As spring cleaning is in the air I’m sweeping away the cobwebs from this space with a few random and superficial thoughts about Space Sweepers, with the emphasis on Richard Armitage who plays another dislikeable James – this time, Sullivan.
Warning! There may be small spoilers.
Even though dystopian sci-fi isn’t my favourite genre, Space Sweepers is good-natured fun and the special-effects are impressive (although I am easily impressed by special effects – split screens and double-exposures still cause my jaw to drop). The leads, Kim Tae-ri, Song Joong-Ki and Jin Seon-Kyu, are likeable, the cast is diverse and the film contains Richard Armitage! And bad Armitage – my favourite – although he tried hard to repel with the hated beard, glasses and slacks. @emilmure has a point.
Extremely attractive in the dark shirt though.
Nice jacket-thing though.
I often don’t enjoy the presence of children in films, e.g. they often don’t act well (understandably) or their performances are irritating and I don’t like being manipulated by cutesey-ness. Dorothy, the little girl/robot, on the other hand is endearing and it was a clever idea having her as a bomb. But, boy oh boy, what has she been eating? Her digestive/bladder problems need to be sorted out. I can’t remember the last time farting children appeared in a film, thankfully it is a rarity, nor when a child wore make-up, which is a no-no in the UK nowadays thankfully.
Is it me or is everyone in South-Korean Space Sci-fi movies getting younger? Even RA , at 152, looks youthful.
On the down-side, Space Sweepers is over long and there was much that was unexplained and confusing e.g. the ship, Victory, sometimes seemed to be in space then on Earth then in space – or maybe I just wasn’t interested enough generally to follow. The leads were fine but some of the acting by the supporting cast was toe-curlingly bad. On that note, some of the reviews described Richard Armitage’s performance as ‘hammy’. I have scrutinised his acting for many years and have rarely heard this said before (and hardly ever agreed with it then). If anything he under acts, which makes his emoting all the more intense when it happen. Armitage under plays menace so well too, his seductive murmurs so much more effective than ranting. So I don’t agree now that it is hammy in Space Sweepers. Unless they meant like John Hamm – with similar cursed beard and glasses.
RA plays it just the way an evil gardening megalomaniac should be played and, as one review described him, as ‘Overacting to precisely the right degree’. His Bond would have been (would be?) fantastic but so would be his evil nemesis (perhaps he could play both as Bond’s evil twin). James Sullivan will have to do in the meantime.
Beauty and the Beard.
RA inhabits his characters. The performance is studied. His walk and stance are different for this film. Sullivan’s stride is slow, relaxed, confident – sexy. His stance, on the other hand is nerdish, repressed and boyish with his thighs pressed together. There are no nervous tics, e.g. throat grabbing and rapid swallowing.
The unexplained veins that come and go, willy-nilly on James Sullivan’s face, mimic the sudden appearance of dragon-fire marks on Thranduil’s in The Hobbit.
My favourite line in Space Sweepers:
Look what comes of finger-wagging, Armitage!
Finally, in my hasty notes for this blog, I wrote ‘Enprmpus’. I had no idea what this was supposed to mean and it has puzzled me for ages. It has now dawned on me – enormous.
All hail the god-like Armitage.
Thanks for reading.