Review: 'Olympus Has Fallen' is silly and shamelessly jingoistic fun

Should we be comfortable with this sort of cartoon villainization?

HitFix
C
Readers
B+
<p>Gerard Butler is in prime 'Die Hard' mode in the exceptionally silly 'Olympus Has Fallen'</p>

Gerard Butler is in prime 'Die Hard' mode in the exceptionally silly 'Olympus Has Fallen'

Credit: Millennium Films

Are you a fan of Motion Captured?

Sign up to get the latest updates instantly.

At least someone still knows how to make "Die Hard" movies.

There is very little about "Olympus Has Fallen" that I would consider fresh or surprising, but Antoine Fuqua does a nice job of creating a certain degree of tension that he manages to sustain for most of the film's running time, and as an action movie, it is satisfying. I am startled by a few major technical issues with the film, but for the most part, I enjoyed it as I watched.

On the other hand, if I take a step back and view it through any sort of political filter, it's kind of horrifying. And considering where we are right now in our relationship with North Korea, the film feels ill-timed at best, downright inflammatory at worst. Last year's terrible "Red Dawn" remake was too chuckleheaded to be taken seriously by anyone. "Olympus" follows a pretty familiar shape, and the extended opening sequence serves to set up Mike Banning (Gerard Butler), a Secret Service agent who is basically a surrogate member of the First Family. When we meet him, he's in the boxing ring, sparring with President Benjamin Asher (Aaron Eckhart), who is wrapping up a family trip to Camp David so he can head out to a major fundraising event, his wife Margaret (Ashley Judd) and his son Connor (Finley Jacobsen) in tow. On the icy road as they head into town, there is a terrible car accident, and Banning makes a choice that ends with him being transferred permanently off the President's detail.

As a result, when the White House is attacked by a well-organized and staggeringly well-informed North Korean terrorist cell, Banning isn't there, and almost everyone working in the White House ends up dead. Banning is close enough that he sees what's going down, and he heads right into the middle of things, drawn by duty and a need to redeem himself. The main terrorist, Kang (Rick Yune), has anticipated every possibility except for Banning, and once Banning gets inside, he proves himself to be the very best as what he does.

Yep. You've seen it before, and you'll see it again later this year when "White House Down" is released, with Channing Tatum and Jamie Foxx in the leads. The script by Creighton Rothenberger & Katrin Benedikt is very direct, wasting no time in either set-up or pay-off. The film's basic understanding of the workings of government and the military is very goofy and silly, but the cast plays it dead straight, which is the only way to make this really work. Butler ultimately has to carry this thing, and I suspect this will do exactly as much to make him a movie star as his last 40 films have done. I remember when I was speaking to Lauren Shuler-Donner about Butler while they were in production on "Timeline," and she was the first person to tell me that it was just a matter of time before he would become one of the biggest movie stars alive. I heard the same thing repeatedly in the build-up to "The Phantom Of The Opera," and once "300" opened to a surprisingly robust first weekend at the box-office, it felt like he finally had his shot.

Nothing's really blown him up any bigger than that, though, and at this point, he seems to have settled into his role as the Rom Com dude you hire when Hugh Jackman's not available, and in an action film, he's the guy you get when the A-list is busy. He is perfectly fine in the lead here, but to me, this is a perfect example of why he isn't a "true" movie star. Butler must be charming in person, and he certainly has a few moments here and there in the film where he nails a beat or where he manages to sell the action in some way. But there's almost nothing he does that I would call special or truly memorable. It's a performance I feel like a lot of people could have given, and with a movie star, we are drawn to them precisely because we can't imagine anyone else doing what we see them do.

I would love to know the full story behind the film's almost shocking terrible special effects. There are moments that look fine, but there are way more moments where it looks like not only are the effects not good, they're not finished. I counted at least ten shots in the film where it looks like we're seeing a rough image that hasn't even been color timed properly, much less rendered completely. I can't imagine the shots look the way director Antoine Fuqua wanted them to look, so why would they end up in the final release print of the film? Were they just locked into this date out of fear that the larger-budget "White House Down" might steal their thunder?

When you've got a cast that includes Aaron Eckhart, Dylan McDermott, Morgan Freeman, Angela Basset, Melissa Leo, and Radha Mitchell all in one film and I can't name anything particularly good that any of them do, then that is obviously a problem. The few attempts at character development are transparent exposition, and really don't help move the film forward at all. Fuqua's at his best here when he's staging the big set pieces, but even then, I'm surprised how non-stop and brutal some of the violence is. If you're making a film like this, I'd rather see it be more of a cartoon. The real-world tensions that are being used to motivate the action in the film are important enough that I feel like trying to make this feel "real" is a bad idea in general right now.

I enjoyed the fact that this plays a pretty skillful riff on the "Die Hard" model, and yet I don't feel good about it. Fuqua definitely knows his way around an action film, but I wish he'd figured out how to tell a good story at the same time.

