PATRIOT GAMES
A film review by Richard John Rauser
Copyright 1992 by WNI and R. J. Rauser
Some films seem to fall into the hard-to-define category because they have no idea what they want to be, or, even worse, they want to be something they aren't. PATRIOT GAMES is a shining example of this dilemma: it is a techno-movie that wants to be an exciting action flick, but fails miserably. It fails for two main reasons: (1) Jack Ryan, the character and (2) the problem of action vs. analysis.
To start with Jack Ryan, let's be brutally honest. This character is boring. He is uninspired. He is bland. He is dull as dishwater. He is an analyst. Yes, a CIA analyst, but don't let the "CIA" part fool you, folks. An analyst is an analyst whether they work for the CIA or the Postal Service. The result is that Jack Ryan is comfortable behind a desk, clutching a pen, not crouching behind a desk, aiming a gun. The boring-as-hell Jack Ryan was a great character in The Hunt for Red October, because that film was not an action film, nor did it pretend to be. It demanded an analyst and Jack was a good one. PATRIOT GAMES, by contrast, will not work as anything *but* an action film. Unfortunately, Jack Ryan is as far from an action hero as can be imagined. Yes, he does hold a gun a couple of times in the movie. It looks almost laughable. The bulk of his time he spends behind a desk or in a gloomy computer room, wearing a drab suit.
Here's the problem: even though this is a realistic portrayal of CIA analysis, and even though Jack Ryan is a good character for what he does, there is nothing exciting about watching Harrison Ford analyse satellite photographs. This film is, in a word, bland. It isn't exactly boring, but it continually kept building up for a large climax, but then refused to give us a climax. To use a sexual metaphor, the film suffers from premature ejaculation.
There are terrorists, and they have guns, and yes, they even shoot them (a couple of times). But I wanted to see Jack Ryan fight the terrorists with his own gun, shooting, ducking, running, jumping, and saving his wife and child, as the previews for this film have so deceptively implied.
What I got was Jack Ryan fighting the terrorists in his own, boring way: as an analyst. Sure, it's realistic, and yes, it's true to the book (which I have read). But it is also one other thing: uninteresting.
This brings me to my second point about PATRIOT GAMES' failure as a movie: the problem of action versus analysis. If you are like me, you went (or will go) to PATRIOT GAMES expecting action. Not brainless, laughable, cartoon-style action like in Lethal Weapon 3, but intelligent, solid, well portrayed action a la Die Hard or The Living Daylights. But this is simply not the case. PATRIOT GAMES is *not* an action movie. It is as simple as that. There are a few action scenes scattered throughout the film, but they are over almost as soon as they have done (as I said before, premature ejaculation).And what little action we see isn't very exciting or nerve-wracking. We never get time to experience these emotions.
So PATRIOT GAMES fails in terms of action, for the simple reason that there is very little of it and what little we do see is over far too quickly. So how about analysis? Oh, we get plenty of that. A typical scene from PATRIOT GAMES is Harrison behind a desk, brooding over photographs... Harrison looking into a hospital room, brooding... Harrison at home, brooding... then cut to the IRA headquarters and see the main villain also brooding....
That is the main reason PATRIOT GAMES fails. The type of movie it sets itself out to be demands action to make it work. And anyone who has seen a PATRIOT GAMES preview will agree that the marketing people tried (and succeeded greatly) to make this film appear to be a fast-paced techno-action thriller. Sorry. It's a slow-paced techno...film.
Any movie in which the IRA targets a CIA analyst for revenge HAS to be action filled to work. This movie has very little action, and what action it does have is handled all wrong. And, to make things even more hopeless, the main character is an antithesis of action.
The Hunt for Red October was also a techno-analysis film, but it is a fantastic film because it doesn't *want* to be an action film, and doesn't *try* to be. PATRIOT GAMES wants and tries to be an action flick, but doesn't even come close.
Perhaps it's my fault. After all, I went to the theater expecting to see Harrison Ford in his own Die Hard. Nope. What I saw was Harrison Ford in his own, dull version of The Hunt for Red October...a boring version of a great, entertaining movie.
On a scale of one to ten, I have decided that PATRIOT GAMES deserves 6 1/2. Some elements of the plot are mildly interesting, and the acting is quite good. But I'm sorry, this film just doesn't succeed. You can have a great techno-analysis film, or a great action film, but not both. PATRIOT GAMES is certainly not action, and I doubt if techno fans will think it's even a great techno-film.
On the other hand, PATRIOT GAMES is a fairly close adaptation of the book, so if you enjoy being bored by Tom Clancy's overly-long, bloated novels, then PATRIOT GAMES will probably suit you fine.
Otherwise, avoid.
-- Richard J. Rauser rauser@sfu.ca WNI
.
The review above was posted to the
rec.arts.movies.reviews newsgroup (de.rec.film.kritiken for German reviews).
The Internet Movie Database accepts no responsibility for the contents of the
review and has no editorial control. Unless stated otherwise, the copyright
belongs to the author.
Please direct comments/criticisms of the review to relevant newsgroups.
Broken URLs inthe reviews are the responsibility of the author.
The formatting of the review is likely to differ from the original due
to ASCII to HTML conversion.
Related links: index of all rec.arts.movies.reviews reviews