me explain. 

I love the Universal Soldier series, but I always found it a bit lacking when it came to considering the ramifications of the program. For fuck’s sake, they are re-animating dead Vietnam soldiers as cyborg assassins! And it’s a fairly light-hearted series for the first two movies. This is some dark shit, and Day of Reckoning finally dives deep into the darkness. The UniSols of this film have survived too long, and they are all pretty much crazy. The scenes in the bunker are fairly disturbing. The UniSols just sit around, amped up and drunk, just wanting to kill something because they know nothing else. Andrew Scott and Luc Deveraux claim to be their liberators, but really they’re just masters of a different name. And when John takes over at the end, he’s still just using the UniSols to do his bidding. 

Only death can free these men, but they’ve already died, multiple times in many cases. The film ends with the revelation that John has created a clone to infiltrate the government agency that controls the program. Terrible things are going to happen because John, a government creation meant to stop the rogue UniSols, has chosen to believe the revenge narrative they created. It’s a vicious cycle that seemingly has no end, and that’s the point. Where else could this program go? I know this is covered to a degree in all these films, but this felt like the most realistic and fully formed exploration of the consequences of the program.

One of the main consequences of the program is violence. Of course, the entire series is violent, but only Day of Reckoning garnered an NC-17 because of it. This is because the use of guns is toned down...a bit. The gunplay is still there, and it’s gorier than ever. But the most brutal moments of the film don’t feature guns at all. One such moment involves a fight with baseball bats. In a generally great sequence, John realizes his abilities while fighting off a would-be UniSol assassin in a sporting goods store. After an awesome bat on bat fight, John gains the upper hand and eviscerates his attacker’s head with one swing. I don’t know what else to say except that it’s fucking awesome, and it’s the kind of thing I always wanted from this series. Because what’s the point of creating supersoldiers just to have them pull a trigger. Give those fuckers bats and machetes and let them go crazy.

And Day of Reckoning is truly crazy on many levels. The fact that many of the characters are either under mind control, can’t remember their past, or are flat out rage monsters creates an unnerving mood throughout. But the sound and visuals amp it up even further. The sequences in which Van Damme seems to be telepathically recruiting characters are particularly difficult to watch. The primary example of this is when the UniSol is recruited by Lundgren after the brothel massacre. The flashing lights and the chaotic score along with images of a bald Van Damme make it an extremely effective scene. It’s hardly something you would expect from this franchise.

And that’s precisely why it’s the best film in the series. Day of Reckoning is possibly the boldest sequel ever made. It’s a violent head trip, and it’s everything a Universal Soldier movie could and should be.

Universal Soldier: Apocalypse Now

While I found a lot of similarities to Refn’s work in Day of Reckoning, the most blatant homage is to Coppola’s Apocalypse Now. Actually, Day of Reckoning is damn near a remake. The basic plot is a soldier (Scott Adkins) is sent by the government (in this case, though, he’s unaware of the government’s involvement until later) to take out a rogue superior (Van Damme) who has gone insane and started his own army. He eventually makes his way to Van Damme, even going down a river at one point. The ending is where it diverges a bit from Apocalypse Now, even though he still kills Van Damme with a machete much like how Brando dies in Apocalypse. The difference is that rather than simply leaving, he takes Van Damme’s place, albeit with a much smaller army (you know, because he killed almost all of them earlier). The fact that he kills many of them could be a reference to the note Brando leaves for Willard telling him to kill them all. Small differences aside, this is very clearly meant to be a tribute of sorts to Apocalypse Now. And this is a logical film to emulate as Van Damme and Lundgren's characters were originally soldiers in the Vietnam War, and Lundgren's character was kind of an amped-up Kurtz himself in the first film. 

Van Damme’s screen time and overall performance and appearance is further evidence of the connection. Van Damme is barely in this movie. He shows up in the beginning scene, but after that he is only seen in glimpses or very short scenes, which is how Kurtz is portrayed in Apocalypse, as he’s heard in an audio recording early on, then we just see pictures of him. Both Deveraux and Kurtz hang like specters over their films. They are mysterious, dangerous men that our protagonist must face. 

