Threenie Tuesday Review: Safe

Here's my belated review from this past Tuesday. Thanks for your patience. Because there were totally people out there, eagerly waiting to hear what I thought of Safe, right?



Now, I've got lots to say on this film, so I waste time telling you stuff that you won't find out from watching the trailer, or giving details that IMDB or Wikipedia can do better.

This review represents the latest development in a progression I've been experiencing, so it's related to other things I've been thinking about. I wish I could just give you a grade or number of starts telling you whether you should see Safe or not.

If only it were that simple...

In fairness, I should mention that I didn't see this movie alone. I went with four other people, most of whom I know from college. I tend to prefer watching movies alone, at least for the first time. I can watch LotR, Star Wars, Napoleon Dynamite, or That Thing You Do! (ooh, gotta blog about that one eventually) with friends or family. We'll talk a lot, recite dialogue as it happens, give commentary, etc. and it actually does add to the fun.

But normally, if I'm seeing a movie for the first time with other people, my personal viewing experience is significantly colored by my perception of their experience. More often than not, that coloration results in a less enjoyable experience for me. I'm interested and concerned by what they think, how our experiences might differ, and why. It adds a layer of social awkwardness to the moviegoing experience, and it's something I try to avoid.

I bring this up because, if I'm honest, it did influence my opinion. I should explain. Sometimes I have trouble deciding between two options. Do I want chicken or beef? Coke or ginger ale? Should I sleep on my left side or my right?

When I get in jams like these, I find it's helpful to ask the opinion of someone whom I love, trust, and respect. Then do exactly the opposite of what they say.

It's not that I don't think people's advice isn't valid. It's quite valid. But it's also wrong. Therefore, when I get other people's advice, I have the highly valuable knowledge of exactly what I should not do.

I want to assure you that I'm kidding. If only it were that simple...

Anyway, movie review.

As we came out of the theater, one of my friends expressed the typical opinion that Jason Statham movies are enjoyable crap. Personally, I kinda liked it, and not as a "so-bad-it's-good" movie. I thought it was pretty good. Whether I just wanted to disagree with my friend or not, I'm not sure. Let's see how well I rationalize this.

As a person who approaches entertainment critically, I had to learn over a period of time how to watch Jason Statham movies. The first one I saw was The Transporter 3. I'll be honest, I hated that movie. It was pure Eurotrash. Especially the Eurotrash girl.

As I watched more Statham films, I grew to understand that there were certain things one had to know to expect in order to enjoy them, and possibly even pick out some genuine strengths. None of them did I think were really good films. They were pretty good action films, with stories and acting ranging from bad to just okay.

The first one I saw and really liked was The Mechanic. This one takes a lot of explaining as well. I guess I should save that for another entry. Suffice it to say, though, that I grown to appreciate Statham films for what they are.

Right, so... Safe. One of the most important elements of any story is characterization, and in this case writer-director Boaz Yakin and cast actually did a pretty good job.

Statham's character, Luke Wright, seems much more human than a lot of his previous roles. Right from the beginning, the guy has less than nothing. There are some character moments of surprising depth and vulnerability in the early scenes. When he stumbles his way into the plot and makes his first kill of the movie, he tells the shocked crowd around him, "Don't lose sleep. He had it coming," then proceeds to vomit off-screen, presumably out of remorseful disgust. This is as hardened and brutal a character as Statham has ever played, but this isn't his typical gruff anti-hero or almost-villain. Wright is a man of violence, suffering, and near despair, but he is a hero in the traditional sense of the word. His investment in Mei is not based on greed, lust, or revenge, but on a value for human life, and a desire for justice, as near as he can hope to accomplish. There is one quibble I have with him though, which is that the first time we see him, he's an MMA fighter. For barely a scene. It's a rather thin excuse for a plot hook, and I can't help but think there are a hundred more plausible ways Yakin could have handled that.

Mei, played by young Catherine Chan, seems like a real (albeit somewhat precocious) child. Her portrayal is more realistic than I had expected. Early on in the story she is presented as an exceptionally intelligent and brave girl. At the same time, I appreciated the fact that she wasn't ultra-capable just because she was a genius. Geniuses are often really stupid people, and middle-school-aged kids are still kids. There is an interesting balance here: she is dangerous, yet somehow helpless.

The crime bosses, played by James Hong (known as the host from the Chinese restaurant episode of Seinfeld) and Igor Jijikine, are pretty genuinely bad guys. I'm reminded of Elastigirl's speech to Dash and Vi in the Incredibles: they do not value Mei's life any more than those of the victims of their rackets. They want what they want, and they're willing to kidnap, threaten, torture, or kill a little girl to get it. Their henchmen, Reggie Lee and Joseph Sikora, respectively, are just as ruthless, though Lee's character has a more interesting role to play as Mei's adoptive father, earning him a little more screen time than any of the other major mobsters.

There are some weaker characters here, such as Wright's crooked NYPD frenemies, or the mayor of New York, or his aide. For the level of influence they have on the plot, they're relatively flat characters. A little acting flair or some wittier dialogue writing would have added a little more complexity.

Of course, this is a Jason Statham movie, so maybe deeper character motivations and a more involved story would have clogged up our sensory input channels too much, leaving no room for all the firefights and beatdowns. The plot was exactly as complex as it needed to be to carry the action and drama.

One of the things that I noted in retrospect is that the level of violence was not particularly high, which I suppose works well with the "good guy" version of the Statham action hero. The fight scenes weren't the most memorable I've seen. Perhaps it's due to going from the large-scale destruction in The Avengers, or the squicky brutality of last year's Drive, but Safe didn't really stand out to me. Action movies are sort of an all-or-nothing, go-big-or-go-home proposition. If you don't have a massive wad of money to dump into your action scenes, you'd better do something extra clever.

That said, Safe is overall a step up from Statham's usual schtick. There's extra tension, drama, and even heart in this film. Oddly enough, the most tender-hearted character in the whole movie is actually Luke Wright. It seems that Statham has some hidden depth as an actor. I won't pretend that Safe was a really good movie, but it's good enough to give some hope to Hollywood after last year's rather depressing lack of anything good to watch.

Out of 10, I give this a 7.8. See it if you want, if you don't, don't. Keep an open mind if you do. It might surprise you.