INDEPENDENCE DAY
A film review by Alex Brenner
Copyright 1996 Alex Brenner
Dir: Roland Emmerich Will Smith Bill Pullman Jeff Goldblum Harvey Fierstein Harry Connick Jr.
At the risk of labouring an already overstressed point, I felt that it would be worth adding my tu'penny ha'penny worth to the debate surrounding this vastly popular film. It seems to be the case now that every year the moviegoing public selects one or two films and makes them massively successful, and they are, largely without exception poor, if not downright dire. Last year we had the tedious, contrived 'Batman Forever,' the year before that the characteristically vapid 'Lion King' and the pernicious and subversive 'Forrest Gump,' and then before that, 'Jurassic Park.' It is saying something about a given group of films when dramatically the most successful of their number is that saccharine and manipulative dinosaur epic. And, unsurprisingly, given that it was moulded by the same hands which gave us the terrible 'Stargate,' 'Independence Day' is not going to change any of that. Before I launch into my list of objections, firstly let me state that this is not a bad film in the class of 'Benji: The Hunted' or 'Spy Hard.' It possesses certain moments which a viewer can enjoy, and as a whole it is not what one might categorise as offensively bad. However, much has been made of the many ludicrous moments in the script which betray the creator's uninterest in really suspending disbelief. My personal favourites include the bizarre idea that one could upload a virus into an alien computer, the outrageous fluke of the First Lady a)surviving and b)being found, and the notion that the fire that consumed a whole city might somehow become channelled into a tunnel, which might vaguely be considered reasonable if it were not for the clear portrayal of someone surviving by hiding in a little side door. Preposterous: whoever allowed these into the final script needs to have his powers of discrimination substantially upgraded. Still, one might be prepared to forgive this of the film. After all, amidst a hostile invasion by belligerent super-aliens, one might need a little light relief. The film does not let the critic off so lightly, however: there are deeper problems with the film than that. 'Independence Day' is extremely derivative. Every five minutes I found myself being reminded of other films, usually bad ones: 'Apollo 13,' 'Star Trek 6/Generations,' and, God forbid, 'Stargate.' Upon consideration, it seems that Emmerich is seeking to broaden the appeal of the film by nodding at certain genre conventions. Unfortunately, these nods inevitably lack conviction, and thus the film assumes a patchy 'jack-of-all-trades and master of none' aspect. An example: as the film nears its climax, Jeff Goldblum's character suddenly becomes very concerned about the environment. This is a difficult subject to handle without coming across as glib or manipulative, but here it is such a momentary consideration that it really opens a window on the director's technique. Imagine: 'Gee, the punters like environmental issues ... how can we squeeze it in? Ah-ha ... ' (n.b. this goes some way also towards illustrating the difference between a film like this and 'Mission: Impossible.' For all the latter's faults, it is undoubtedly the work of a man who knows his trade, whereas 'Independence Day' is in the main never more than workmanlike; where 'Independence Day' is derivative, 'Mission: Impossible' is allusive). Another example might be found in the use of homosexuality. Not only does fighter jock Will Smith have a boyfriend, which seems at odds with Airforce regulations, but Harvey Fierstein is also allowed to be his rampant, camp self. Again, one gets the sense that, rather than there being any honesty on Emmerich's part, he instead is winking conspiratorially at Tarantino fans and those who feel that there should be a more full representation of homosexuality on film - without actually sympathising with their causes. It all appears to be terribly cynical to me. These are still gripes, momentary complaints rather than criticisms about the work as a whole. These are yet to come: there is little question that the film is generally jaundiced. With the exception of the effects sequences, moer of which later, the film is subject to a terrible defocussing of dramatic intensity. Where the film should grip, it bores. There are several possible reasons for this. Firstly, Emmerich makes great play of giving his characters lengthy introductions, showing us their private and public personae, giving us a little slice of their lives, and so on. Despite this, the protagonists are still merely caricatures: the cocky fighter jock, the wholesome president, the eccentric Jeff Goldblum intellectual from 'The Fly' and 'Jurassic Park.' Thus the audience instinctively becomes disinvolved in their condition; there is no desire to empathise and thus to become infused with the tensions and emotions of the characters. We simply observe their actions, always very aware that we are watching a