SAN ANDREAS
US, 2015, 114 minutes, Colour.
Dwayne Johnson, Carla Gugino, Alexandra Daddario, Ioan Gruffudd, Archie Panjabi, Paul Giamatti, Hugo Johnston-Burt?, Heart Parkinson, Kylie Minogue.
Directed by Brad Peyton.
Yes, all the reviews and conversation have made cracks (!) about faults (!) in this earthquake disaster movie. But, that is what it set out to be, and that is what it does - reminding the oldies in the audience of the 70s, Towering Infernos on fire and collapsing, underwater swimming in the Poseidon Adventure, Earthquake..
If you are in any way apprehensive about earthquakes and being trapped in one, this is definitely the film not to see. There is no let-up throughout almost two hours of action – a moment or two every now and then for some of the human interactions but then it is into more quakes, more after-shocks, more buildings collapsing, more fires starting, a great tsunami on San Francisco Bay, then flooding…
One would suppose that San Andreas will have an Oscar nomination for Special Effects (rather than for screenplay and dialogue, some of which is more in the line of the Razzie nominations). The point is that they look particularly realistic, with scenes of Los Angeles collapsing, with scenes of San Francisco collapsing, comparatively lesser destruction in Bakersfield – and a huge canyon opening along the San Andreas fault itself. And there is a pounding score to match.
One of the main surprises for those who read the final credits is to discover that the bulk of the film was made at the Gold Coast Studios in Queensland, with the special effects work and editing done in the United States.
With other disaster films in this vein, the human story tends to be fairly predictable. In this one, we own are introduced to some veterans of helicopter rescues in Afghanistan showing their skills in quite a predicament as a car goes over a cliff above the San Fernando Valley. But with Dwayne Johnson at the controls, there are only momentary doubts, if any, that all will not succeed. The human story focuses on him, his grief after the accidental death of his daughter some years earlier, his inability to communicate, his wife leaving him in frustration, his older daughter still keeping in touch with him.
On the other hand, for the scientific part of the film, which is more credible, there is the always-reliable Paul Giamatti at Caltech, working with his staff for models of gauging the predictability of earthquakes from tremors, especially in California and along the famous fault. His assistant goes to the Hoover Dam when suddenly, only 15 minutes into the film, there is the first of the huge quakes and the extraordinary destruction of the famous Dam. Then ominous readings are found and news of further quakes. The Professor is able to hack into television channels to warn the country and, especially, the state and its two major cities, that they are to expect the worst.
Audiences would not be expecting to find that Dwayne Johnson is able to rescue his former wife, Carla Gugino, so immediately from the top of an LA restaurant and together, first by helicopter, then by car, then by plane, and eventually by boat on San Francisco Bay, they go in search of their daughter (a lively Alexandra Daddario), who is in the company of the young British engineer (Australian Hugo Johnstone-Burt) who is to be interviewed for a job and his teenage brother (Art Parkinson).
So, we follow the younger trio through all kinds of adventures, risks, the daughter using her father’s experience and ingenuity to make contact and to keep them going to the highest point available.
It goes without saying there are some final dramatic, melodramatic tense moments before the final rescue and Dwayne Johnson utters words about: re-building.
Yes, the screenwriter might have made a more imaginative fist of the human story and the dialogue, but it certainly takes a second place to two hours of extraordinary effects which persuade the audience that they are right there experiencing tremors, quakes and after-shocks.
1. The impact of the film? In the disaster film tradition, especially from the 1970s? Audiences identifying with the situations, the characters, the dangers?
2. The credibility of the plot, the San Andreas fault, the explanations and diagrams in the film, through California, for Los Angeles, San Francisco, the opening up of the canyon on the fault? The Hoover Dam, Nevada, the destruction?
3. The special effects, no let up, with the Dam, with all the quakes in Los Angeles, the after-shocks? Buildings collapsing, fires, the sooner army, the flooding of San Francisco? The cumulative impact?
4. The human story, introduction to Ray and his fellow-workers, skills, the background in Afghanistan and the rescues, the dangers? Ray’s personal story, separation from his wife, his love for Blake, the death of the younger daughter and his not accepting it? His previous love for Emma? The divorce papers, going to visit, meeting Daniel, moving in? His accepting the situation? Blake flying to San Francisco with Daniel? His going on leave? The introduction to Blake, waiting in the office, meeting Ben, Ollie? Her being trapped in the car, Daniel leaving, Ben and Ollie and the journey with Blake? Ray the helicopter, finding Emma, going to the roof, the rescue, the crash of the helicopter, the drive, the canyon, the plane, leaving it to go out to sea with no fuel? The boat? Sailing around the city, the experience of the tsunami? The final rescue?
5. Blake, her relationship with her mother, with Ray, with Daniel? His leaving her? Ben hearing him about the car, he and Ollie going to her rescue, he shrewdness in using the Jack, lifting the car and the stone? The resourcefulness of each one? Blake relying on her experiences with her father? The phone, going to the store, the batteries, the connections? Moving towards the high ground, Coit Tower and its destruction, moving to Nob Hill, the buildings continuing to fall, the water, in the high building, Ben’s injury and Blake looking after it? The glass partition, seeing Ray and Emma, coming to the rescue, Blake almost drowning, reviving her?
6. Daniel, his character, architect, the buildings, the type, fear, leaving, pushing people aside, killed on the bridge?
7. The film’s focus on individuals, the background of people, dying, surviving?
8. The Professor, Kim, the tests, the modelling for predictions? Kim going to the Hoover Dam, the sudden quake, the destruction, rescuing the little girl, his death? Going back to the laboratories, the television interview, the growing amount of information, the need for warning people, hacking into the television, the interview and the warnings – and the gratitude that people were warned in time?
9. The effect of the experience, the blend of the familiar with the vividness of the special effects and a sense of realism?