Van Damme’s screen time is almost identical to Brando’s, but so is his appearance. He has a shaved head, and he even paints his face later in the film (seemingly for no other reason than to further resemble Kurtz). Van Damme also matches Brando’s understated performance. He is mostly quiet, which makes for one of the most effective, and definitely eeriest roles of his career. This is not a knock against Van Damme, but I’ve always thought his presence was more powerful when he is more silent. This is why his darker, more villainous roles stand out because when he stands around stone-faced he looks creepy as hell. 

It’s easy to be disappointed by how little Van Damme is in this film, but when you understand the design of the story (and it’s homage to Apocalypse Now), it makes perfect sense. And it makes for a more potent performance from Van Damme. If he had been around every other scene just being brooding and evil, it would have become a bit tiresome by the end. Better to leave him the mystery that must be found rather than to pull the curtain back too soon. Screen time doesn’t matter when his presence can be felt throughout the film. It’s a unique and great performance from Van Damme in easily one of the most interesting films he’s ever been involved in. 

Why Do I Own This?

It’s a Jean-Claude Van Damme movie. In fact, I bought it twice, technically. It was cheaper to by a Regeneration / Day of Reckoning combo DVD than buying Regeneration by itself. But then I found out that the DVD version of Day of Reckoning was not the uncut, NC-17 version. So I had to buy the blu ray. I’m glad I did, though, because the extra brutality in the uncut version is worth it.

Random Thoughts

That murder at the beginning is definitely the darkest thing Van Damme has ever filmed.

The craziest little whorehouse in the fucking world…

This movie needs a seizure warning. Seriously. The flashing lights and whatnot are difficult to watch.

What a terrifying cult: a group of genetically enhanced super soldiers sitting around whiskey drunk all the time just waiting for an excuse to start beating the shit out of each other.

I watched this right after John Wick 3 (I definitely need to watch something with less death now), and the sequence when Adkins kills all the UniSols is just as good as a sequence in the Wick series. Obviously Wick is the more premiere series, especially since there are multiple impressive sequences throughout those films while this film just has the one, but it's still very impressive for any action film, much less a DTV one.

Lundgren gets two badass deaths in back-to-back movies. That's rare because when most characters die in a movie, they stay dead.

UniSols using baseball bats and machetes makes for much better (and exponentially more gruesome) action.

Refn Returns to the Weird with "Only God Forgives"

*Only God Forgives is in theatres and On Demand now.

 

Directed by Nicolas Winding Refn, written by Refn, starring Ryan Gosling, Kristin Scott Thomas, and Vithaya Pansringarm - Rated R

This is definitely one of those disturbing Chigurh movies.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Nicolas Winding Refn got a lot of attention with Drive so it comes as no surprise that some people (critics, as well, I guess we count as people...) are disappointed with his latest film, Only God Forgives.  I am not discounting anyone's negative opinion of the film (opinions can't be right or wrong), but if people are upset because the film isn't all that much like Drive, they should take a second look.  If forced to compare the two films, I will admit that I enjoyed Drive much more than this film.  That said, Only God Forgives is the more challenging, and interesting, of the two.  Fans of Refn pre-Drive should definitely check this out.  But think more along the lines of Valhalla Rising than Drive.

 

Since I started off with comparisons to define this movie, I might as well take it one step further to give you an idea of what this movie is like, at least in tone.  I would describe it as Kubrick's The Shining by way of David Lynch's Blue Velvet.  This is a very psychological film, and a lot of the main character's inner conflicts are represented in a nightmarish hotel-type setting.  These scenes feature plenty of slow tracking shots as well, so that's where the Kubrick comes from.  It's kind of like Refn decided to keep going through the rooms in the hotel in The Shining instead of just glimpsing in at the weirdness (remember that strange shot with the dude in the dog costume?).  The Lynch comes from the randomness of the film, most notably the karaoke.  Yes, Only God Forgives features multiple karaoke scenes in which the audience watches in perfect stillness.  Think Dean Stockwell's rendition of In Dreams in Blue Velvet.  By the way, I don't consider these similarities a weakness in any way.  Refn still has his own style, and I love it.

 

Speaking of style, if you just want to watch this movie for some spurts of brutal Refn violence with some interesting uses of color all set to strange yet perfectly fitting music, then you'll be pleased with this.  If you want an easily accessible story to go along with that, you'll be disappointed.

