About LS.n


 
 

Shooting Blanks (The Rock)
by Kerry Douglas Dye

published 12/14/98

FEATURES HOME



Kerry Douglas Dye is LeisureSuit.net's Manhattan-based Senior Editor.



MOST RECENT YAK ABOUT THIS ARTICLE:

Subj: Transformers 2
definitely, look at the racism in transformers 2, "i'm a dumb black robat that cannot read", or the bucktooth blubbering idiot at the deli.

-- Sandra
Jun 25, 2009 at 4:14PM

Read more or post your own





Be cool like us!
Are you getting our weekly update?





It's GOOD to share!
E-mail this article to a buddy

Check out Die Hard instead.
Let's move to a film that hasn't gotten nearly enough criticism: The Rock (Michael Bay, 1996). It's a movie with all the ingredients of a classic guy film: mismatched buddies, close calls, a couple of pretty girls, men in uniforms pointing guns at each other, and explosions a-plenty. So what's my complaint ('cause you know I got one)?

It may just be that I'm nostalgic for the days when action pictures were actually about something. In Die Hard, for example, there were thieves posing as terrorists who were going to murder dozens of people to cover up their crime . . . Bruce Willis had to save the day, and there was really a day worth saving. But go and compare that to the supposed conflict in The Rock, and you'll see; the later film comes up severely lacking:

In The Rock, Ed Harris plays legendary and supposed brilliant General Francis X. Hummel, who is upset with the U.S. government because it refuses to honor and pay benefits to the families of military men lost in covert operations. Okay, that's certainly something to be pissed off about, and if it were me, I'd head straight to the offices of the New York Times and see that something was done about it. I mean, Hummel has a lot of secrets that the U.S. government doesn't want made public . . . isn't that a hell of a bargaining chip?

Apparently not. General Hummel isn't too media savvy, I guess, because he thinks it would make more sense to steal some rockets loaded with deadly nerve gas and hold the city of San Francisco hostage. Okay, I know, it sounds like a stupid way to achieve his goals, but bear with me here . . . maybe he's on to something. I mean, this is the legendary Francis X. Hummel--he's certainly smarter than you or I (or is it 'me'? I can never remember). So he must know what he's doing, right?

Well, no. The funny thing is, the government refuses his demands. Just refuses them. So now you're thinking, "uh-oh, bad news for San Francisco!" But guess again. When the U.S. government refuses his demands, he just folds up his tents and quits. Quoth Hummel: "We bluffed, they called it. The mission's over."

So wait, the brilliant General went through all this effort on a bluff that didn't even come close to working and then just gave up when the plan tanked??? Yeah, that's pretty much what happened. This is the man they called a legend. Looks like age has dumbed him down and wimped him out a bit.

A pretty thin reed upon which to lean an entire film. But now all you fans of The Rock are saying, "come on, guy, the film isn't completely free of any conflict . . . if it were, why are there so many gunfights? Anyway, it's just a dumb action picture. Don't take it so seriously." Well, thanks for your input sport, but I'm not done yet.

I will grant you that a dumb action picture with a story that doesn't make any sense certainly has its place, but what really incenses me is that director Michael Bay directs this stupid movie likes it's the fucking Last Emperor or something. What's with all the slow motion? What's with all the weird freaking colors? Why did he shoot a movie that's just about as dumb as they come like it's of biblical significance???

The obvious answer is that Michael Bay has no standards. A gilded turd is still a turd, but maybe Bay, to defend him for a moment, figured if he was going to be handed a turd maybe gilding it was better than just admitting it was a turd. Okay, I'll grant that. But I've just gotten started:

My final argument for why I hate The Rock and the man who made it is that it is the most racist, sexist, unenlightened film to come from a major studio since fucking Mandingo.

The Rock is not a particularly funny film--it takes itself way too seriously for that. Nicolas Cage, by virtue of being Nicolas Cage, manages some fun moments, but other than that, every joke, every gag . . . every real laugh in the film is based on a racial or sexual stereotype.

Shot one: sassy Negro in a cage. "What kind of a fucked up tour is this??" (The audience roars with laughter. 'He-he, colored people are funny, he-he.') Shot two: lisping homosexual on the floor. "All I care about is are you happy with your hair cut?" (The audience howls. 'Mommy, look at the little queer on the floor!') Shot three: fat Japanese chef babbling gibberish. (The audience is rolling in the aisles. 'Learn the language or go back to Korea, you goddam chink bastard!') Shot four: yet another Negro, this one a newspaper vendor. "Where's that sonofabitch at? I'm gonna hunt him down! That motherfucker ain't safe nowhere!" (The audience spews Coke out its nose. 'You tell him Sambo! This shit is timeless!') You get the idea.

Well needless to say, a real man is not a racist. So is Michael Bay racist scum? The Rock sure makes it look that way. Even if you like the film, for all its bangly music video gloss and empty story line, every time you rent it, you might as well just send a check off to your local Klan chapter. The two are morally equivalent acts.

The worst of the worst, and some suggestions -->


Your name:

Subject:


Comments:

Forward a copy of this yak to the LS.n Editors

Forward a copy of this yak to this article's author

If you want to get an e-mail if someone responds to your yak, give us your address below. It won't be made public.

THE YAK SHACK


Name: Sandra
Subject: Transformers 2
-- Jun 25, 2009 at 4:14PM
definitely, look at the racism in transformers 2, "i'm a dumb black robat that cannot read", or the bucktooth blubbering idiot at the deli.

