. . . the new Wages of Fear would just be a mediocre action/adventure movie. But since it's a remake of a singular classic, it's atrocious. The original took a deep look at its characters, had a remarkable location, and delivered prolonged nail-biting suspense. This remake manages to be slightly exciting at moments, but that's all. But for viewer's who know the original -- or William Friedkin's remake, Sorcerer -- such excitement quickly wanes.
The scenario is the same: nitroglycerin must be delivered by trucks to an oil well fire to extinguish the flame. Nitroglycerin is highly unstable, so the drivers are taking their lives in their hands. In the real world, nitroglycerin has been replaced by other more stable explosives, so why it must be nitroglycerin now should have been explained, as it was in Friedkin's Sorcerer. A definite strike against this remake, but it's not the biggest problem.
The remake adds a ticking clock to the scenario: unless the fire is extinguished in twenty-four hours, a neighboring natural gas field will explode and destroy a nearby village. This does little to amplify the viewer's suspense.
The characters aren't much: two brothers, one of the brothers lover, and a bad guy. The brothers are estranged, as one blames the other for leaving him behind at the scene of a robbery nine months prior, and he has been doing time in a brutal prison. The brother who was at liberty during this time is the one with the lover, and he feels just dreadful about leaving his brother behind, but that's it. The at liberty brother's lover is quite lovely and works for a Medicins Sans Frontieres (Doctors Without Bordere) type NGO, so she has principles and cares, but that's it. The bad guy works for the oil company and only reveals himself as the bad guy gradually. But any astute viewer, with no knowledge of the original, will see the reveal coming miles away.
But in this case, knowing the original might work against figuring that out, because there is no bad guy in the original. Instead, characters reveal themselves, their hidden natures, weaknesses, strengths, brutalities, and kindnesses as they haul their dangerous cargo over treacherous roads. One cries out, "We're paid to be afraid!" and in the original they are afraid, going up in isolation against the ever present possibility of death. And in this remake? They're kinda scared. At moments. But these are action/adventure heroes, buddies - no! Better! Brothers! - so their fear doesn't cut deep. How could it? They're cardboard cut outs. And here is where this remake falls off a cliff and explodes.
Beyond that, there's not much to say. The finale is sentimental, meant to be moving, which may have some screaming at the TV. I did. I guess anything resembling the original finale's breathtaking nihilism must have been vetoed by a producer, but that may be a good thing-I doubt the filmmakers could have pulled off anything close to it.
The acting is fine, although the actors aren't given much to work with. The acting and the cinematography, which often including sweeping panoramas of the desert, makes watching this new Wages of Fear tolerable. But people who remake a classic should aim for something higher than that. Otherwise they'll end up having contributed yet another data point in favor of the proposition that classics should not be remade.
The scenario is the same: nitroglycerin must be delivered by trucks to an oil well fire to extinguish the flame. Nitroglycerin is highly unstable, so the drivers are taking their lives in their hands. In the real world, nitroglycerin has been replaced by other more stable explosives, so why it must be nitroglycerin now should have been explained, as it was in Friedkin's Sorcerer. A definite strike against this remake, but it's not the biggest problem.
The remake adds a ticking clock to the scenario: unless the fire is extinguished in twenty-four hours, a neighboring natural gas field will explode and destroy a nearby village. This does little to amplify the viewer's suspense.
The characters aren't much: two brothers, one of the brothers lover, and a bad guy. The brothers are estranged, as one blames the other for leaving him behind at the scene of a robbery nine months prior, and he has been doing time in a brutal prison. The brother who was at liberty during this time is the one with the lover, and he feels just dreadful about leaving his brother behind, but that's it. The at liberty brother's lover is quite lovely and works for a Medicins Sans Frontieres (Doctors Without Bordere) type NGO, so she has principles and cares, but that's it. The bad guy works for the oil company and only reveals himself as the bad guy gradually. But any astute viewer, with no knowledge of the original, will see the reveal coming miles away.
But in this case, knowing the original might work against figuring that out, because there is no bad guy in the original. Instead, characters reveal themselves, their hidden natures, weaknesses, strengths, brutalities, and kindnesses as they haul their dangerous cargo over treacherous roads. One cries out, "We're paid to be afraid!" and in the original they are afraid, going up in isolation against the ever present possibility of death. And in this remake? They're kinda scared. At moments. But these are action/adventure heroes, buddies - no! Better! Brothers! - so their fear doesn't cut deep. How could it? They're cardboard cut outs. And here is where this remake falls off a cliff and explodes.
Beyond that, there's not much to say. The finale is sentimental, meant to be moving, which may have some screaming at the TV. I did. I guess anything resembling the original finale's breathtaking nihilism must have been vetoed by a producer, but that may be a good thing-I doubt the filmmakers could have pulled off anything close to it.
The acting is fine, although the actors aren't given much to work with. The acting and the cinematography, which often including sweeping panoramas of the desert, makes watching this new Wages of Fear tolerable. But people who remake a classic should aim for something higher than that. Otherwise they'll end up having contributed yet another data point in favor of the proposition that classics should not be remade.