There is a moment when Sheriff Talley (Bruce Willis) empties his gun into an already dead man-- and the sound is muted. After multiple scenes of deafening gunfire and explosions, all of which were part of a police action, when he empties that weapon, the sound is muffled: it's personal. That breakaway choice is perhaps the most obvious example of the director Florent-Emilio Siri's talent. The whole of "Hostage" is carefully crafted, with the kind of operatic violence we see in exceptional action films, e.g., Seven Samurai, RoboCop, Django Unchained, Deadpool (among many others). Along with pacing and music, choices like that are what give movies their power, like drivers behind the script and the performances.
The overall rating almost dissuaded me from watching, but the negative reviews were unconvincing, especially those that claimed the plot was hard to follow because there are two sets of bad guys. Really? Some reviewers couldn't separate the young punks taking hostages in a house from the masked gangsters who terrorized both the punks and the police? It reminded me of the reviewers who didn't like "Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End" because they couldn't keep track of three ships (Black Pearl, Flying Dutchman, and Endeavor). Three. How did they make it out of grade school, I wonder. There are reasons to dislike the third Pirates movie, but that's not one of them.
I watched "Hostage" for Bruce Willis, who was also a producer. Evidently he brought Siri from France to direct after seeing his first feature. That confirms what I've read about Willis over his varied career: he appreciated that movies could be both popular and cinematically sophisticated. The trouble was, he was so good in "Die Hard" that audiences and producers wanted more of the same, and he delivered, but his oeuvre also includes comedy, drama, satire, science fiction, ensemble films, voice-over work, and more than a few cameos. He took supporting roles as well as leads, and made more than a few bombs like "Hudson Hawk," "Bonfire of the Vanities," and "Breakfast of Champions" (which has sunk to DVD obscurity). I.e., he took chances. Screenrant lists him sixth among greatest action stars, after Schwarzenegger (No. 1), Eastwood, Stallone, Harrison Ford, and Jackie Chan. All I'll add is that he is, by a fair margin, the most versatile and talented actor in that bunch.
The overall rating almost dissuaded me from watching, but the negative reviews were unconvincing, especially those that claimed the plot was hard to follow because there are two sets of bad guys. Really? Some reviewers couldn't separate the young punks taking hostages in a house from the masked gangsters who terrorized both the punks and the police? It reminded me of the reviewers who didn't like "Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End" because they couldn't keep track of three ships (Black Pearl, Flying Dutchman, and Endeavor). Three. How did they make it out of grade school, I wonder. There are reasons to dislike the third Pirates movie, but that's not one of them.
I watched "Hostage" for Bruce Willis, who was also a producer. Evidently he brought Siri from France to direct after seeing his first feature. That confirms what I've read about Willis over his varied career: he appreciated that movies could be both popular and cinematically sophisticated. The trouble was, he was so good in "Die Hard" that audiences and producers wanted more of the same, and he delivered, but his oeuvre also includes comedy, drama, satire, science fiction, ensemble films, voice-over work, and more than a few cameos. He took supporting roles as well as leads, and made more than a few bombs like "Hudson Hawk," "Bonfire of the Vanities," and "Breakfast of Champions" (which has sunk to DVD obscurity). I.e., he took chances. Screenrant lists him sixth among greatest action stars, after Schwarzenegger (No. 1), Eastwood, Stallone, Harrison Ford, and Jackie Chan. All I'll add is that he is, by a fair margin, the most versatile and talented actor in that bunch.