"Olympus Has Fallen" opens everywhere today.

Drew-mcweeny-sm
Drew McWeeny
Film Editor
A respected critic and commentator for fifteen years, Drew McWeeny helped create the online film community as "Moriarty" at Ain't It Cool News, and now proudly leads two budding Film Nerds in their ongoing movie education.

Comments

  • Option 1

    Comment instantly as a guest Guest
  • Option 2

    Connect
  • Option 3

    Login or create a HitFix account Login Signup
  • Default-avatar

    Randy of AFTimes

    I don't know about jingoistic.
    I'd say "violently patriotic".

    I'm glad that I wasn't he only one that had problems with the CG FX.

    But, honestly, this film works a great deal because it helps get the bad taste of A GOOD DAY TO DIE HARD!

    I have little hope for WHITE HOUSE DOWN to be any better.

    March 22, 2013 at 4:49AM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    Ben

    There are two reasons that North Koreans are the bad guys in this film, from what I've read (I plan to see this one in the next week or so). One is simple business: American films don't play in the DPRK, there's no real audience for a broad consumer product in a Stalinist dictatorship, and it wouldn't be a major market even if Kim Jong Un opened his country's cinemas to American productions. That was the reason that the "Red Dawn" awful idea of a reboot was retro-fitted to North Korean baddies instead of the original Chinese ones, because of what a huge market China is and how Beijing uses that leverage to keep almost all films that contain any material remote unflattering towards China out of the country (I have no earthly idea how SKYFALL got cleared for release there, as it has some pretty tough views on China, I guess they didn't want to miss a billion-dollar 007 juggernaut).
    The other is based on something director Antoine Fuqua said about not wanting to tap the well of Middle Eastern villains and to try something different. Fuqua also noted that one thing that made North Korean villains interesting is that the DPRK is so closed off that it's hard to know anything concrete about them.

    March 22, 2013 at 9:45AM EST Reply to Comment
    • Default-avatar

      Mark Sometimes China demands edits to a film which the studio gladly complies with. So the offending stuff about China was probably removed from Skyfall.

      March 22, 2013 at 12:08PM EST
  • Default-avatar

    Prettok

    Horrifying?! What kind of effect do you think Hollywood movies have?

    In the 1960s Hollywood made lots of mushy-liberal flicks that softened the portrayal of the Soviets (the russians are coming, the man from uncle, etc). Even the Bond films replaced the USSR with SPECTRE to softpedal any politcs. Meanwhile in the real world, the cold war intensified.

    In the 1980s however, Hollywood showed absolutely no reservations in making the Russians the bad guys. (original Red Dawn, Rambo, Top Gun, Firefox, even the 80s Bond films). And suddenly the Berlin Wall came down and the cold war ended.

    Pyongyang has some movie buffs. Films like this might be the only way to knock some sense into them about how the rest of the world sees them.

    March 22, 2013 at 10:49AM EST Reply to Comment
    • Freakazoid_talkback_profile

      mmcb105 Right, because this movie will screen in Pyongyang.

      March 22, 2013 at 12:31PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      prettok Not to the general public, but those weren't the movie buffs I was referring to.

      March 22, 2013 at 4:40PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      dustinwhiser Perfect example of the "correlation equals causation" fallacy.

      March 22, 2013 at 4:59PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      CinemaPsycho Dictators don't CARE how the rest of the world sees them. Nor do they care about how they are portrayed in Hollywood action movies. If you really think 80's movies brought down the Berlin Wall, you need the kind of therapy that you're probably too arrogant to ever seek.

      March 23, 2013 at 3:00AM EST
  • Batboy_talkback_profile

    Rev. Slappy

    I read somewhere that the dodgy effects were done by a Bulgarian company. Ironic that a jingoistic movie outsourced work to a foreign effects company.

    March 22, 2013 at 12:36PM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    synnerman

    Yeah, you're right, we should worried about vilifying a country that has threatened to nukes us... as they continue to develop nuclear weapons.

    March 22, 2013 at 9:24PM EST Reply to Comment
    • Default-avatar

      jay kim USA has a world largest nuke bombs if you wanna know the truth!

      March 23, 2013 at 5:56PM EST
  • Default-avatar

    Brian S

    As a white man, I am getting tired of all the countless movies that portray white people as villains, and... okay, I was being sarcastic. But seriously, if hundreds of movies can be made with white people being portrayed as sadistic psychos, with little to no complaints from the white population, then I think the North Koreans, or Chinese, or whomever, can weather the storm of a few films of varying quality to cast them as antagonists. Let's all try and keep the sensitivity levels turned down.

    March 24, 2013 at 10:16AM EST Reply to Comment

Get Instant Alerts on Motion/Captured

Around the Web