Noisy entertainment even though it could have done with being tighter and more urgent than it was

Rating: Null/10 (21 September 2011)

Very early in this film Paul Walker's character is hanging off the side of a speeding train in urgent need to get off before it hits the bridge. Instead of jumping to the ground and hoping he can roll his speed down, he jumps to a speeding car seconds before an explosion and then goes with that car as it flies off a cliff into a several hundred meter drop into a lake. At this point my girlfriend asked how any of that had been easier than just jumping onto the ground considering that hitting water from that height is similar to hitting concrete. I couldn't argue her logic but I did have to explain that her logic and attention to detail have no place in a film franchise that has hit its fifth instalment without ever suggestion that logic or plotting are anywhere near as important as a shot of a young woman's ass and a love of fast cars.
And that is the problem with Fast Five that you need to overcome, it will at no point do much with the plot unless it knows it can get from that bit of plotting to the next car, gun or ass scene with minimal effort. It is a summer movie though and the "Five" in the title does mean that you should know what you're coming to with it. So I did my best to overlook the plot which is messy and a lacking logic at pretty much every turn – I over look it because I'm happy to surrender logic if the film can give me thrills and action. Mostly the film does, or at least it gives spectacle. Whether it is the foot escape over favela roofs or the ridiculous destruction derby of the robbery itself, the film provides you with a lot to look at and as such it is entertaining as spectacle. Personally I though the whole film could have greatly benefited from being tighter outside of these scenes and needed an injection of actual danger and tension. Instead everything happens and our characters and their cars seem indestructible, which does rather detract from the action because the viewer doesn't really "care" or worry about what is going on – it is all about just the spectacle. Although, like I said, it does do this well.
Previous films in this series have had terrible effects and some awful CGI cars (that look CGI). I'm sure computer effects were in use here but mostly it doesn't show – specifically the car chases and scenes of destruction are satisfyingly real; again they may be effects but they are very good if they are because you do have the satisfying feel of stunt men working hard in the real world – something so many effects-driven blockbusters forget about now that computers can do so much. Matching the spectacle the cast mostly do what they are required to do by looking great. Paul Walker remains good-looking and has the sparkle in his eye that makes him fun to watch in these film. Alongside him Vin Diesel looks like he is half asleep in the most part and in this film his presence is massively damaged by having to be compared to The Rock. The Rock may not have much to do but he has great presence and a real brutal charm – arms the size of tree-trunks also help his "character" but, like I said, it makes Diesel look dull and out-of-shape by comparison (although the dull one is certainly true). Outside of them Brewster is OK despite having little to do, Tyrese brings his mouth but not the homoerotic comedy that he brought to the second film while both Pataky and Gadot have tremendous figures. Ludicrous, Kang and others in the gang appear to be in for fans of the franchise but it gives too many characters to care about – in terms of excitement and making the film tighter, it would have been better with a smaller group and tighter focus.
Overall Fast Five is a fun film in a franchise that has seen some poor ones already. It provides spectacle and noise which is all one can ask for – even if I would have loved it to be tighter, more dramatic.