More reviews by —
TITLE:
RATING:
DIRECTOR
CATEGORY |
You've really got to hand it to the folks who made this movie. They knew exactly which parts to skimp on and which parts to go ahead with, full tilt.
They spend the shortest possible amount of time on some rather trite character development ("just talk" scenes) and get right to the meat of the picture—blood, guts and thrills. And not only is this the stuff that everyone has come to see, but it's done so well here that I actually overcame my usual dislike of Stallone and really enjoyed Cliffhanger.
Even I must admit that, while he's not all that great at emoting (and sometimes even speaking), Stallone is awfully good at grunting, groaning, and fighting. And, it would seem, mountain climbing (or at least, looking like he's mountain climbing)
And that's most of what Cliffhanger is, to its credit—mountain climbing.
The scenery is wonderful (supposed to be the Rockies, it's really the Dolomites in northern Italy) and the climbing (as well as the running, falling, helicopter-dodging, etc.) is quite breathtaking. This especially applies to the truly harrowing opening sequence, which I seriously don't recommend to viewers with a fear of heights.
The story that sets up the stunts isn't any wilder than the usual action movie premise. Some bad guys (really bad guys, especially Lithgow, as we later discover) highjack some money over the Rockies, but their plan goes slightly awry and both them and the cash make a crash landing—just not together. So the good guys, (mountain rescuers Stallone, Turner and Michael Hooker) who come to save them, are forced to help them find the money.
Many vicious fight scenes, and several dead bodies later, the audience stumbles dizzily from the theater, feeling like they've actually spent an hour and a half looking down from giddy summits. A bit (actually more than that) less gore would have made Cliffhanger more to my liking, but the non-violent thrills still make it worth seeing.
June 30, 1993 |