U.S. Marshals Review
by Doug Skiles (rskiles AT mail DOT win DOT org)March 17th, 1998
U.S. MARSHALS (1998)
Starring: Tommy Lee Jones (Sam Gerard), Wesley Snipes (various character names), Joe Pantoliano (Cosmo Renfro), Robert Downey Jr. (John Royce), Irčne Jacob (Marie), Tom Wood (Noah Newman), Daniel Roebuck (Biggs), Kate Nelligan (Walsh)
Directed by: Stuart Baird, Written by: John Pogue
Rated PG-13 by the MPAA for violence, gore, and strong language
Reviewed by Doug Skiles
I'll lay out the basics first. Sam Gerard, the Chief Deputy U.S. Marshal from THE FUGITIVE (1993), and his team of crack deputies, are back. Another man has fled from the clutches of the state, and Gerard must chase this new fugitive down. But what's the story this time? Why is he running? Did he do what he was accused? If not, who did? Who's doing the cover-up? Why? And so on. All the stuff you love from your traditional action/suspense/mystery flicks, but with better characters (especially Jones' Oscar-winning Gerard role) and better action set-pieces, pushing it into the above-average fun-film range. Plus, it's a Warner Bros. film, and everyone knows that ever since about 1994, it's been a red-letter day any time that Warner has actually released a good film. '97 was their best run in a while, what with CONTACT, ROSEWOOD, and L.A. CONFIDENTIAL. Maybe things will look up for them this year.
Now then... I've never felt the need to adress what other critics have thought of a movie before, but this time, I'm afraid I must. It's just that this time, I've read a number of reviews with differing opinions, but many of them made various statements that left me with one vital question: What movie did these people see? I'm not talking about disagreeing with their opinions. I'm talking things that seem to be factual, and yet, also just seem... well, wrong.
I guess some of these could be taken as opinions. Regardless, I have no idea where anyone could get these impressions. I'll just ramble them off for you, to give you an impression of what I'm getting at here.
The following statements, made by a number of unrelated, anonymous film critics, appear to be nothing short of, well, FALSE:
1) U.S. MARSHALS is nothing more than a copy of the THE FUGITIVE.
2) Since it is such a copy, it is a bad movie.
3) Tommy Lee Jones doesn't even seem to playing the same character in U.S. MARSHALS as he was in THE FUGITIVE.
4) Sam Gerard's opening raid serves no purpose whatsoever to the movie.
5) After discovering things about the fugitive he is chasing, Sam Gerard appears to forget them repeatedly later on. He still chases Snipes even after he finds the truth about the character.
6) Wesley Snipes' character plays little importance to the story.
7) Wesley Snipes' character doesn't try very hard to clear his name.
8) Every detail of the plot is solved within one hour, leaving nothing more to do than to catch Snipes.
9) None of these characters ever seem to be in any real danger at any point in the film.
10) Certain plot points are left hanging at the story's end.
Now, stand back, while I turn each of these claims into a smoking pile of rubble. Incidentally, I apologize to any critics that feel offended by reading this review, but I am accusing no one person of wrong-doing.
1) So let's see, there's another fugitive running from the law, and Sam Gerard has to catch him, and that makes it a copy? Is it so unbelievable that a U.S. Marshal might have to chase more than one fugitive in his lifetime? I think not. I mean, what else was copied here? Okay, both fugitives escape via a vehicle crash. That's one plot point. What else? Don't use that lame "a man jumped from a high place in both films" excuse. A man jumped from a high place in DIE HARD (1988) and BATMAN & ROBIN (1997), too, but THE FUGITIVE sure as hell isn't a DIE HARD clone, BATMAN & ROBIN is by no means a FUGITIVE clone, and so, clearly, since nothing other than a fugitive and a crash is taken from the first movie, neither is U.S. MARSHALS just a clone of THE FUGITIVE.
2) Even though the fact that it's not a copy has already been adressed, let's take a look at this. Okay. Let's talk about the James Bond series. It's up to 18 films at this point. They all have Bond saying "Bond, James Bond." Bond always sleeps with beautiful women. Bond always uses interesting gadgets. Bond always dresses suavely. Bond always defeats the villian in the end. Bond always makes cheesy puns. The fact that TOMORROW NEVER DIES (1997) copies these elements from the other 17 films doesn't make it horrible automatically. In fact, it received mostly favorable reviews. But, gasp! How can that be! It's such a copy, it must be horrible! After all, U.S. MARSHALS isn't anywhere near as copied from its first film as TOMORROW NEVER DIES was from its first *17*, and so U.S. MARSHALS is already bad for having copied a fugitive and a crash, right? Sure. Right. Whatever.
3) You were in the bathroom throughout the entire movie, weren't you? I mean... I can't barely fight this one, because it's too obvious that this is the same guy. Struggling to get the job done above all else short of taking care of his teammates. Barking orders powerfully even while taking a moment to smile good-naturedly and joke with his colleagues. Hey, this is Sam Gerard. The one we loved in THE FUGITIVE. Of course, it's no longer an Oscar-worthy performance, because it's not original anymore. We've been here before. But still, it's a strong character, it's the same character, and wow, Tommy Lee can carry a movie. With some help of course, but we'll get to that later.
4) It's nice to have it established who Sam is for those who didn't see THE FUGITIVE (this film DOES work as a stand-alone, incidentally), but that's not the real reason this needs to be here. It's nice to get reaquianted with the faces of his team that we might not remember... but that's not the reason we need this here either. We need this here so that Sam has a good reason to get on that plane. If not for this scene, everyone and their brother would be screaming "Contrived! Stupid!" when Sam climbs onboard that flight. Now he has a reason. Aren't you glad the filmmakers took the time to make it NOT contrived?
5) Yeah, stop chasing a man who fled from police and knows the real story behind all the weirdness that's going on. That'd be real smart. Sure.
6) Huh?! He's the fugitive that Gerard chases! He has nearly as much screen time as Jones does! He's the reason there's a plot here!
7) So you really DIDN'T see this movie. You know, you really shouldn't write reviews unless you see the movie first. I don't want to list spoilers here, but since every scene Snipes is in involves him using every method he has to track down the whole story behind his situation, I wonder, where was the person that made this comment?
8) God, this is just too wrong. Not only is the whole not resolved until the final FIVE MINUTES, but you couldn't even possibly predict every detail of the plot until the moment that it's all laid out before you.
9) Yeah, that would explain the characters who are shot, or the others who are seriously injured, during the course of the action. That's not a danger, obviously.
10) When the whole "conspiracy," along with the people/person behind it, is taken care of, and Snipes' character's fate is resolved, what more were you expecting?
Sorry about the ranting. I apologize again. But don't worry about it. Just go out and see U.S. MARSHALS. I mean, aren't you getting sick of seeing TITANIC (1997) now? You've been 47 times! For the love of God! Just go check out U.S. MARSHALS, and have fun. It may not be near the excellence of THE FUGITIVE (thanks largely to less emotional involvment and no Harrison Ford), but you'll have a good time.
RATING: ***
Originally posted in the rec.arts.movies.reviews newsgroup. Copyright belongs to original author unless otherwise stated. We take no responsibilities nor do we endorse the contents of this review.
