Retro Rewatch: Escape from LA - 1996

Retro Rewatch is an ongoing editorial that takes a look into certain films, conventions, crazes, and characters of the horror genre years after their heyday. It is an effort to try and put the magnifying glass up to the horror world with the much needed luxuries of time and perspective applied in order to fully understand the impact and social significance of these projects/themes/ideas (if any). So for this installment of Retro Rewatch, we’re going to take a look into the bowels of UNnecessity with John Carpenter’s Escape From LA.

The debate still rages on about whether or not Escape from LA is a remake of Escape from New York or a direct sequel to it.  If you haven’t seen Escape from LA, then it would most likely seem to you that this is a question that should be pretty self explanatory.  I mean it’s either a sequel, or it isn’t, right?  Well the problem with the movie is that there are so many striking similarities to Escape From New York without actually referencing or acknowledging any of the events that took place during Escape From New York, which was filmed 15 years prior. 

Just to look at a few of the similarities here, one takes place in New York and one takes place in LA.  Now that doesn’t seem too similar, but both cities have since been converted into island prisons where the criminals basically have free reign to do whatever they want there without guards, cells, or shackles.  Both films recruit a notorious criminal named Snake Plissken (both times played by Kurt Russell) who is tasked with infiltrating the city and recovering an important person by the US government.  In Escape from New York, it was the President of the US and in Escape from LA, it was the President of the US’…. daughter.  These are just a few of the similarities that occur between the two films which lead us to an Evil Dead\Evil Dead 2 confusingly debatable situation, but I could spend all day showing you how they are pretty much the same movie.  How about for now we forget about all of those similarities and just try to take the movie for what it is.

Escape from LA is an action movie with a few choice horror movie elements thrown into play.  We all already know that Snake Plissken is a bad ass, but he is still thrown in to a situation that seems like it may be his last stand.  There are criminals everywhere that would kill him just because they felt like it or were kind of bored at the moment.  It’s a world where the worst people in society are all basically thrown in a cage and allowed to roam freely amongst themselves.  It’s total anarchy all of the time, and it’s not a safe place for anyone to be no matter how tough you are.  That is a pretty scary situation that our main character is thrown into and add on top of that the fact that he only has 24 hours until a virus kills him, there is a pretty big emphasis on getting the job done quickly.

After all the motivation for the journey is in place, the film kind of devolves into something that leaves the viewer asking themselves what in the hell is going on.  I don’t want to give away too much of the film if you intend to see it, but please make a mental note that there is a car chase/surfing scene, an overly elaborate plot that takes more twists and turns than anyone cared for, and a knife wielding dog.  Actually I lied to you, one of those isn’t actually in the movie, but can you guess which one?  Yeah it was the dog, you thought it was the car chase/surfing scene didn’t you?  Gotcha.

Escape From LA was supposed to be the film that took John Carpenter and his extremely impressive horror resume screaming into Hollywood and finally becoming a big time feature film director.  We all knew for years that this guy was an amazing auteur with films like The Thing, The Fog, Assault on Precinct 13, and Halloween, but apparently Hollywood wasn’t sold on him.  Hollywood still isn’t exactly sold on giving him a big budget and time to do what projects he wants to do despite that same Hollywood vehicle has now remade 3 of his films with another 2 on the way.  You would think that it wouldn’t be that hard for the guy to still get funding but apparently it is.  Regardless, with a 50 million dollar budget, the movie only returned 50% of that in the theater and was widely regarded as a failure.

People cited that Escape From LA was too much like the original, which was why they didn’t see it, but I don’t buy that for a second.  How many times have the masses of filmgoers been fed the same exact stories over and over again.  I’m not complaining about this scenario because there are filmmakers out there who will take a tired and boring concept and turn it into an amazing original piece of work but why would it have been a deterrent for fans of action movies? I feel that the film was not successful because the fans wanted a direct sequel, not a reimaging of Escape From New York.. Yes Escape from LA was much higher budget with better effects and gore, but it was like taking out an old CD that has a smashed case and replacing the case.  It looks nicer but it’s still the same CD.  Ultimately, the fans didn’t get exactly what they wanted and therefore the public seem to follow suit.  It’s a shame too because Escape From LA, even though it isn’t the best movie that ever existed, it’s a great time with some friends and a six pack because of its random outlandishness and often seen moments of baddassery.

Is it a cult classic, a fitting analysis, or complete forgettable?:  If you are a diehard fan of John Carpenter like I am, then this one is a cult classic to you just because you can’t fully comprehend how it got made while simultaneously basking in its cheesiness.  For everyone else: it’s completely forgettable.