Let’s begin by saying I like Bruce Willis. Always have. Any man that bagged Demi Moore is alright in my book. So I looked forward to checking out his latest movie Hostage. How can Hollywood screw up a movie that seems so similar to one of the greats: Die Hard?
Movie starts off great. Motherfucker is the third word uttered during a hostage standoff gone bad. Very dramatic. I felt bad for Jeff Talley (Bruce Willis’ character) when the scene had ended.
The movie continues on a few years later with Jeff Talley still being haunted with the memory of the fucked up hostage negotiation . . . he’s got marriage problems, he afraid of taking command or taking chances, etc. You know the setup, it’s been done countless times.
So we know to expect another dramatic hostage situation, where Mr. Talley is forced to face his demons. We get that in the most ridiculously huge fucking house I’ve seen. The back of this house is built into a goddamn mountain! I’s got more secret passages than a carnival house. It’s got state of the art security, central cameras in all the rooms, panic rooms and a shit-load more I don’t even know what the fuck it is. That’s why I find it completely asinine as to how 3 douchebags climb the security fence and simply walk into the house without tripping any alarms or having anyone see them.
As it turns out Walter Smith (homeowner) is a shady bastard, so the people he deals with want something and force Bruce Willis to do their bidding, unless he wants his family killed. Quite the stupid set-up. The criminals behind this syndicate don’t need Willis’ character at all. Fuck, they dress up as FBI have access to helicopters and high powered assault equipment. Thoroughly unbelievable.
What’s worse is they clearly tell him, “Deviate from the plan and we’ll kill your family.” So what does Jeff Talley do time after time? Deviates from the fucking plan. Do they kill his family? Take a wild guess.
There is one bright spot in Hostage, however. Ben Foster plays a sick, demented character Mars Krupcheck. This fucker, shoots people and watches them die. Sets people on fire. Very dark, brooding and clearly marching to a different drummer.
Overall, Bruce Willis doesn’t fail to deliver, either. He proves he is still a great emotionally driven actor. He thrives on these kinds of roles (if you haven’t seen the Die Hard trilogy, you should be flogged). As stated above newcomer (to me) Ben Foster played his role to a tee. You couldn’t get Trent Reznor to act the part better.
The failure of Hostage is the absolutely preposterous actions our “hero” takes. A poorly contrived hostage swap, where he should have clearly been shot in the face by the kidnappers. Doing the exact opposite of what your families captors are telling you do, just doesn’t make sense. They should have been killed the moment he decided to do his own thing, and that was 20 minutes into the movie. Hell, the movie may have been better, if it suddenly became a revenge for killing my family flick . . .
'Movie Review: Hostage (2005)' have 3 comments
March 16, 2005 @ 4:19 pm Nashtradomus
Definitely not Oscar-worthy, but a fun movie to see.
Hostage had potential, but it didn’t fully deliver. The action was awesome, nonstop fun. The story was mediocre at best. The acting was good, but a little overdramatic
Hostage is a Bruce Willis movie, so there are certain things that must be included. Bruce having an estranged relationship with a spouse (that sounds disgustingly familiar), Bruce having that weepy-eyed angst as he deliberates over what to do next, and Bruce getting hurt, but toughing it out.
Let’s face it, Bruce will never top “Die Hard,” but he still makes movies that are fun to watch. The real highlight of the film is Ben Foster who plays a psychopathic hostage taker. He does a good job as this “real” bad guy with dark and seriously disturbing issues. The best part is whenever Ben Foster was on screen you didn’t know what to expect would be his next move.
To like this movie, you have to suspend reality at points to make the plot work. Like, in the beginning, the three hoods climb over the wall and get into Kevin Pollak’s house, past the security cameras.
Second, the three punks were pretty good at terrorist-style gunfire, seeing only one had actually ever fired a gun before!
Third, when Willis is caught between the two hostage situations, an awful long time expires before we hear from those who hold his family. Wouldn’t you think they’d be closer and would’ve pushed the situation along a little bit.
Fourth, Ben Foster would’ve raped the teenage girl in the first ten seconds in the house, especially when she’s tied up so much.
Fifth, the real bad kid became the “killer who wouldn’t die” at the end. I HATE THAT!!!!! He’s stabbed in the head, shot with a machine gun, kicked in the head repeatedly and here he comes!!!!!
Ultimately, the film is anti-climactic. No real surprises, like the vast majority of Bruce’s movies. This is not a bad movie, nor is it a great movie. Bruce Willis will get acclaim for his performance, and admittedly, it’s not bad at all. This is a decent action thriller, but it will probably be forgotten.
I rate it B-
March 16, 2005 @ 6:48 pm P. Kael
Wow. I think this is the first time our opinions are basically the same.
As said before this is a basic Bruce Willis action flick. It requires the viewer to suspend reality (a whole bunch) and to look the other way when running into the huge gaping plot holes, to really enjoy the movie.
January 5, 2008 @ 6:48 pm bruno
I waited till I could get the dvd from the library since the reviews were so bad at first . . .
I am still troubled by the ending when Willis finally gets to his kids and Water Smith demands that the pseudo FBI guys shoot him since he has seen his (Walter’s) face, even tho Willis keeps insisting that he hasn’t seen any one elses face. Miraculously, Water produces a pistol (where the fuck did that come from??) and shoots the FBI guy in the head and all hell breaks loose. I watched that part a donen times and backed up 15 minutes trying to see where the gun came from . . . anyone else catch that blooper?