Escape from L.A. (1996)

nTitle: Escape from L.A.n(1996)

nDirector: John Carpenter

nCast: Kurt Russell, Steve Buscemi, Peter Fonda, ValerianGolino, Pamela Grier, Bruce Campbell, A.J. Langer

nReview:

nEscape from L.A.nis a strange kind of film. When I first heard the news that a sequel to John Carpenter’s Escape from New York (1981) was beingnmade I was excited to see the resulting film because not only was JohnnCarpenter back behind the directors chair, but Kurt Russell was still going tonplay Snake Plissken! That’s really all I needed to know. Sadly, when I went tonthe theater to see it, I came out being disappointed. Where was all thendarkness? Where was that terrifying post- apocalyptic world that I loved fromnthe first film? Why were characters trying to be funny? Why was everything sonsilly? Why? Why? Why? Well, many years have passed since my initial disappointmentnwith Escape from L.A.nI’ve grown some, matured some. I had a chance to recently re-watch Escape from L.A. How do I see thisnfilm now?

nCarpenter and Russell on the set of Escape from L.A.

nWell, I honestly can’t bring myself to hate it. I see why I didn’tnlike it when it was first released, but I’ve grown to accept this film for whatnit is. It’s pure unadulterated campy fun. Funny thing is that a script wasnwritten for this film way back in 1985, by a guy called Coleman Luck, butnCarpenter thought the script was too light and campy. What? X-squeeze me? BakingnPowder? That’s exactly what Escape from L.A.nturned out to be anyways! Ultra campy and ultra light; at least when compared tonthe first film which was so dark and brooding. Escape from New York was a film that took itself verynseriously. Yeah it’s a science fiction film, but it was a decidedly serious one.nNot many laughs or jokes in sight. Inncontrast Escape from L.A.nis colorful, filled with one joke after the another, and very, very campy. Thisnmovie is obviously making fun of itself. And to tell you the truth, I like thatnabout it because it’s obviously what Carpenter and Russell were going for. So you’llnbe better of just erasing your expectations for this film. If you haven’t seennthis one yet, you have to go in expecting a different film than Escape from New York.

nWhat makes Escape from L.A.nso different? It’s all about the tone of the film, the look of it. WhilenEscape from New York felt like a horror movie at times with it’s darkness andnfreaky looking characters, Escape from L.A. is actually well lit and colorful, filled with comic book heroes, villains andnone liners galore. Take for example the character called ‘The Surgeon Generalnof Beverly Hills’ the one played by Bruce Campbell. This character feels like ancomic book villain, like something out of an episode of the old Batmanntelevision show. He’s a surgeon general who hasnperformed so much surgery on himself and on his patients, that they havendisfigured their faces! He likes chopping up good looking people to use for hisnsurgeries. This is a prime example of the kind of totally over the topncharacters you will find on this film. They aren’t particularly scary ornintimidating like the villains on the first film, but they are entertaining nonenthe less. And the comic book characters don’t stop there my friends! Pamela Grier plays a transvestite who used to be Snake Plissken’snpartner in crime! Steve Buscemi plays a double crossing tourist guide! PeternFonda plays a surfer who likes to ride Tsunami tidal waves! And so on. But even though this film is filled with funny, entertaining characters such as the ones I’venmentioned, this doesn’t make Escape from L.A.na bad film in book, just a different kind of film than its predecessor.

nBruce Campbell’s ‘Surgeon General of Beverly Hills’

nBoth Escape from New Yorknand Escape from L.A.nare decidedly anti-establishment films. They both have this cynical view of thengovernment; in these films, the government is not to be trusted. There are terroristnattacks aimed at the government on both films. On the first one they hijack and crash Air Force One;nforcing The President of the United Statesnto fall into the hands of the freaks inside Manhattan. On this second one, the president’snown daughter is the one that rebels against the government and decides to livenwith the leader of the criminals; a guy called ‘Cuervo Jones’. And here’s whatnI liked about this movie. While it does criticize fascist forms of government,nit also criticizes rebellious leaders who instigate their followers towards committingnviolent acts. So it doesn’t side with anyone. On this film, both sides arenwrong. The film pleads for a new beginning, it’s asking governments to forgetntheir old grudges and start from scratch. Snake himself says it in one scene: “Inshut down the third world, you win, they loose. I shut down America, theynwin, you loose. The more things change, the more they stay the same” This isnone of the ideas presented in the film that I truly liked. The idea that bothnsides should just call it quits and bring on the peace, bring on the freedom. Again,nthis last bit demonstrates how much of Kurt Russell’s Libertarian views are onnthis film. After all, he wrote a lot of it himself along with John Carpenternand Debra Hill. These are three life long buddies writing a movie they wouldnfind amusing, which makes this film a labor of love. This is probably why thenfilm has a more laid back, ‘were having fun here’ vibe to it.

nThat being said, the film does have some faults going for it.nThe visual effects for example are freaking horrendous, I mean this was an50 million dollar movie, one would think that better effects could have beennafforded. There’s this painfully bad effects sequence in which Snake drivesnthis mini-submarine through the underwater ruins of L.A….wow, there’s some badnCGI for you. I mean, granted this was early CGI, but even for 1996, theseneffects where half assed in my book. The scene where Snake Plissken rides a tsunaminwave on a surfboard with Peter Fonda, while campy and kind of cool in a way (it’snall about that Hippy attitude!) the scene just comes off as one bad specialneffect. The scenes with Snake and crew flying these gliders, wow, you couldnjust tell those things weren’t really flying; the list just goes on and on. Sonexpect lots of cheesy effects on this show.

nBut don’t get me wrong, I don’t hate this movie. I quitenenjoyed it actually. I mean yeah, I loved the first one a whole lot more. It’snjust darker and scarier; it’s got more of an edge to it. This second one isntongue in cheek every step of the way. Watching Escape from L.A. feels like watching a cheap Italian RipnOff like 2019: After the Fall of New York (1983), but with a bigger budget. Actually, Escape from L.A. has a lot of similarities with 2019: After the Fall of New York, so in a way, this is Carpenter’s pay back for all those cheap Escape from New York rip offs that the Italians made. Ultimately, I love both Escape from New York and Escape from L.A. for different reasons. And fornall the tonal differences between both films, they still have many similarities.nNo matter where, Snake Plissken will always be Snake Plissken, you can tellnRussell has lots of love for this character. Plissken is what kept me watching.nThe opening and closing segments of the films are extremely similar as well. Andnhere’s where we get to the best part of the film, the ending. Not gonna spoilnit don’t worry, but I will tell you that it is the best thing about the movie.nRussell himself came up with it and I applaud him for it, it encapsulatesneverything Snake Plissken is in terms of attitude. That idea that maybe the worldnwould be better off if we simply started again, from scratch, screw the way things are, let’sntry something new! Welcome to the human race my friends, welcome to the humannrace.

nRating 3 ½ out of 5