 

Only God Forgives does a have a relatively simple revenge story since it essentially just about Ryan Gosling killing the cop (an incredibly menacing Vithaya Pansringarm) who allowed Gosling's brother to be killed.  But this is not a movie about Gosling going around beating dudes up.  Gosling barely speaks, for one thing (although he speaks more than One Eye in Valhalla), and his brother doesn't really deserve to be avenged.  Gosling's brother rapes and kills an underage girl.  On top of that, Gosling's basically evil mother (an easy to hate Kristin Scott Thomas) manipulates him at every turn.  In fact, Gosling isn't very likable either.  The film kind of feels like a revenge story told from the "bad" guys' perspective.  There's nothing wrong with that, though, and I find it pretty interesting.  Some people might want to like the protagonist, however. 

 

The fact that the "hero" of the film isn't exactly into his quest nor do we want him to accomplish his task is strange enough, but Only God Forgives allows itself much more interpretation.  I don't want to posit any theories in a review, but when you look at the movie with characters representing some good and evil archetypes it gets pretty interesting.  If you're not willing to put a little thought into the film, some of it will be downright pointless. 

 

Because of that, this is up there with Valhalla Rising as one of Refn's more challenging films.  It's still entertaining, but not nearly as fun to watch as Drive or Bronson.  But it leaves an impression, and it might make you think a bit.  And it's still Refn, so at the very least you'll get an interesting audio/visual experience.  Is it as good as Drive?  No, it's different.  It's interesting and challenging.  And sure, I'll watch Drive at least a dozen more times over the years, and I'm not sure if I'll ever watch Only God Forgives again.  But it's still worth checking out.  When Nicolas Winding Refn challenges the viewer it's not always fun, but it's definitely worth your time.  

 

Random Thoughts (SPOILERS)

 

Wow, does Gosling take a beating in this movie or what?  It might be the greatest one-sided fight scene I've ever seen.  Although it is kind of hard to think of many one-sided fights in movies.  There's usually a slight chance the other participant could win...  Anyway, very brutal.

 

Completely dug most of the music, especially the fight scene music.  Drive still takes the cake in that department, though.  I might buy one song from this soundtrack, but I still listen to songs from Drive regularly.

 

Okay, might as well get into the theory that I think fits the most.  I'll keep it short.  Gosling's mom is Satan and the cop is God.  This is why he seems almost supernaturally powerful and tends to dispense judgment (this is Old Testament God).  Gosling finally gets away from Satan's influence (and feels the need to reminisce inside the womb one more time...odd), and seeks forgiveness from God.  He wants forgiveness for killing his father years ago (confirmed by the mother), which is why he allows God to cut his hands off in the end.  This is his ultimate fear as early scenes in his nightmare/psyche/hotel foreshadow this punishment.  By the end, enough has happened to him that he accepts his punishment and it relieved/released.  Or whatever...

"Drive"

Drive - Directed by Nicolas Winding Refn, written by Hossein Amini, starring Ryan Gosling, Carey Mulligan, Albert Brooks, Bryan Cranston, and Ron Perlman - Rated R

The first Vader of the year.  Can't help it, I just love the work of Nicolas Winding Refn.

Every now and then something great happens in Hollywood. An interesting director makes enough great films overseas and he’s given a modest budget and a little star power and he gets to make whatever he wants out of a film. And then that film ends up playing on the big screen in an area as small as Perry County. I sat back unbelieving Sunday night as I watched Nicolas Winding Refn’s latest film Drive and witnessed one of the best films of the year…and I didn’t have to drive an hour to see it.

Refn has been making quality films since 1996’s Pusher, and recently he made his finest film to date (in my opinion, of course) with 2008’s Bronson. His films are not easily digestible as they feature graphic violence, strange soundtracks, and plenty of awkward silences. Drive continues that tradition as it features all three of those elements. Because of this, many people might simply dismiss this movie as “weird.” That’s easy enough, especially since the previews make it out to be some hardcore action flick (it has action, but to call this an action movie is unfair).

Weird isn’t a bad thing, especially with some of the crap Hollywood churns out these days. Drive may not be a traditional film, but it has it where it counts. There are awkward silences and the soundtrack, which sounds like it belongs in an 80s thriller, may be out of left field, but it all comes together to make one stylish film.

