BEFORE: Saniyya Sidney carries over from "King Richard". This film was originally slated to fit between two other films with Gugu Mbatha-Raw, "Jupiter Ascending" and "Miss Sloane", but before watching it, I realized that it would be very helpful to make my connections in September, so I pulled it from the middle of the three-movie chain and re-scheduled it for here. Whew, that was a close one.
What a difference a few months can make, since I'm constantly adding new films to my watchlist (and the back-up watchlist of what's streaming) - back on January 1 when I watched "Nomadland", the only connection out of that film was Frances McDormand, which made the film a great candidate for kicking off the year, because it only linked to one other film. But here's another film with David Strathairn, and he was also in one my documentaries, so back then it looked like he'd only be in one film all year, now here he is in his third film for 2022. Things are always changing, and I never know who's going to be in enough films to make the year-end countdown, not until the year is over, anyway.
THE PLOT: After years in hiding, a woman is forced to go on the run when her superhuman abilities are discovered. Years after having abandoned her family, the only place she has left to hide is home.
AFTER: I think we're starting to see a different kind of superhero movie, there's sort of a new wave of films in response to Marvel and DC hero movies, where having powers is maybe not such a good thing. I saw this in "Brightburn" last year, and to a lesser extent, in "Project Power" and "The Old Guard". I propose that maybe DC and Marvel are stuck in their formulas, where the good guys have to win at the end of the movie - but without a well-known hero, things can get a bit murkier, and I I tend to applaud that. It can make a very far-fetched concept a bit more realistic, perhaps?
Here in "Fast Color" the women in one family all have a super-power of sorts, and I suppose that means it's genetic, but the problem is that the power itself isn't very well-defined. These women can take an object and break it down into colorful dust, and swirl it around in the air - "unmake" it, so to speak. But so what? There's only one instance in the entire film of this power being useful at all, when a character turns the doors of the police station to dust so another character can escape custody.
There's also an implication that if Ruth, the lead character, could get her power back, perhaps she could save the world, which is undergoing a massive drought. Very realistic, as this is a possible result of climate change - but exactly HOW she's going to use her power to make more rain or make more water is also poorly defined. Is this even possible? The rules about these powers seem to state that nothing can be "made", it can only be "unmade" and then "remade" - so how, exactly, would this apply to fixing the clouds or making more water? It's like some screenwriter didn't really think it all through, why set up a bunch of rules that are ultimately in need of being broken, for the story to continue?
Before we even get there, Ruth has to deal with government agency types who have spent years trying to track her down, because they want to study her powers, or something. Sure, they may have another agenda, because the theory is that her powers are energy-based, but she's also a danger to society because she has seizures that also seem to cause earthquakes, so it's just as likely that the government scientists want to kill her, not study her, because that's a matter of public safety. After almost getting caught, Ruth returns to her mother's house in the middle of the New Mexico desert, and then has to spend a lot of time unpacking a lot of family issues before she can even get to thinking about fixing her powers somehow, or figuring out a way to deal with the seizures.
There's also the local sheriff who's tracking her once she hits town, but possibly for very different reason as the federal agents. Really, it's a long way to go just to get Ruth back to her old routine and there's also a lot of stalling and re-stating the old relationships before anybody can even think about maybe fixing the world. Jeez, if Superman or Batman were this neurotic then their cities would be in a lot of trouble. Marvel characters like Spider-Man and Hulk tend to have more personal problems than their DC counterparts, but after the relationship issues get checked, at least they get on with the fighting. This is a rare example of a thinking-man (or woman's) superhero movie, but then, come on, that's not really going to work, now, is it?
They've been trying for decades to get more gender equality in comic books and superhero movies - most of the attempts have been laughable, producing Marvel characters like Gwenpool and Squirrel Girl. More recently, Marvel's had success with the "Captain Marvel" and "Black Widow" films, and the "She-Hulk" series is airing now, while DC hit big with "Wonder Woman", and "Birds of Prey", to a lesser extent. Maybe, just maybe, this is the right way to get somewhere, but I don't think "Fast Color" is going to move that needle.
Also starring Gugu Mbatha-Raw (last seen in "Miss Sloane"), David Strathairn (last seen in "Adrienne"), Lorraine Toussaint (last seen in "Selma"), Christopher Denham (last seen in "Being the Ricardos"), Monique Straw, Richard L. Olsen (last seen in "Wildlife"), Jason E. Hill (last seen in "Brothers"), Aliza Halm, Levi Lobo.
RATING: 4 out of 10 coffee packets from the diner
No comments:
Post a Comment