All posts by Rod Lott

Torque (2004)

Torque is essentially the same story as The Fast and the Furious, but told with motorcycles. And it’s 2 goofy 2 be any good.

The Ring’s Martin Henderson stars as Ford, a renegade cyclist who ditched his girlfriend (Monet Mazur, too clean-scrubbed to convincingly play white trash) for a romp in Thailand after stealing some motorcycles with crystal meth in the gas tanks from a sniveling, mullet-sporting bad guy named Henry James (not the author of The Turn of the Screw, but Matt Schulze from The Transporter). Now, Ford is back to set things straight with Henry and the feds.

Only it ain’t that easy because he’s also pursued by a rival biker gang known as The Reapers, led by a snarling Ice Cube, who thinks Ford has murdered his brother, because that’s just what Henry wants everyone to believe. And while that may resemble a plot, the script does nothing to forward it. Oh, the characters talk, all right — it’s just everything they say is meaningless, like the words of Charlie Brown’s school teacher, unless it’s a priceless gem of bad dialogue. This movie is jam-packed with exchanges like “Nice bike.” “Nice ass.”

Nice try. With its saturated, slightly washed-out colors, I liked the way Torque looks. I just didn’t like how it sounds, feels, tastes or smells. Every frame is jacked-up and pimped out to resemble a Mountain Dew commercial. Every character lacks peripheral vision and a hearing range beyond two feet so that people and motorcycles can sneak up on them all the time, yet the dudes have no trouble communicating with one another during their loud rides.

But action is the hook for a flick like Torque — unfortunately, it’s ludicrous. Cycles zip and zap everywhere, including through a moving train filled with passengers, but the climactic chase has Ford and Henry James facing off through downtown L.A. at 200 mph and having somehow obtained expert reflexes. This scene flies by at such speed that you cannot tell what the hell is happening … and maybe that’s for the best. —Rod Lott

Buy it at Amazon.

Paycheck (2003)

Paycheck most certainly was just that for star Ben Affleck, because he invests very little in the film, other than portraying an unlikable chucklehead, which his protagonist is not supposed to be. Like Minority Report (but with lower star wattage and much less behind-the-camera skill), Paycheck is based on a Philip K. Dick short story. Affleck plays some kind of freelance techno-whiz who consults on jobs so top-secret that after his gig is over, his memory of the experience is erased. As the story begins, he accepts a two-year assignment — one far longer than ever before — that will result in an eight-figure payday, meaning he won’t have to work ever again.

But when he’s done and his brain is wiped clean of the previous 24 months, he is shocked to find that he has forfeited his money in exchange for an envelope full of 20 items worthy of a junk drawer: a paper clip, a pass key, Affleck’s career. He’s also pursued by the police, for a murder he’s not sure he did or didn’t commit, and as he flees, he learns that each item in the envelope helps him evade capture. Perhaps he was working on a machine that could foresee … the future?!?

It’s not a terrible idea for a film, but director John Woo and company have steered it down that road. Woo’s Asian sensibilities simply do not translate well to American film; his direction is needlessly showy, making for choppy editing, awkward pacing and poor performances. Plus, when he manages — even in a sci-fi thriller — to throw a shot of his beloved white doves, I had to groan.

Affleck has shown signs of being able to act before, but here he’s simply coasting; the man can’t even laugh credibly. As a biologist and requisite love interest, Uma Thurman is completely vacant, giggling and trying to act like she’s Kate Hudson or something. She’s not and it doesn’t matter, anyway, because she and Affleck have zero chemistry. Oh, and I’m not certain, but I think Paul Giamatti is supposed to be playing a monkey. —Rod Lott

Buy it at Amazon.

The New Centurions (1972)

No one writes a cop novel like Joseph Wambaugh, so it’s no wonder Hollywood has adapted so many of them, starting with The New Centurions. It follows rookie cop Roy (Stacy Keach, sans ‘stache, initially) being introduced to the night shift of the scummier areas of Los Angeles by near-retirement Kilvinski (George C. Scott, intense as always). As they make their rounds, the lonely old man imparts wisdom to his family-man protégé: “Look out the window. There’s always another asshole.”

The partners and the other cops of their division — a vanity-free Erik Estrada among them — are shown breaking up domestic disputes, rounding up street whores, working robberies big and small, hunting down a flim-flam man, making routine traffic stops, trolling parks for “fruits,” and chasing various perps.

There’s a reason they call it a beat: because it wears one down. Like Wambaugh’s excellent, reality-based novels, Richard Fleischer’s film pulls back the veil of being an officer, presenting a portrait that’s not at all gussied-up, revealing the repercussions of making an honest but deadly mistake, and the toll the job takes at home. A scene in which the wrong guy is fatally shot is powerful, but most tense is when the police attempt to wrest an abused newborn from its drunk mother.

The New Centurions isn’t your average Hollywood crime drama. When Kilvinski mentions retirement, any other movie would mark him for death before his last day on the job; instead, Stirling Silliphant’s script shows him taking a more realistic route. It’s a solid work, tonally false only with a late-in-the-game subplot of romance for Roy. —Rod Lott

Buy it at Amazon.