![]() The notion of a sequel remained on the backburner until the mid-1990s, when both Carpenter and Russell expressed interest in revisiting the material and character. Already in the business of sequels after his breakthrough Halloween (1978) and its follow-up Halloween II (1981, written by Carpenter and producer Debra Hill, direction credited to Rick Rosenthal), Carpenter hired television writer Coleman Luck to write a sequel to Escape from New York in 1985, but the draft he delivered was unsatisfactory. Since Escape from New York earned a respectable profit at the box-office, talk of a sequel began shortly after its debut. seems to signify a paradigm shift in Carpenter’s career, not only as an important change in his perspective and attitude as a director, but also his ensuing technical laziness as a filmmaker, resulting in the poor reception of his works both critically and commercially. ![]() And after Escape from L.A., he released three failures: the lackluster Vampires (1998), the enjoyable flop Ghosts of Mars (2001), and as of this assessment, Carpenter hasn’t made another film since his ill-received indie The Ward (2010). His (justifiably) self-proclaimed masterpiece The Thing had bombed, he sacrificed creative control on larger budgeted films, and he collided with studios on titles like Memoirs of an Invisible Man (1993) and Village of the Damned (1995). ![]() All signs pointed to a director growing tired of his craft-that playing the Hollywood game and fighting for artistic integrity when it was rarely delivered had worn him down. Carpenter had made 17 features for either theatrical or television release in the previous twenty years by comparison, he made only three features in the twenty years following Escape from L.A. marks the first major sign the director was burning out, that the studio struggles and underwhelming reception of his then-recent films had incited him to consider an unofficial retirement. ![]() More significantly in the realm of Carpenter’s career, Escape from L.A. The key to enjoying the film is setting aside the presentation and dwelling on what Carpenter hoped to say about Hollywood. remains troublesome because of its unclear relationship with its predecessor, if not an admirable effort for its fleeting entertainment value and palpable anger. marks an angry, campy, and over-ambitious project, reminiscent, at least in its intent, of so much cult fare from yesteryear where a social commentary is trapped inside a B-movie presentation (think The Stuff). Unfortunately, the film forgoes any grand attempts at narrative originality or technical precision in favor of its message, which is delivered in a number of harsh episodes and encounters involving legendary eye-patched anti-hero Snake Plissken, played to badass perfection by Kurt Russell. More a vague remake than a true sequel, the 1996 release represents the famously cynical director’s most contemptuous film, where he lashes out against everyone from studio execs to Disneyland, from the American President to the plastic surgery-addicted culture of Los Angeles. After years of commercial failures and lost creative battles against various studios, John Carpenter delivered his most acerbic blow against Hollywood with Escape from L.A., his pseudo-sequel to 1981’s cult classic Escape from New York.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |