Just blow up already!

Rating: 5/10 (5 March 2012)

For some reason Speed seems to be above criticism. It doesn't deserve this regard. I've never liked this film, and for a long list of reasons. I remember clearly the summer of 1994 when it became a sleeper hit. 'Die Hard on a bus' they called it. Erm...no. More like 'The Poseidon Adventure on a bus'.
Everybody knows the story by now, which is the sign of a high-concept idea. But I'm not captured by it. A bomb threat on a yuppie elevator ends with the bomber apparently blowing himself up in the parking lot. The LAPD cannot allow the yuppies to fall a breathtaking one-foot per second into the basement (it honestly moves at this 'speed' with none of them affected by zero-gravity). The bomber claims he invested 3 years into this plan, but overnight he conjures-up a better plan (all with just a single oppose-able thumb) in which a bus will blow up if it falls below 50 mph.
Half-witted cop Jack Traven races to the rescue. But instead of blowing-out the bus's tires he simply yells at the driver to stop. He doesn't. Once on-board they barge through traffic jams, hard corners, magically jump over 50-foot gaps (launched by invisible ramps it seems), and argue among themselves. The passengers are an undynamic bunch of cardboard cut-outs (burly worker in hat, long-faced African woman, whiny old crone, unemployed bachelor, geeky tourist) who never once get our sympathies. Many of them don't even have any dialogue and just sit there as if the threat of being blown to smithereens is a daily occurrence. Also, if I were Jack Traven, I'd put a bullet in the head of that annoying Helen before she even got a chance to draw air into her lungs in order to make her first complaint.
Directed by former cinematographer Jan De Bont (who is actually responsible for making Die Hard look as good as it does), it's a high-key movie (to the point of almost being sterile) with lots of destruction and well-choreographed action, but he has no idea how to direct actors or build character. Between the action scenes there are painful lulls which are not helped by the frequently awful dialogue and poor writing.
Perhaps I should say poor re-writing. Though Graham Yost is the only credited writer the script was significantly re-written by Joss Whedon, who made many changes. Originally the bomber was revealed to be Jeff Daniels' character, but after Whedon created Howard Payne the character of Harry Temple became redundant by the end of the second act and he's needlessly killed off. Other elements of the original draft are fossilized into the story and give it an irregular flow. There are so many other contrivances and lazy explanations that I just can't forgive. Jack Traven realizes that there is a camera on the bus when Payne refers to Sandra Bullock as 'the wildcat', despite the fact that the ancient camera Payne has hooked up inside the vehicle has nowhere near enough resolution to make out the Wildcat logo on her jacket (which she is also leaning against).
Keanu Reeves' acting is so bad it makes Seagal look like Olivier. Don't get me wrong, I like Keanu, but he's excruciatingly awful in this film. His puzzling facial expressions and just plain bizarre pronunciation of certain words gives Jack Traven (already an unlikeable character) a semi-retarded edge. I longed for Payne to get away with it.
Apparently Vic Armstrong was up for directing this but the producers went for Jan De Bont because of his lengthy camera credits. The success of the film is purely down to star power and its high concept. It's nothing to do with De Bont's ability as a director (which is why he hasn't worked since 2003) and I know that Armstrong would have made a better movie, even if he was stuck with Keanu (who he worked with a year later on notorious flop Johnny Mnemonic ), who couldn't even act ill if he had the flu.
Speed is not a good film. It's a badly-written early 90s relic. I just cannot even begin to understand the adoration its gathered over the years.