Drive doesn’t seem so odd on the page, though. It’s about a Hollywood stunt driver who moonlights as a getaway man (Ryan Gosling) who falls for a damsel in distress (Carey Mulligan) but gets into trouble with the wrong men (Albert Brooks and Ron Perlman). It’s your standard story of a low level criminal getting in way over his head. But it’s so much more than that thanks to what Refn and Gosling bring to the film.

Ryan Gosling has done well for himself lately, but he’s never really turned in a commanding physical performance. He’s stuck to these troubled characters that have issues operating in the real world. No problem there, since he handles that disconnected performance so well. In fact, he gives that same performance for much of Drive to the point that some people have speculated that his character is sociopathic. His strange, constant grin and ability to turn every moment into an awkward silence certainly makes for an interesting performance especially when he so seamlessly turns into a badass.

Gosling gets to go crazy in this film and it’s great. The film makes good use of his leather driving gloves and you can just feel (and hear) the tension every time he makes a fist. And every time he makes that fist you just know things are going to get violent. The violence is typical Refn: bloody, shocking, potentially disturbing…but perfectly reasonable for the story. The ultra-violence is acceptable for a film like this because it is meant to kick you in the face when you least expect it. Violence is standard in films these days but sometimes it can put in there just to placate the bloodthirsty hordes. Sure, those hordes will like Drive, but with this caveat, “It was awesome, but man, it was slow…and kind of weird.” Others will realize that the violence is there to shock you, not just entertain you. The scenes of violence are not treated trivially; they are intense. But they do look amazing (I never claimed I wasn’t part of the bloodthirsty hordes).

The title of the film may lead you to believe that the majority of the action of this film would take place on the road, but that is not the case. There are a few well crafted getaway/chase sequences, but this film isn’t exactly a full-on car movie, though there are plenty of cool shots of the dash with Gosling’s intent eyes in focus in the rearview. The title of the film is more about the drive of Gosling’s character than it is about the physical act of driving, however. Some may be disappointed by the lack of cars and all, but there should be plenty there to keep people entertained.

Drive also has the benefit of an amazing cast. Aside from Gosling, Mulligan does a fine job silently communicating with him in plenty of scenes and she certainly comes across as a woman worth fighting for. Bryan Cranston has a few good scenes as a mentor-type. Christina Hendricks has a decent, though small role. Perlman livens up the screen in his scenes. And Albert Brooks is the surprise of the movie as a menacing, though reasonable mobster.

If all of that wasn’t enough, then there are plenty of smaller elements to focus on with the film. The strange satin jacket emblazoned with a scorpion that Gosling sports in nearly every scene can add depth to the film when you factor in the reference to the fable “The Scorpion and the Frog.” Though the film is enjoyable by just leaving it alone and saying, “It’s just a jacket that’s meant to convey an almost 80s sensibility of the film.” That retro look along with the soundtrack is cool enough to keep things interesting as well.

Interesting is the word that should be used for Drive. The film can be looked at closely and it can be simply enjoyed. My suggestion: enjoy it simply at first, then stop and think about what you’ve just seen. There’s enough action and style to keep you entertained, but there’s also enough under the surface to keep you thinking of the film. That’s certainly the effect the film had on me and I can’t wait to watch it again.

Random Thoughts (SPOILERS)

Gosling stomps a dude’s face until it is nothing!  No comment really about this, just...wow.

That shotgun blast that disintegrated Christina Hendricks's head was ridiculous in all the right ways.

The Scorpion and the Frog is a fable about how the you can't change someone's nature.  In the fable, it's the scorpion.  In Drive, it's Gosling.  He can't change, so even if he does survive that gut stab at the end (I believe he's dead, though), he still has to move on and keep driving.

Refn loves it when making a fist makes a sound...and I do, too.

Finally, I heaped insane amounts of love on this film and I am not alone.  I'm sure the backlash has already begun, but you shouldn't let yourself be swayed by other critics or by the message board crowds.  I loved it and apparently other people loved, but that didn't sway my opinion.  Nicolas Winding Refn is who convinced me that this is the best film of the year so far.