Lights, camera. Action comedy Back In Action turned out to be the project that Cameron Diaz deemed to be worthy of her return to film, and it's now up to each and everyone to decide for themselves if they agree with said decision. Diaz and Jamie Foxx star as Emily and Matt respectively, a now married couple who fell for each other while working as a spy duo for the CIA. Fifteen years ago they decided to drop out and start a "normal" life together under false identities after a botched mission led people to believe that they're dead, and so now they're living in the Atlanta suburbs with their two kids Alice (McKenna Roberts) and Leo (Rylan Jackson). However, their cover gets blown and the family needs to go on the run when Emily and Matt become a target due to them still possessing an important item from that botched mission.
It's definitely not a good sign that just the simple task of describing the story manages to both bore you to tears and make you roll your eyes. It is therefore even a worse sign that the movie—directed by Seth Gordon from a screenplay by Brendan O'Brien and Gordon—is dead set on being the blandest, most conventional version of itself. In spite of branding itself as a comedy among other things, the "humour" presented doesn't draw, or most pressingly, deserve any laughs with its look-at-these-kids-and-their-modern-ticks type of jokes and sassy yet pointless comebacks. Add depressingly flat characterisation and personality traits (annoying teens, your typical American, violence-driven arrogance etc.), plus a healthy dose of unfunny one-liners, and you have absolutely nothing to be invested in or amused by as a result.
You can easily see this utter lack of magic reflected in the performances, starting with Diaz and Foxx who put in their day's work, meaning that they're perfectly adequate but their shared banter doesn't have any real charm. On paper, their characters should be dealing with issues regarding loyalty, surveillance, terrorism and violence, but none of that struggle comes through at any point. It is simply just another day's work for these actors and you shouldn't care about their characters.
Roberts and Jackson's contributions have a lot of oscillation in terms of line deliveries, but to be fair, they are undermined by terrible dialogue that sees the kids as plot devices only. Kyle Chandler (as Chuck, the couple's old colleague) and Glenn Close (Ginny, Emily's mom) show up to do what they can with their stock characters whereas Jamie Demetriou (Nigel, Ginny's boyfriend) tries to breathe some fun into the movie. Andrew Scott (Baron, Emily's former associate) on the other hand is completely wasted here and the actor collects his paycheck whilst looking like he's constantly wondering if his new flat paid for with that paycheck was worth stooping so low or if he should fire his representatives.
At least Back In Action earns the right to have word "action" in its title since the stunt team is able to create a diverse collection of well-designed action set pieces from hand-to-hand combat to vehicle stunts (although it doesn't really speak well to your top creatives and stars when the film's entire highlight reel consists of moments that were probably executed by the second unit and stunt doubles). Still, you can't be picky with achievements when you're dealing with a film that is glorified algorithm vomit.
Elsewhere, the project isn't sufficient even on a technical level. It's genuinely surprising to see a real editor credited here (that would be Peter S. Elliot) since the only direction for it seems to cutting to the person saying the line or cutting to a shot where the actor's back (putting the back in Back In Action, I guess) is turned so that an alternative line added during ADR sessions can be A/B tested. This, once again, would be fine if the dialogue was decent. The purpose of this sort of editing and pacing is that the viewer scrolling on their phone on their couch is sort of able to follow along, which is just disheartening to witness nowadays. Composer Christopher Lennertz's insipid orchestral score and cinematographer Ken Seng's camera movement only make matters worse, so much so that Back In Action flatlines completely every once in a while—ironic since the deadly danger that the family supposedly is in rarely feels deadly or dangerous at all.
Despite the fact that the filmmakers dare to suggest towards the end that these characters might be back in action for a sequel or five, this movie proves that we have never been less back, and it is, indeed, so over. It is my sincere hope that no one's cover gets blown any time soon.
Smileys: Stunt choreography
Frowneys: Humour, editing, characterisation, dialogue
A family featuring spy kids switches to a plan that has them back in action while the Smiths heart a stone.
1.5/5
Where to watch:
This article may contain affiliate links, which means that we may earn a commission if you make a purchase through these links. Thank you for the support!
