I dug Uwe Boll's original 2009 film, "Rampage". Definitely one of his best flicks to date - being quite a mean and nihilistic film about a town targeted by a mass murderer.
This is a direct follow-up, marking the return of Bill Williamson, one of the most bloodthirsty homeland terrorists on record. After mercilessly annihilating over one hundred innocent citizens, he disappeared, leaving just an internet video (as seen at the end of the first film) where he explains his motivations which entail wiping out as many people as possible in order to lighten the exhaustion of the Earth's resources and prolong the overall existence of civilization. Here, we find Bill hiding out in a small house in the woods somewhere, assembling explosives and gearing up for another attack. This time, his sights are set on a TV news station, leading to a hostage situation involving the staff - namely, the top anchor, whom Bill seems to have taken issue with. As a SWAT team forms outside, Bill has some demands that he wants met...
Unlike the first movie, "Rampage 2" isn't total wall-to-wall carnage, but more of an upheaval of political indiscretion and anti-government diatribe. You really get the feeling with both of the "Rampage" films that Uwe Boll is just venting his ass off. The first being a completely masturbatory explosion of senseless violence on the unsuspecting public with the film's tagline asking, "Have you ever considered it?", while the sequel attempts to make more verbal points concerning the government, all culminating down to the stark message that the rich must be killed. Boll's harsh and unapologetic approach to these films' bold call for violent, anarchistic proletariat uprise clearly stems from a personal agenda which these movies are structured around. Can't say I have any objections... Though I'm only speculating...
As for the film, itself, "Rampage 2" (like it's predecessor) has it's flaws, such as our anti-hero firing machine guns at passersby from an alley all day and not drawing attention from the authorities. I also couldn't get past the breaking of a DVD in half just by tripping and falling on it... The positives, though, would definitely include Brendan Fletcher's performance. He really fell into the role this time around and it's much stronger, I'd say. In all, I'd give this one a recommendation for those who liked the first flick. They're not without their gaping plot holes and irritating overuse of shakey-cam bullshit, but Boll certainly seems to be coming around as a film-maker these days. I'm sure this is on it's way to becoming a big series...
No comments:
Post a Comment