A Review of "Stealth" (Now on DVD)
Mood:  lazy
Topic: A Review of "Stealth"
I greatly enjoy science fiction, especially science fiction that deals with men versus out-of-control machines. Perhaps it is the chess player within me, but this sub-genre has always seemed to offer wonderful scenarios for the doom of mankind, from Fred Saberhagen’s Berserkers, to James Cameron’s Terminators. Stealth, the summer movie recently released on DVD, takes its own crack at this ever popular theme. The result: a cinematic equivalent of the Atari 1040ST---lots of unfilled promise that, nonetheless, does manage to hold your attention for a spell.

Briefly, Stealth is a movie that revolves around an elite team of three pilots (as played by Josh Lucas as Lt. Ben Gannon, Jessica Biel as Lt. Kara Wade, and Jamie Foxx as Lt. Henry Purcell) who fly super-advanced aircraft capable of striking targets in the most hostile regions of the world. The wrinkle arrives in the form of EDI (pronounced ‘Eddy’), an untested AI-controlled warplane that threatens to make human pilots anachronistic via its unmatched flight capabilities. Worse, during a trial run, EDI is stuck by a lightning bolt, becomes self-aware, and quickly becomes a menace not only to the pilots that fly with him, but to world peace in general. Such is the set-up for the film. Sounds like the makings for a good movie, no? The right elements are there, but unfortunately the movie plays out like the gut-wrenching aerobatics displayed during the film’s many action sequences: lots of ups and downs with little straight and level flight in between.

A big part of the film’s problem is its derivative nature. Like Independence Day, this move borrows heavily from a number of predecessors such as Fire Fox, 2001: A Space Odyssey, Top Gun, and Iron Eagle. While it is okay to borrow elements from other films, it is definitely NOT alright to do so and dump the various parts into the lap of the viewer without any attempt to tie them all together in a coherent fashion that makes sense. Unfortunately, this is what happens with Stealth. You get a lot of clever, if rehashed, elements, but nothing is really developed beyond the “wouldn’t it be cool if….” stage of scriptwriting.

Take, for example, EDI and the idea of AI-operated warplanes replacing human pilots. Cool sci-fi idea, but it is never really developed to believable proportions. Even though the creator of EDI, a man by the name of Keith Orbit, is introduced into the movie, we are never really given a glimpse into how this technological wonder was developed and what possible flaw might have suggested his later eccentric behavior. Instead we are subjected to a few lines of standard techno-babble that tell us nothing. This, of course, hinders the believability of EDI and harms the whole film as a result. The movie would have been far better served if we were given an explanation of EDI’s creation along the lines of Colossus in Colossus: The Forbin Project or the W.O.P.R. in Wargames, perhaps the two finest celluloid examples of super-machines gone wild because of cold logic unmitigated by human morality.

EDI lacks development in other regards too. Even though he is clearly based upon HAL from 2001: A Space Odyssey, he never conveys the insane malice of that computer. Part of the problem is his voice. Unlike the inhuman perfection of HAL’s speech, or Joshua’s (a.k.a. the W.O.P.R.) tone of childlike innocence in Wargames, his voice is simply annoying in the nasally fashion of a cheap HAL knockoff. It is, quite frankly, just hard to take seriously as a maniacal computer and more believable as a, well, nerdy teenager! This idea is reinforced by EDI’s unfathomable desire to play blaring rock music while attacking enemy targets (a la Iron Eagle) in the fashion of a high school student playing a video game. All these elements combine to create the feeling that you don’t fear EDI as much as you want to steal his lunch money. This is not good when EDI is expected to be the primary villain of the film!

Another annoyance of the movie is its insistence on modeling its pilots along the line of Tom Cruise in Top Gun. To be fair, this flaw is not limited to this film, but has been incorporated by every scriptwriter and director since Top Gun’s release in 1986. How many times are we going to be subjected to the fighter pilot as an ‘order-disobeying-party-animal-with-fashion-model-looks’ stereotype? Top Gun has done more to besmirch the reputation of real world pilots than any other film. When will Hollywood figure out that real warplane ‘drivers’ are some of the most mature, serious, and intelligent people on the planet? You would have thought some director would have tried a different characterization path just out of boredom by now! Alas, this is not the film to break the mold. Not a major flaw, but one I am quickly become very tired of witnessing.

Another problem with the film is its climax---it is strangely anti-climatic. Now, don’t worry, I am not going to spoil the film. But I will say that after watching almost two hours of aerial battles, the final conflict, OVER NORTH KOREA NO LESS, was remarkably sedate! We witnessed terrorists with formidable firepower and the warlord of Myanmar firing surface to air missiles in abundance, but for some strange reason, the North Korean side of the DMZ is portrayed as manned solely by two machineguns and a searchlight! What was rightly expected to be a huge, edge-of-your-seat battle quickly fizzles to the disappointment of all.

Lastly, the film suffers from an identity conflict. Part of it wants to be science fiction, part contemporary techno-thriller. So, while we are subject to present-day elements involving terrorism and nuclear proliferation, we are also shown such sci-fi concepts as AI-controlled aircraft, implosion weapons, and giant, lumbering dirigible fuelers (cool concept!). I found myself asking “which is it?” Are we in the future or the near present as the film postulates? With concepts like these, you cannot have it both ways. I think the movie would have been better served with a pure sci-fi setting as there are precious few (any?) movies that deal with futuristic warfare in a realistic way. This could have been one of the few. Alas, yet another missed opportunity.

Not that the film is entirely bad. The special effects, as you can imagine, are truly spectacular. The dogfight over Russia is particularly well done, leaving the viewer gasping for air like the pilots on the screen. Unfortunately, the F/X are clearly expected to carry the film---something I wish directors would discover is simply not possible without a coherent plot.

Likewise, the film does have an abundance of action, both on the ground and in the air. Some of the scenes are quite clever, such as Jessica Biel’s unusually harrowing ejection sequence. Again, though, like the special effects, an abundance of action cannot substitute for a plot.

In fact, I would gladly sacrifice some of the action for more dialogue. To Stealth’s credit, there are a few scenes that offer some fleeting promise of plot depth, such as when Lt. Ben Gannon debates Capt. George Cummings about the dangers of machines replacing men in warfare. But such moments are invariably clipped short so as to move on to the next battle. This is a shame because you get a glimmer of intelligence in these brief moments that serve to break the vapid expanse of mindless action that dominates the rest of the film.

Finally, the film does have a few unexpected plot twists that breakup a largely linear plot. From EDI’s unexpected personality shift to the development of a corporate-government conspiracy (another hackneyed concept), there are some genuine surprises to be had. Unfortunately, like the dialogue, these moments are clipped and under-developed so as not to, you guessed it!, delay the next action sequence.

So how does Stealth rate? Succinctly: it’s a rental. Stealth will be one of those films that will prove to be perennially popular on late-night television; a film custom tailored for those moments when there is simply nothing else to watch or do. For that, if nothing else, we should be grateful. However, at its worst, Stealth is yet another missed opportunity from Hollywood; another eye-candy effort at churning out the loudest, most action-packed film without ever stopping to properly develop a plot. It is a film marketed to an audience that, for some strange reason, Tinsel Town producers believe is as mindless as the movies they shove down our throats year after year. In short, like the Spruce Goose, Stealth is a magnificent lame duck.

PS: Be sure to stick around through the credits for a (predictable) surprise.

PPS: Is it me, or is Jessica Biel’s closing line one of the worst ever uttered on screen?

PPPS: I’m stilling trying to figure out why the movie is called Stealth when the stealthy characteristics of the aircraft were never developed in the least!