Classic Review of "SPEED"
"If you slow down this bus will explode!"
They sure don't make them like they used to! Simple, daring and narratively comprehensible-- can you imagine there was a time when you could actually follow action sequences!-- SPEED exemplifies everything I usually find sorely lacking from action movies these days. And lest not forget that this film- the directorial debut of the DP of such action classics as DIE HARD, THE HUNT FOR RED OCTOBER and THE JEWEL OF THE NILE- not only grossed over 350 million dollars worldwide (on a modest 30 million dollar budget) but was the movie that really launched Sandra Bullock and especially Keannu Reeves (POINT BREAK behind him but THE MATRIX still five years away) into hollywood movie stardom.
The basic plot of SPEED sounds simple enough and there's good reason for that. It is! L.A. Bomb Squad hot-shots Jack (Keannu Reeves) and Harry (Jeff Daniels) are terrorized by the ultimate bad guy, Howard Payne (Dennis Hopper in a great turn as a mad bomber), who has placed a bomb on a bus in L.A. Once the bus goes 50 mph, the bomb is armed. If the bus drops below 50 mph, the bomb explodes. Got it? Good. Of all the movie pitches I would've loved to have been in the room for... this one takes the cake. But the funny thing is... IT WORKS! Now of course you have Annie (Sandra Bullock), the "wildcat" behind the wheel, put into place by the accidental shooting of the bus driver (this kills two birds with one stone as it increases the immediate tension but also puts a potential love interest up front with Keannu- can you imagine the movie if Sam the bus driver had driven the whole way?) And then you have the elevator sequence at the top of the flick (a dynamite 20 minute opener) and the train sequence at the end (which ultimately is unnecessary and almost comically a recycling of the whole speeding bus fiasco) but that's pretty much all there is to it. So then how is it that such a seemingly silly sounding premise with basically nothing much else going on holds water for 2 hours? Well, as they say: the devil's in the details.
Where so many action/thriller flicks go wrong these days is that while SPEED is a simple story filled with complex characters, more often than not what we get from movies like TRANSFORMERS and the myriad of espionage movies from the last 10 years (see SALT for a good- or rather bad- example) are complex stories with simple characters. So not only are we totally lost in the story but we couldn't care less anyways because the characters are so flat and standard that any emotional connectivity with them is impossible. That's why when we walk out of something like SUPER 8 (a bloated excuse for an adventure movie in my opinion) at the very most you'll remember how ridiculous the explosions were and at the very least you'll remember nothing (I dare anyone to name me more than 3 characters in SUPER 8 from memory). When you walk out of SPEED not only do you remember the dynamite action sequences (and there's certainly plenty of that to be had here) but also the chemistry between the characters. You remember the dorky, annoying tourist played by Cameron from FERRIS BUELLER'S (Alan Ruck); you remember the foul mouthed, hard-ass bomb squad captain played by Joe Morton (a staple of bad-ass action movies it seems); and you remember Bob pushing that button in the elevator at the beginning of the movie. It's the little things- the details- that make SPEED and other great action flicks re-watcheable.
Now if SPEED were nothing more than a character study on "intense emotional situations" I still think it would be a halfway decent flick but as I've mentioned it happens to deliver full force in the action department as well- and in a way most action movies these days don't even try. Through his use of miniatures, practical stunt work, a rich and brutal sound design and his insistence on shooting on an actual highway (one of the other prospective directors wanted to shoot the bus scenes on a sound stage) director Jan De Bont creates a high octane, realistic roller coaster ride that would feel fake and video game-ish if made today using the more often utilized CGI.
Another great aspect of SPEED I can appreciate (and De Bont goes into this early in the commentary) is that there is a vast difference between "handheld" and "shaky" camerawork and one does not neccessarily imply the other. In the case of De Bont he prefers to retain visual control whilst engaging his audience with a constantly MOVING camera rather than simply disorientating his audience by a constantly SHAKING camera. Something rare these days in the midst of tired conventions, endless reboots and shaky, incomprehensible camera movements that render not only the story but the action itself confusing and difficult to follow. And if I can't follow the story- let alone the continuity of the immediate action on screen- how am I supposed to care about anyone involved in it!?
Now that's not to say that action flicks that deliver on kick-ass action but skimp on intense character development and believeable dialogue can't be good (FURIOUS FIVE comes to mind as a great example). And it's not to say that SPEED is flawless in it's dramatic particulars- as it certainly has it's fair share of cheese and barely believable moments (a bus jumping a 50 foot gap in the highway certainly comes to mind as such). It's just that I feel like a lot of "action" directors these days get fooled into thinking that the two are mutually exclusive: that you can either have action or you can tell a good story- but not both. Maybe it comes more from the pressure of the studio system leaning on young, up and coming directors to deliver something that has been tried and true to make money (after all the TRANSFORMERS series is completely terrible and mostly incomprehensible but it's made a billion dollars whereas quality espionage flicks like TINKER, TAILOR, SOLDIER, SPY barely make their money back) or maybe it's just peoples' taste in entertainment has changed (made back in 1994 SPEED is practically a "classic" already). Boy do I feel old...
Regardless, the bottom line is Jan De Bont takes a laughably simple concept and weaves it into an action packed, humor filled, realistically flavored 90's classic that is sure to knock you on your ass regardless of whether it's your first viewing or just your first viewing not on VHS.
