Atomic Blonde

Dir: David Leitch

2017

**

Atomic Blonde is extremely stylish. It really does look the business, with lots of fancy fight choreography, stunning visuals and great composition. It captures the neon-lit style of the late 80s rather wonderfully, indeed, it made me feel all nostalgic and the choice 80s tunes were brilliant. However, it is very much a case of style over content and I’m afraid the visuals weren’t enough for the film to rest on. The fight scenes were very impressive but they weren’t enough, and they soon became rather samey. I’ve read several critics congratulate the film for its remarkable editing but personally I could tell the action scenes weren’t all one take as they jolted backwards and forwards to a giddying degree, so much so, that I actually felt it uncomfortable to watch at times. It says it’s based on the 2012 graphic novel The Coldest City by Antony Johnston and Sam Hart but it is very different and only really shares the basics of the overall plot. The truth is, Charlize Theron wanted to do an action film in the vein of John Wick and thought that the graphic novel’s story would lend itself to it successfully. She bagged John Wick co-director David Leitch, copied all of John Wick’s choreography and visual flare, and even trained alongside Keanu Reeves as he prepared for John Wick 2. The finished film is nothing like John Wick, indeed, John Wick is much better, instead, it’s like a sickly-neon action version of Tinker, Tailor, Solder, Spy – something I’m not sure anyone really wanted. It’s hardly a film ‘based on a graphic novel’ in the classic sense, these days it sounds good and gives people an idea of what they can expect. Truth is, the film is full of false promise. I like Charlize Theron very much, she can certainly do action competently, but I don’t think it is where she excels. She can certainly kick ass but I’m afraid the quieter scenes are a bit laughable and she often forgets she is playing a British spy and often slips into her normal American accent. Theron’s original character isn’t bi-sexual in the novel but she does have a sex scene with a female French Spy (Sofia Boutella) in the film. I believe there needs to be more representation on film, but only when the film benefits from it. Any sex scene, whether it be man and woman, man and man or woman and woman, has to have a point to it – here it is pure titillation. Nothing new there but everyone involved sound really proud of it, like they’ve done something profoundly good, which is really a load of nonsense. You see, James McAvoy stated in an interview that he read up on post-World War II MI6 recruits to get into character and discovered that many of them were functioning alcoholics, drug addicts and gay men because they had usable experience in holding a big secret. McAvoy, who played a double agent, requested his character be a bit of a druggie and homosexual. The producers said yes to the druggie but no to the gay, stating that Theron’s character was already gay and they couldn’t possibly have to homosexuals in one film. It’s pure titillation, which is fine, as long as they don’t pretend it is anything but. The film has no integrity, no originality and absolutely no charm at all. It looks cool as hell, but strobe lighting is no good for when you want to read. It’s a one trick pony, and to be honest, that one trick gets tired quickly. The characters had no development behind them, McAvoy did well considering but at the end of the day none of the characters had any mystery to them and nor did I care what they did, who they really were or if they lived or died. The flashback narrative was a weak plot structure and the final twist is probably the most underwhelming twist I have ever seen. Seriously, I think I’d rather just watch a neon light and listen to Depeche Mode instead of watch this again, or the inevitable sequel.