film. Secondly, the film has little sense of pace: it ambles along, quite content to deliver an effects shot every so often, while the rest of the time is spent delivering shallow moralistic melodrama. The real problem that denies the film any power or impact is that is simply not awe-inspiring enough. Any film which takes something unusual or remarkable as its centrepiece should retain a sense of wonder from start to finish. Even those films whose central themes are invested elsewhere should probably aim to found their drama on a viewer's enthrallment with event and setting as something significant. Take 'Twelve Monkeys,' a film whose ending is set in a very mundane location, and yet that setting is invested with so much before it, and is so removed from the ordinary by events that have previously occurred, that the viewer is absorbed into the whole situation. Film is inevitably concerned with an aesthetic projection of something a little strange (unless one is going to see one's own biopic), and so it is a shame to render the whole process profane, as in 'Independence Day.' As a final illustration, compare 'Independence Day' with 'Star Wars.' Whereas the latter performed the same feat as the former (only with vastly greater force) by having a very spectacular spaceship opening, it retains that sense of the spectacular until its climax, weaving an epic tale with wonder upon wonder, until by the end the audience is left positively overflowing with received sensation. 'Independence Day,' on the other hand, makes its wonders seem very ordinary, until by the end, one is simply accepting the inwards of the mother ship, or some fantastic battle scene, as par-for-the-course. Given that these are really the film's only selling point, it seems inevitable that the film will become resigned to mediocrity, as it possesses no sense of diminuendo or crescendo, merely jolting from a loud bit to a quiet bit, thus losing any kind of dramatic contrast. Unfortunately, the film to which it must be compared is 'Star Wars,' which reveals 'Independence Day's' epic pretensions as stillborn. Another point which seems incongruous: why are the protagonists of Independence Day not more awed themselves? It makes sense to merely accept intergalactic war when it is part of one's life, as in, you guessed it, 'Star Wars,' but when one is faced with something so profoundly alien, the human psyche would be much more given to trauma than is portrayed in 'Independence Day.' Exploration of such could have enormous dramatic potential: a good delineation of the terror and fear, paranoia and horror that a hostile alien attack would engender could have made the film much more successful, but instead the characters merely bumble through, taking the whole thing very much in their stride, Will Smith at one point cheerfully bopping an alien on the nose. Well, damnit, if the characters aren't gripped by proceedings, then why the hell should I be? Unfortunately, the nature of the film and its publicity only exacerbates these problems. Having been stunned by the trailer, one sits through the movie, undistracted by anything else, waiting for the next effect shot. That is no way to watch a film, but the whole 'Independence Day' phenomenon, film included, leaves one with little choice. Now, having severely criticised the film, there are a few good points, as I said earlier. Pullman, Smith and Goldblum make sympathetic, watchable leads, and the special effects are, of course, stunning, unusually so, even in this day and age. This largely not because of any particular technical brilliance, though that is present, but instead because of their amazing visual flair. Some of the sequences do stand comparison to 'Return of the Jedi' or 'The Abyss' (the special edition, not the vastly inferior original release). The jet strike scenes' thrill comes from a real sense of motion, and there are some scenes in which a ship hovers above ground, while an unholy battle takes place in its shadow, which are stunning, providing the film's only true moments of real emotion, sending a genuine awed shiver down the spine. What a pity, then, that the special effects director's sense of visual style is so much better than Emmerich's: the contrast between these battle scenes and the rest of the film is sometimes really pretty shocking. And, you'll already have seen most of these scenes in the trailer. As a final point of denigration, the score is truly terrible. Where it should be unnoticable, it is intrusive, where it should be ominous or emotive, it lapses into fanfare. The film has enough problems without some of its only good moments being spoiled by some marching brass band. So, like 'Jurassic Park,' it has Jeff Goldblum as that eccentric intellectual, an awful score, it is dramatically pathetic, and it has enough in it to make a fantastic trailer. 'Jurassic Park,' at least, was great cinema, if weak anything else. 'Independence Day,' then, comes across as something of a poor man's 'Jurassic Park:' an impressive feat of mediocrity.
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