Disaster movies and action kind of go hand in hand, but seldom does it involve more than trying to dodge whatever artificial natural disaster the Hollywood directors deem up. Today’s movie review focuses on a film that tries to blur the lines between the two a little better, in what will hopefully be a new twist on the action/disaster movie frontier. Utilizing the popular leading man of Dwayne Johnsonto carry the movie, there seems to be hope that this Die-Hard copier can potentially bring enough bucks in to get the attention of the modern era. Does it work? Robbie K here to bring you yet another review this time on:
Movie: Skyscraper (2018)
The Special Effects: The leading point of the movie is the impressive display of CGI in this movie. Perhaps a little corny at times, the movie really invested well in high definition sound to rattle the theater as the chaos of the crime unfolds. Excessive computer-generated images are the key to bringing the inferno to life, but is still beautiful rendered to design a building that will only be fiction for a short while. The world crafting gets kudos for me, and will hopefully impress you as well.
The Realism: Despite there being some fiction behind this movie, it is a little more grounded to the real world than one might expect. The “Pearl” is a building that will soon exist, a setting that is perfect to craft a surprisingly detailed plot. As the scheme continues to evolve, the realism continues to remain in check, finding kinks in the plot and having to adapt. In addition, even the action keeps things believable, where if a character takes a hit, they actually suffer in terms of performance. All of this adds to suspense of the film and engaged to this adapted plot.
Character Involvement: A movie with as many characters always has me worried about how much involvement they have in the plot. Die Hard did it correctly as each character had their place and contributions that actually mattered, and fortunately this copy did the same thing. Most of the characters act as their piece to the puzzle, keeping them integrated into the plot for the entirety of the film and doing a decent job of tying up all loose ends. Even more so, the characters are designed to cover a wide variety of ages, ethnicities, and genre lovers.
Good Pace: The movie movies quickly, gets the suspense going, and does little to try to slow things down. For guys like me, the movie rocks in terms of few slow parts and keeps the intensity amped up to a level of ten and that just makes for a fun movie in my opinion.
The Lack of Beginning: The pace may be good in terms of excitement, but I am with many of my friends in that plot development is also key. Skyscraper’s beginning is almost nonexistent, all the set up skipped over to get to the action and drop any chance of escaping the predictable plot line off the ledge within 15 minutes. Any chance at suspense build up is practically gone and the story actually takes a hit because of that. If you’re not in for the story, then you will glaze over this, but for those looking for a little bit of both worlds don’t expect much of an opening.
The Plot Gaps: For a building that secure and advanced, you would think there would be more contingency plans than the one they had here. This gap is just one example of the stretches and details you have to ignore to fully enjoy the movie. In addition, there are feats of strength, stamina, and physics defying moves that are also a little cheesy for the fans who love those extremes. As these gaps happen, the movie moves quickly to try and forget about them, but still the movie could have used some refining at points.
The Jumps: This was advertised immensely in the trailers and marketing, but the film has that extreme jump that we have grown accustomed to. Yet the movie took that concept and milked it for all its worth. Skyscraper tries to pay homage to Die Hard in many ways, and while it fits into the grand scheme of the movie, the film goes a little overboard with the gimmicks. All the sacrificing brings that bang for your buck, but in terms of story it’s only okay for me.
The Villains Development: I’ll give them props, they have made a better villain than many movies have as of late in the form of Botha (Roland Møller). And while this one of the better villains, it still needed more work in his character development. Comparing to its inspiration source, the villain started giving us some deeper levels, but then it tapered out and he went back to the generic villain. A little more insight and integration could have done wonders to expand the tale even more. Even his side kicks and team held promise, but again they too were overshadowed by the protagonist’s tale, screen time, and jumps.
The Action: Did it fit with the tale? Yes. Was it realistic? Yes. Was it exciting? Depends. Skyscraper’s battles are decently coordinate, but much of this lacks the bite that other movies have had. They are quickly executed, very simplistic, and sometimes a bit overdone in my opinion, but this movie’s feeling of trying to survive the manmade disaster I guess takes precedence over the gun fight. Not the worst action, but definitely room for improvement.
Skyscraper is an example of impressive movie theater worthy special effects, and surprisingly stays on the realistic qualities these franchises often ignore. I give it applause for integration of characters, and Johnson doing a fabulous job leading the film. Still the movie is a diluted piece compared to the movie it copies so much of and therefore needed some amping up in terms of story, villain development and action. Perhaps a little less jumping and a little more time could have given this tale the needed oomph to rock it into higher scores. Still the effects do render it a good theater film, but if you don’t want this kind of movie… save it until you get home.
My scores are:
Movie Overall: 5.0