| Index |
285 reviews in total |
*
*
*
Anything But Basic...
"Basic" takes a lot of plot twists through the steamy jungles of Panama. They are often impossible to follow. No, literally. Impossible. As in they literally do not piece together. You can try to analyze them, but when you do, you find out there is nothing really to be analyzed. But the film, by confusing and tricking the audience, makes it appear as if something is there, which is almost as good as if something really is there. Therefore, the movie, though frustratingly difficult to follow at times, is entertaining. Confused yet? Yeah, that's what the movie will make you feel like.
The film opens up in a rain-drenched Panama jungle at night on an Army training mission headed by Sergeant West (Samuel L. Jackson). Most of the film--ALL of the film, for that matter--takes place at night, during a rainy hurricane, and adds to the nonexistant plot. What is so intriguing is that the plot isn't really there, but the writer tries to manifest one, and we feel as if we are staring at some nonexistant, material wad of words and flashbacks and images thrown together in a blender, the writer hoping for it to come out smelling of roses. But I already went over that, didn't I?
Flash forward to the next day. An Army chopper picks up two men from the training mission, one injured and one very much alive. The injured man, Kendall (Giovanni Ribisi), is sent to a hospital, and the alive man, Dunbar (Brian Van Holt) is sent in for questioning by the very sexy and very Southern Osborne (Connie Nielsen). Dunbar refuses to speak to anyone except a Ranger. So in comes Ranger Tom Hardy (John Travolta) to piece together the events surrounding the death of Sgt. West and his team.
The writer of "Basic," James Vanderbilt, has so many twists and turns that the film is impossible to keep up with. I like movies like these, where you see different characters telling their version of one event, but the mistake Vanderbilt makes is that he overuses the plot flashbacks in the middle of other events. It becomes hard to seperate present from past and what's real from what's not. So many revelations happen that I feel like I'm in the middle of the writer's mind, as he comes up with new ideas and tries to squeeze them in time after time after time. There is a limit to how many times you can use "surprise" revelation endings. Vanderbilt uses three of four in a row, piled on top of each other, time after time after time. Just as we think the plot twists are done, and we start to smile because we think we might finally understand the basis of the plot, something else happens, and we zoom in suspensefully on John Travolta's face as he, along with the audience, realizes something. Which leads me to something else.
The end of the film leaves more open than concluded. So many plot holes are never ironed out. With the ending being the way it is, you can look back at certain events and think, "Why did that surprise (so-and-so)," and "Why did that event happen as it pays no relevancy to the plot?" The answer to all this? Simple: It's called audience manipulation, and James Vanderbilt uses it a lot. He throws the audience a bone to keep them happy, continues with something else, throws another bone, and when it's all done and over, we're choking on all these bones and he doesn't realize it. Interesting how he said he named his character Tom Hardy after the Hardy Boys. If I recall, the Hardy Boy novels, which I was an avid reader of at one time, usually revealed a lot at the end. "Basic" tries to, but does not.
The film has an excellent director at its helm, John McTiernan. A man who chooses his projects carefully and wisely and, unfortunately, sometimes horribly ("Rollerball" was exceptionally bad). But "Die Hard" and "Predator" are two of my all-time favorite action films, "Predator" being my all-time favorite "alien" movie. Who wants McTiernan to return to his roots and film a "Predator 3"? It would be good, but don't count on it. Like I said, he chooses wisely, and if I assume correctly, he's the kind of director who doesn't like to return to old projects.
"Basic" confused me, but after the film was over and my mind was in a knot trying to figure out all the different plot twists, I realized how much fun I had being duped by this film. I laughed to myself as I came to realize that this movie has a paper-thin plot, and the filmmakers all tricked us by taking so many twists and turns and throwing so many confusion bones at the audience and making us believe that the underlying plot of the film was something deep. I really enjoyed this movie, even if I still don't really understand it fully. Then again, I don't think you're really supposed to.3.5/5 stars -
*
Man, I can't believe I almost overlooked this because the major film critics panned it. Basic is seriously good and the kind of mystery/suspense story I don't see anywhere near enough of. I enjoyed every minute of this movie. I couldn't figure it out and was surprised at the end. For me, it doesn't get much better in the entertainment department than a movie like Basic. John Travolta does what John Travolta does best, playing a wise guy better than anyone, and Connie Nielsen delivers a great little performance and she's hot to boot. This movie has an amazing number of plot twists and the pacing is quick so try to keep up with it. I loved it!
*
Author: bob the moo from United Kingdom
15 February 2004
Infamously cruel Sergeant West takes his unit into the Panama jungle on a training exercise. Two days later two of his men return and report the rest dead. When the base investigator makes no process, the base commander calls in shamed DEA agent Hardy. The investigation continues well with both of the two men telling their stories, however Hardy finds that the stories contradict themselves and that the truth is much, much more complex than first appeared.
