You know your movie's in trouble when just its simple name isn't enticing you enough to grace your time with it. That's exactly what happened with me and the Netflix action spy flick, "Back in Action", with Cameron Diaz and Jamie Foxx. Right out of the get-go, I have a horrible feeling that I'll be lucky if this review manages to get a single view on this site. This has nothing to do with my writing skills, as I don't think it'd even matter. It has everything to do with the fact that no one in their right mind will even remember this film even exists.
Anyone who remembers "Back in Action" before, during, and/or after having seen it will be deemed the ultimate trivia expert in my book. Want proof, you say? And how. Tell me if you've heard this plot before. Two CIA agents (Diaz, Foxx) are in love with each other and, after a mission goes wrong, resort to hiding and starting a new life. 15 years pass, or so they say as no one ages in between that time, and the cover is blown. Their kids are caught in the crossfire and they all go on the run to clear their names and restore a once peaceful lifestyle.
I'll go on record of saying I didn't detect a single ounce of originality whatsoever with this title. This distinction applies to more than the stale concept. How many times in any action film you can think up have we seen a character yell "Go! Go! Go!" in the middle of a chase? This happened at least three times here, and I won't be surprised in the least to learn if there was more, for the script is that awful. It's painfully contrived on every level, following stereotypical characters with obviously unconvincing emotional arcs.
The kids are either overly snarky/moody or stuck behind a phone/tablet. Yeah, you really want to root for brats like these. They come a dime a dozen, and overpriced at that. The dialogue is cringey and irritatingly artificial. The way Diaz and Foxx talk here, you wouldn't be sold that their characters are secret agents. A surprise villain unveils themselves past the film's midpoint and it wasn't even remotely exciting in the least. Overused contrivances and cliches abound, all of which have been used better in many other films within the crowded spy genre.
The only aspect just as unimaginative as the script is with the action itself. I caught myself regularly looking elsewhere during the action scenes. It wasn't enough that they were all either CGI or suffered from imbalanced lighting (too light or too dark). It didn't help that I mostly knew what the outcome would be after each one. But when the smartest actions made during these scenes still end up being boring while watching, that alone should tell you just how uninspired and lazy this film actually is. A sin that's very common nowadays.
The only saving graces with this film, which are quite pitiful in retrospect, are two small aspects. There's a side character, played by Jamie Demetriou, who's the boyfriend of Diaz's mother, played by Glenn Close. He enjoys the closest thing to the film's best moments between his dialogue and the role he plays in the climax. "Back in Action" also has an end credits segment showing off conceptual images of individual scenes from the movie. It's fine, provided you'll be able to remember this film by then. I'll be lucky to recall this film by tomorrow.
The actors in general aren't awful, but the script they have to work with is a waste of alot of paper. This was Cameron Diaz's first film in 10 years, and I'm not sure what's in this script that's so special to get her out of the woodward. Yes, Jamie Foxx is an executive producer and they get along well apparently. They could've done something else together though and yielded a better result. Even the licensed songs (good and overly played alike) used as the action scenes ensue feel out of place and do a disservice to the musical talents involved.
We need to stop using "Ain't That a Kick in the Head" in action films for awhile. It's getting very tiring. We live in a time when Hollywood is literally recovering from a massive fire that spread across the area while striving to maintain its relevance against all odds. Given this intel, there's no places for soulless, by-the-numbers, cookie cutter spy flicks like this anymore. The Rotten Tomatoes score of 25% is accurate for this title, as that is the best score it will get from me. The most insignificant film to grace The Film Pub by far.
Final Verdict: 2.5/10
Comentarios