TITLE: Review: Days of Thunder (1990) AUTHOR: Joe Johnson DATE: 7:56:00 AM ----- BODY:
Dir: Tony Scott

I never saw Snakes On A Plane. The nearer it came to release, the more mindful it seemed of crafting "cult" status. There is a vital difference between SoaP and those films that actually reach so-bad-they're-good level (i.e. Plan 9, Beastmaster, They Live): sincerity.

In reviewing the films of Tony Scott, I confronted one of the most sincere films in recent memory. Days of Thunder (DoT) was so straight-faced and serious that it made Schindler's List look like Duck Soup. Sincerity may be one of the hardest tricks in composing and directing a film. If an audience doesn't buy it, you risk the possibility of undermining every other element of the film. Which is probably why so few contemporary "action" films even attempt it.

The safe route is injecting a little (or large) dose of irony. Consider how many films use a "cool" character - someone who probably watches David Letterman, who smirks more than smiles, who makes "air quotes". There has to be someone in the movie that permits the audience to disbelieve the film world - at least in the potentially absurd scenes. In DoT, Scott could have used a worldly-wise ironic character to smirk when Cruise enters the film riding down the race track on the blackest, baddest motorcycle he could find (a motorcycle that has no other function in the film). This guy - let's call him "Owen" or "Bond, James Bond" - provides a safety valve for an audience who isn't quite sure they're ready to take the situation serious.

Watching a film A.S. (After The Simpsons) is particularly hard, because we're used to finding idiocy in people who take themselves too seriously. There's one quick way around this: use actors that are already cool (i.e. Samuel L. Jackson, Bruce Willis). DoT almost did this - at the time. Who was cooler than "Maverick"? Tom Cruise used to be so cool; pretty - but definitely cool. A little of that mystique has worn off. Granted, there's no way Scott could have known that at the time, nor could he have anticipated that throwing in Nicole Kidman as the love interest would create a whole other subtext.

Another warning sign is having a British director (except John Boorman) attempt to capture southern U.S. "folk culture". When depicting southerners and topics like driving fast cars in a circle, there are so many stereotypes and (perhaps) unfair jokes that it's hard for many people to not make fun. It's not fair, but it's a fact. And adding the California car driver and the Australian doctor only makes it worse.

The concept behind DoT is fine. It is essentially Top Gun on wheels, so it should work... but it doesn't. Top Gun had some gravity because it followed guys in military uniforms flying jets saving the world from communism. Top Gun also had chemistry. DoT is guys wearing Mello Yello jumpsuits bumping into each other's fender then freaking out when there's an accident. And where's Val Kilmer, the ultimate cool guy - Doc Holliday, Elvis, "Iceman"?

Ultimately, DoT's sincerity backfires. It happens too soon, too forcibly without ever questioning the absurdity of the racing life. Like Road House, it doesn't seem to realize that if an audience doesn't care about the culture, it might have a problem identifying with the characters. And - like Road House - all the sincerity, bravado and intensity that seemed masculine and cool at the time, now seems a bit absurd (and not in a good way). Rather than being a film that pulls you in, DoT is impossible to watch without a group. It's impossible to watch without a smirk. And for a film that is completely straight, that's not a compliment.

** of *****

Labels: ,

--------