For the majority of this film everything goes the way you expect it to, but yet it all still works reasonably well. The plot twists in several ways as each contradiction brings out a bit more truth in the overall tale. It is filled with dramatic interrogation scenes which, although clichéd, do still serve to be reasonably gripping. However at some point, and I can't say exactly when it happens, the sheer volume of twists and the leaps we are expected to make simply become too much for the quality of the material and it more or less collapses in on itself.It isn't that the twists are too much of a stretch, it's that they are too much of a stretch for this film. Usual Suspects has massive twists that bewilder and require big jumps, but that had the acting and script to back it up.
Here the same isn't true, the script doesn't do a good enough job of gradually revealing a story to us just to twist it; instead it just seems to be constantly changing the foundations to the point that I felt I was on quick sand rather than a base where the walls kept moving (if you get my meaning). What I'm saying is that the story didn't set itself up well enough to provide killer twists, instead it was constantly pulling small then bigger twist after twist - to the point where I was expecting the next one before it arrived. Not to unfairly compare, but Usual Suspects gradually added layers rather than twists as it builds to a climax. Basic just keeps twisting but eventually gets to the point where it overstretches itself and the twists lose their impact.
The dramatic tone suffers for this reason and, after a good start it all too quickly loses it's impact. Travolta tries hard and for the most part he does OK, but his slick character loses it towards the end, and his final `winks' are not easy to understand. I got the feeling that he didn't understand his character anymore that I did. Jackson gives a better performance in flashback although his character is pretty much a basic sergeant-major cliché, until the ending goes and ruins a fair amount of what he had done up till that point. Nielsen is pretty good but gives a masculine performance in a masculine film. The support cast is actually pretty good although Ribisi damaged his reputation with me by doing some sort of weak effeminate spoof character.
Diggs, Holt, Daly and Sanchez all do pretty well and their solid flashback sequences help the interrogation to be more dramatic.Overall this film is too twisty and some of them really demand jumps that are just not made possible by a script that doesn't do enough to help the audience out. It still manages to be pretty dramatic and enjoyable for at least the first half, but the final third demands too much and twists too much for the material to cope with. Not as awful as other reviews lead me to expect but it collapses alarmingly fast towards the end.
*
Author: Daniel Feit from New York
2 September 2003
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
Despite all the horrible reviews written of "Basic," I decided to give it a chance as a rental because director John McTiernan has made several of my favorite movies. Admittedly, I haven't seen a good one of his since "Thomas Crown Affair" (a remake), but I hoped "Basic" would work on some enjoyable level.
It starts off quite well. John Travolta and Connie Nielsen are investigating a murderous incident at an Army base, and both of their witnesses are untrustworthy. Their stories go back and forth, eventually painting a picture of what "really" happened. It's all been done before, I suppose, but it's fun to watch.
Unfortunately, the movie derails late in the picture. After what seems like a perfectly good ending (I won't elaborate, but you'll see), the movie just keeps going. All of a sudden what "really" happened was fake, here's what "really" happened, or did it? The conclusion of the film is an absurd reversal of (nearly) every premise of the film. I half expected one of the characters to reveal themselves to be an alien or a vampire or some other Tales From the Crypt/Twilight Zone nonsense ending.
Much like "The Recruit," the script doesn't know when to quit with all the reversing. Thanks to the masterpiece film, "The Usual Suspects," now every dopey mystery has to have "the big surprise." And you can do that once, maybe twice in a story. But you can't press that "reset button" five or six times! If I spend 90 minutes watching a film, I've got to know that at least part of that story "really happened." You can't wash it all away with "that guy was lying." No wonder Entertainment Weekly titled their review "Trashomon."
P.S. If you watch the film on DVD, there is a really funny extra segment with the screenwriter. Besides reading his own writing on camera, he explains with incredible arrogance how original his story and characters were. So pompous it's hilarious!
*
Author: icemanrr from Lisbon, Portugal
20 May 2005
now a days, you see a movie and in the middle of it, you already know the ending, so it's really refreshing to see that 'basic' defies that! i was really having a blast, was loving it, and when the end came i was blown away, but for only one second, because then the brain kicked in, and realize that the plot was wrong, didn't made sense! there were so many twists (and i love that in a movie) that even the editors got confused, if that ending was meant to be, than there were things that happened earlier on, that don't make sense, that are just wrong.
despite all that i liked the movie, i enjoyed't when i was watching and even more when i came out of the theater room and debated with my friends, trying to make sense on why some scenes happened, i bought the DVD only to get to the sad conclusion that i was right and there's something wrong with the story. if only the story would have matched, it would be, one of my favorite action movies!
