Harry here with RAZOR's look at PAYBACK. There have been massive reshoots since Helgeland's wonderful original cut. We still don't know how it's turned out. It could be kickass, it could be great, but if it isn't... then the fault will lie quite clearly at the feet of Paramount and Mel Gibson. If you have read the current PREMIERE, they outline a bit of the 'behind the scenes' story, but they haven't seen the films in question. Ie... Helgeland's PAYBACK and Gibson's PAYBACK. And, I have to refrain from talking about the second film till I have seen it, but when I saw the trailer... Well... There seems to have been some MAJOR changes... I'll let RAZOR take over from here....
This review has spoilers, but most won't matter since the studio is butchering and
altering the film beyond recognition.
PAYBACK is Oscar winning screenwriter Brian Helgeland's directoriol debut and if it
were not for Paramount Pictures and the morons that run that studio, it would have been an
impressive piece of work. We're not talking perfection here. The ending is a let down
that wants us to guess what happens to the lead, but other than that one weakness, I found myself
thoroughly enjoying this relentless & funny crime film.
PAYBACK is based on both Donald Westlake's novel and the 1967 Lee Marvin/John
Boorman film, both called POINT BLANK. In this version Mel Gibson plays "Porter", a tough
thief who gets betrayed by a fellow thief and his own wife. Left for dead, he returns for
revenge and the $70,000.00 that was taken from him. No more, no less.
The film has a great set-up where Porter rips off half a dozen people, all during the opening
credits. It's a riot watching Mel Gibson do things one wouldn't expect Mel
Gibson to do. He even rips off a blind man! That's what makes it so funny. I'd
rank this as one of the best opening credit sequences I have seen in the last ten years. From there
things continue to go just as well as we see Mel and his so called buddy rip off some Chinese
money launderers for $140,00.00 (this film is a great example as to why seat-belts are
important). Then we have the betrayal, followed by Mel kicking ass and taking names. There are
a lot of good actors in this film and they all do real well in some tasty roles. I especially liked
Lucy Liu as the Chinese dominatrix who loves to have sex and kick ass at the same time. I
actually wanted to see more of her since she was such a trip.
The temp track used has some music from movies like FACE/OFF and BREAKDOWN, but most
is taken from 70's crime thrillers, much from DIRTY HARRY and it works so well I
hope they keep the music in the film. The film needs that sleazy feel and Lalo Schifrin provides it
just fine. If we can’t have the temp track music, then get Lalo to do the score.
There isn’t a lot of LETHAL WEAPON type action in this film. PAYBACK is told in
low budget style. The script is king and there is no need for 100 million in pointless action &
stunts. The film has enough fun with Mel Gibson beating guys up, getting beaten up, turning the
tables on his enemies and using the police without their knowledge. It all builds up to a cameo
appearance by the great James Coburn (love that guy) and a terrific finale involving that
$70,00.00, a half dozen bad guys and a train station. Again: No LW4 super action here. There is
no need for it.
This leads us to the film only real weakness: Porter's girl drives him, shot & bloody as
hell, from the train station, to an unknown fate. He doesn't even get his $70,00.00 because
some street bum take it. It’s a bad finish for a good, solid movie and I am shocked the
script was given the green light with such an obvious down beat ending. Didn't they think
about the testing process?
I'm sure this is Paramount's biggest gripe. No big time action set piece, no
explosions & a bummer ending. How can we market that?! Warner Bros. Asked them the same
question last year with L. A. CONFIDENTIAL and they sure didn't answer it very well.
While PAYBACK is not as good as that film, it sure is better than Paramount gives it credit. If
they want re-shoots, then just change the last scene so Porter gets his money & the girl.
That's it. It would take 1 day to shoot the new ending.
After seeing the new PAYBACK trailer, it is obvious that Paramount wanted more. They
didn't like some of the test cards where there were complaints about Mel Gibson being
too mean & nasty, killing people in cold blood. Well, they deserved it! They were all killers!
Paramount got complaints that there was too little action and no vulgarity. WHAT?! So what if
"Fuck. Shit, pussy, dickhead" and the like were never uttered. It added to the film! And to hell
with mindless action. We don't need it.
Paramount delayed this film for reshoots and a new ending. The trailer give more than a few
hints at what we can expect.
First of all, the "voice" of the syndicate, wonderfully realised by the voice of Angie Dickinson,
is gone. Now Kris Kristoferson plays the head of the syndicate and not only do we hear his
voice, we SEE him as well! This means certain lines where James Coburn refers to "her" will
have to be changed to "he" or "him." Now I love Kris as much as the rest of you and I am thrilled
he is getting work, but why remove Angie’s voice? What's the point? If Kris
doesn't show up at the finale, then there will be no point to it.
The trailer had a stiff Gibson narration, ala the forced narration for BLADE RUNNER So what
is that supposed to do?! Narrations rarely work. These Paramount suits need a double tap of .45
Black Talons to the head.
There are thwo explosions in the trailer that were not in the workprint I saw. Boom goes the
building. Boom goes the car. Boom goes this film.
Maybe we'll see a miracle and PAYBACK will be improved. But I do not see how. I
watched John Boorman's POINT BLANK last night, which was the first filming of
Westlake's novel and that film was terse, to the point and brutal. PAYBACK, at least
Brian Helgeland's version, was/is a worthy predecessor. For once we have (had) a film
that through away conventional big budget filmmaking and went on instinct. But that’s not
good enough for Paramount.
Paramount should be pleased with the new trailer. It got a great reaction from the opening night
crowd at Star Trek: Insurrection (a bad, bad film). But why spend what is rumoured to be 10
million extra dollars on a film that was already on of the best of the year?
Morons.
I'll end this by saying I believe the director's guild of America needs to go on
strike. Simply round up all the talent there is and tell the studios there is no more NRG bullshit.
There should be a panel of filmmakers set up so that director's can protest studio
changes. The film would be screened and if the panel agrees with the studios, then the changes
can be made. If not, then fuck you studio.
Otherwise we will just see the continual slide of filmmaking in Hollywood. How bad do things
have to get before there is significant change?
RAZOR
| 
