Soldiers of Fortune Has Too Many Mixed Fortunes
By
Kristin Battestella
I
was eager to see this seemingly fun and action packed 2012 ensemble yarn, but Soldiers of Fortune is a disappointing
mixed bag of what could have been.
Ex-army
Captain Craig McCenzie (Christian Slater) reluctantly joins a special operations
mercenary training organization funded by millionaires interested in playing
soldier at the highest stakes. Metals magnate Dimidov (Sean Bean), video game
developer Sin (Dominic Monaghan), banker Charles Vanderbeer (Charlie Bewley), Texas
tycoon Sam Haussmann (James Cromwell), and weapons dealer Grimaud (Ving Rhames)
don’t take the training seriously at first, and each has their own motives for
joining in the rebellion against ex-CIA agent Carter Mason (Colm Meaney). When
their play mission turns into a deadly coup d'état, the team must shape up to
make it out alive.
New
director Maxim Korostyshevsky and writers Alexandre Coscas, Joe Kelbley (Booking Knights) and Robert Crombie (Ink) open with international intrigue,
Taliban infiltration, and bikers, but the onscreen titles telling the audience
the when and where do little to explain what’s happening. Between telling
Craig’s back story, showing the repeated recruitment attempts, and all the island
rebellion whys, Soldiers of Fortune takes
too many times to start it’s tale. The tired, down on his luck soldier premise
also puts the film off on the wrong foundation, resulting in too much time
being spent later on in clarifying who is who. There’s no such time to spare in
a 95-minute action caper – Soldiers of
Fortune should have focused on the adventure for hire sardonics as its cool
with no angry military whip them into shape off kilter. This is supposed to be
an action film, not a war allegory, and I don’t really care about Craig’s
history in comparison to the irony of millionaires playing soldier who end up
really saving the day and writing it off as charity. This could have been a
funny, unrealistic bombastic romp or dead serious and heavy in its political statements.
Heck, Soldiers of Fortune could have
even stayed middle of the road subtle irony wink even, but the picture just
feels so aimless and topsy turvy. Maybe it’s
not that original either, but seeing these richy, badass, screw ups already ala
Major League had to be more
entertaining than Soldiers of Fortune actually
turned out to be. I keep thinking of editors who say forget the prologue, open in media res, and cut your first thirty
pages. The early training scenes come too easily for the quirky team, and
turncoat speculations don’t seem to matter. Despite their charm and likability,
the learning the ropes muddled vision and save the island rebellion mission
feel like one big macguffin. This askew start and all over the place plotting
certainly makes Soldiers of Fortune confusing,
and unnecessary flak prevents the ensemble’s potential from blossoming.
Christian
Slater is a very unusual choice for the lead here, yes. Though he is physically
capable, swift, and believable with the guns and gear, some of the action is a
little too preposterous, and it’s tough for one to get over the “It’s Christian
Slater! Pump Up the Volume! Kuffs!” feeling. His dialogue and
delivery are also uneven. Either this is a poorly written character with
undeveloped emotion or Slater is too dry for the part. Craig’s reluctant drill
sergeant is neither ruthless nor funny when he’s threatening to kill the next
person who answers his cell phone during the obstacle course. He starts out so
angry over being unjustly dishonorably discharged but ends up happily joking
with the millionaires. Again, hinging Soldiers
of Fortune on this flat character was wrong. Can you still have Slater in a
military or action movie? Sure, but not as the faulty lead. Likewise, Freddy Rodriguez (Ugly Betty) is all but useless as
Craig’s best bud. You never feel his sidekick is going to amount to anything, and
their lack of chemistry adds to the lack of believability here. I mean,
Christian Slater has to whip these guys – these
guys – into shape. Are you %^&#(*^ kidding me? I don’t love him or hate
him and feel uber harsh, but Slater is outclassed in what is a direct to video
action yarn.