*
Author: chet19 from l.a.
28 July 2003
I'm still shaking my heads hours after seeing this lousy movie. First of all, the acting was great. End of compliments. It's one of those movies where something mysterious happens. By way of flashback, we see one soldier's version of the story, and then another soldier's. But then Soldier #1 changes his story to defend himself against what #2 had said. The writer/director at this point hope to get you to go, "Hmmmm, now THIS is getting interesting.
I wonder what REALLY happened out there?" At this point, you really do wonder. But then both soldiers change their stories, they implicate a doctor who tells (then changes) HIS story. They implicate a colonel who tells(then changes) his story. Then both soldiers, for the 42nd time, change their stories. By this point, you'll be like "Who the hell cares what happens." You'll no longer wonder...you just won't care. It's a good thing that you don't care what happens, because the ending makes no sense whatsoever.
*
Author: x111b3825 from Nowhereman, Norseland
22 February 2004
There's a whole lot of deep analysis going on here, but in the end, since so many others have analyzed this to death, I would recommend just watching it with an open mind and seeing if you find it entertaining.I thought it original to a point, well acted out, and while predictable on a couple points, for the most part, leaving me wondering when we would find out the absolute truth of what the heck was going on...Maybe later I will put something more in depth here, but for now, beware of the critics and their "plot holes," because in the end, aside from a couple very small glitches, this was pretty well done.
*
Author: mjw2305 from England
23 December 2006
Basic engages your attention pretty early on and keeps you guessing throughout with the twists and turns in the storyline and its refreshingly unexpected ending.As you would expect Travolta and Jackson are both superb, as is Connie Neilson. The characters build well, the writing is very solid, and the story is quite original.All in all 'Basic' is a good thriller that is a little complex and confusing for the casual movie fan.
Definitely worth watching, but not a classic 7/10
*
Tagged by many critics as overly predictable despite trying to be the complete opposite, BASIC is nevertheless a strong, original and entertaining film.
The cast, from big names John Travolta and Samuel L. Jackson to lesser-knowns Connie Nielsen and Taye Diggs, ably unravels the mystery surrounding the disappearance of a reviled army sergeant during a hardcore training outing. The episode is recounted in as many ways by as many witnesses, an interesting method that has worked so well in other films such as COURAGE UNDER FIRE. It may all seem confusing at first, but gifted director John McTiernan gradually weaves everything together, though perhaps not as seamlessly as one would ideally prefer.
BASIC is not without its flaws, but they are not as glaring as one might think from professional reviews, or even many of the comments on this website. Its originality is welcome at a time when so many films follow the same cookie-cutter formula.
*
Even though I had some doubts about this movie before watching it, I definitely wanted to give it a try. There were several reasons for that. One of those reasons is because Samuel L. Jackson plays an important role in it. That man on his own is already reason enough to watch a movie, but I also knew that it was directed by John McTiernan, who also made "The Hunt for Red October", "The 13th Warrior" and "Die Hard: With a Vengeance". Three movies that I've seen and liked very much. The only one that didn't really do it for me was "The Thomas Crown Affair", but with an average of three out of four, I could only hope for the best with this movie.
"Basic" starts with showing us how army sergeant West takes six of his special troops on a training mission into the Colombian rain forest, from which only two return alive. When the rescue mission arrives, they see one soldier killing another and carrying a wounded comrade. As soon as they are back on the base, the interrogation of Dunbar - one of the two survivors - starts. But he refuses to talk to anyone else than another Ranger who he doesn't know yet. That's where former Ranger and current DEA agent Hardy comes in. He is able to get a confession out of Dunbar, but as he digs deeper, he only finds more and more prove of contradictions and illegal practices...
This is one of those movies that you have to watch when you can keep your mind to it from the beginning until the end. If you think that you'll need to take a break in between, you better don't even start watching it because the entire story is so confusing and so many plot twists make it almost impossible to watch it, unless you can keep focused. But don't think that this means that this movie isn't any good. It's especially thanks to the many twists that I kept watching, because the interrogation scenes and the 'action scenes' on the base didn't always do it for me.
What I also liked about this movie was Samuel L. Jackson's performance. He was really nice as the tough sergeant West. You could see that the man enjoyed playing this role. John Travolta wasn't bad either, but I've already seen him play better roles.Overall this isn't a bad movie. Thanks to the mysterious story and the many twists it is hard to keep track, but when you are able to do so, you'll have fun watching it. Still, not everything about this movie was that strong and that's why I give this movie a 6.5/10. It isn't the best movie in the genre, but could have been a lot worse than this.