Name: Ivan
Subject: Shooting Blanks (The Rock)
-- Jun 22, 2009 at 2:52AM
Bay films are clearly racist. Just watch them.

Name: Kevin James
Subject: Vacuous bunch
-- Jul 10, 2007 at 10:22AM
Stumbled across this merry little band of personal flag waving and am pleased to say I was very entertained. An anti-racist using the term Negro! ( and don't pull the irony card on me ), the immortal line "a good movie has action from beginning to end",hahahahah! , attacking a persons right to employment and my own personal favorite, the opening gambit...."as a Jewish person I...."! The day we can refer to ourselves as simply 'a person' will be a happy day, but thank you one and all. I found your brief battle of wits around 'The Rock' excellent reading.

I myself found 'The Rock' lacking any of the qualities that a great movie should enjoy, but still thoroughly enjoyed its nonsense and whooped on the inside when Cage and Connery saved the day and in doing so became closer as human beings. aaahh must go a little salt in the air has brought a tear to my eye.

PS I’ll be on the look out for these subtle racist gags in Transformers. If Optimums prime ‘pimps his ride’ and adopts stereotypical gangsta slang we’ll burn Bay's beach front house down! Too strong? By any means necessary!

Name: jk
Subject: Chef not oriental
-- Apr 29, 2005 at 1:41PM
I know some interesting words in spanish. I thought i picked out "hijo de puta" (son of a whore). Fair bet he is hispanic. Frankly cussing in spanish is worse than cussing in english, and that is why it is preferable

Hummel simply wanted to bluff. he did not want to kill millions. thatis what would happen if he launched.

Name: Kerry Douglas Dye Responds
Subject: Re: This guy is way off
-- Jun 6, 2003 at 8:37PM
> A sign of a good
> movie is action from
> beginning to end

You win. You're the more capable critic.

Name: Rick
Subject: This guy is way off
-- Jun 6, 2003 at 5:26PM
Ok, he refers to the movie as "gilded turd". It's gilded alright, but definetely not a turd, this is what he doesn't see. He obviously didn't analyse or understand the movie the way a critic is supposed to. General Hummel chose launching Vx rockets as his bluff because there was no counter-substance for it, it was the strongest, most lethal stuff out there with nothing against it. I think that would be enough to scare more than a few Pentagon officials. A sign of a good movie is action from beginning to end, and this movie has it. Not to mention an excellent score and the slow motion sequences, excuse me buddy, are filmaking masterpieces. This guy, whoever he is, doesn't know anything about movies and shouldn't be a critic in the first place.

Name: Bobby
Subject: Give it up
-- Jun 1, 2002 at 4:55AM
This was a good review, what are you talking about. I admit that the racism accusations were a bit overdone, but that it was a serious yet meaningless film with too many slow motion shots was a truthful statement. The movie was crap. I especially despised all the pseudo-heroism you got to see watching the navy seals get mowed down by the marines. How sympathetic. How dumb. There were too many sympathetic and heroic parts in the movie, as well as too many shrewd remarks. And also, Roger Ebert is a moron. Do not use him as an effective example of a good movie reviewer. Just check out his review of The Graduate and you will hopefully know what I mean. To the writer of this review, keep up the good work. And never mind dimwits like this guy.

Name: Kerry Douglas Dye Responds
Subject: Re: what?
-- Nov 4, 2000 at 3:02PM
> Michael Bay is one of
> the best action film
> directors out there
> cause he knows what
> the audience wants.

Best quote ever about why society is going straight to hell, a topic much on my mind as Al Gore struggles to figure out why a mindless shirt like George W. Bush is so popular. You and your "intellegence" can enjoy the descent--I'm going to stay up here on my high horse.

(And don't pull the Jew card on me, you illiterate putz. I'm voting for your ouster at our next convention in the Catskills.)

Name: jason
Subject: what?
-- Nov 4, 2000 at 2:42PM
This is the worst review of any movie i have ever seen in my entire life. Why don't you compare yourself and your review to the people who have actually seen the movie and made intellegent reviews about it...you know, people with careers? Roger Ebert, etc, etc. But no...you wouldnt do that, would you? Youd rather scatter your review with swears and accuations of racism??? Are you fucking nuts? Michael Bay is one of the best action film directors out there cause he knows what the audience wants. He makes incredibly entertaining "popcorn" movies that everyone seems to like. Everyone, that is, except you. And your review about there being no threat? Did you even SEE the end of the movie? General Hummel dies and the two Captins are going to launch the rocket on San Fransisco? Or were you too busy calling Michael Bay a racist? And are you surprised that not a single racial orginization in America has a problem with the movie? I wouldnt expect you to be. Seriously, this is one of the worst reviews i have ever read and i personally think that the author is a complete moron. As a jewish person i find the reference of renting The Rock to Checking in to the local Klan chapter horrendously offencive, and as a lover of film i find this entire review an insult to my intellegence. I cannot believe anyone would ever hire you.



This page is best viewed with the latest version of the Netscape or Microsoft Internet Explorer browser.

© Copyright 1998-2001 LeisureSuit Media, LLC, All Rights Reserved.
Some content is copyrighted by the author and is used with permission. No portion of this page or its content may be reproduced, in part or in whole, electronically, in print, or in any other form or by any other means, without the written consent of the LeisureSuit.net editors. Contact us at webmaster@leisuresuit.net.
[an error occurred while processing this directive]