Damn
straight Sean Bean already knows how to fire a rifle! One expects the Game of Thrones alum to be the angry
army guy – he did that, in fact, in Age
of Heroes the year prior – but Bean looks great as a suave jet setter with
big toys and lots of babes. Dimidov has badass history, international playboy
clout, zing, and an insistence for his own room, “Helen and I will take the
dining room…” Yes, I am Bean biased. I
totally admit he was my reason for seeing Soldiers
of Fortune, and I’ve seriously enjoyed some of his recent, smaller
independent material. However, it’s more bemusing to watch him play paintball target
practice with a cigar firmly between his teeth than watch Slater try and teach
anybody to play soldier. There are some sloppy hints that Dimidov is suspicious
and greedy, but it’s another wasted opportunity to not let Sean Bean have a
full on good time with his badass image. And let’s not forget about Ving
Rhames! I’m not sure what sort of accent he was attempting, but Rhames (Pulp Fiction) is always delightfully
slick – and his Grimaud seems to know more about weaponry and tactics than
Captain Craig. Zigzag so you can’t be targeted so easily…you don’t say! This is
actually the second time in recent memory I’ve seen this simplicity not being
utilized on film, and it really makes screenwriters look like they don’t do any
basic research. Grimaud’s an armory dealer with morals on both sides, but his
gray is never fully developed, and again, only Rhames’ charisma saves the
character. I’d believe him as an angry military drill sergeant! Reverse Rhames and
Slater and Soldiers of Fortune
increases tenfold.
Need
more character class? Soldiers of Fortune
should have given James Cromwell (L.A.
Confidential) more to do as the fun and crusty cowboy Haussmann. He has his
bucket list with lots to chew on, but he doesn’t seem to be onscreen enough,
nor is Colm Meaney (Deep Space Nine).
If he’s the military nemesis to our millionaires, you should see him in more
equal screen time. His Mason is also a little too ruthless or over the top, as
if it can’t be decided whether he’s a heavy, deadly villain or a lighthearted parody.
Dominic Monaghan is his usual fun self, too – and the subtle broken leg humor
works. The jabs on who is richer or who has a bigger gun – literally – go a long way, and Soldiers
of Fortune should have used this flair instead of resorting to a convenient
mishmash. The women are nondescript, and Charles Bewley (The Twilight Saga) is far too cliché as Vanderbeer – the seemingly
wimpy banker using this excursion just to prove his street cred. If his quirks
aren’t going to be highlighted, then why bother? Despite some attempted but
obvious plot twists, I honestly didn’t notice when Vanderbeer wasn’t onscreen. How
is the audience supposed to care when the characters themselves gain or lose
their conscience or sympathies as needed? Some members of the team seem to die
or feel written out as if the writers realized those players were pointless,
and Soldiers of Fortune completely
misses the boat in utilizing the built in fun of having Bean and Monaghan together
again. What, no Lord of the Rings jokes?
Thankfully,
sarcastic flashbacks, a touch of panoramic zooms, sweeping angles, and fun
editing add smarts and help Soldiers of
Fortune wink at the absurd. Onscreen graphics, text, satellite imagery,
scope camerawork, and slow motion also add panache. Most of this is quality,
but some pieces feel unnecessary or noticeably present just for the expected
looking cool. Hip quips also feel misplaced amid what’s supposed to be tragic
resistance scenes, and their plight feels somewhat small scale compared to the
rest of the colorful action and battle scenes. The sets, locales, and outdoor
adventuring do fit the bill, and the spectacle isn’t super chaotic and in your
face – although there is a lot of gunfire, blood capsule pops, and old
fashioned fake kills. Soldiers of Fortune
is rated R, but sometimes it doesn’t feel like it should be. It’s also disappointing
that this is a bare bones, featureless DVD. The menu interface advertising the
titular and tax deductable adventure is fun, but it seems like the production
team sold Soldiers of Fortune short.
It has the people, the budget, and the action. What happened?
Miscasting
and missed opportunities prevent Soldiers
of Fortune from becoming the witty, stylized yarn it could be. The step-by-step
clichés and confusing encounters will make your head hurt at the waste. Fans of
the cast or contrived action films can have a few hours of good fun with the
absurdity here, yes, but Soldiers of
Fortune could have been much, much more.
No comments:
Post a Comment