There’s undeniable, primal appeal in watching the unexpected second phase of Liam Neeson’s career in motion: originally renowned for his intricate, character-driven performances, Neeson has spent the last 5 years crushing bad guys with one swing of his gigantic fist in a variety of amped-up situations. He took on an army of sex traffickers in Taken, memory loss and Diane Kruger in Unknown, and was chosen to play the 21st century incarnation of John “Hannibal” Smith in The A-Team. Then there was Zeus in Clash of the Titans, which gave Neeson the opportunity to act mad and spout super-camp lines like “Release the Kraken!”
It’s arguable that Neeson, now 60, has always been a candidate for mindless action fare: at a towering 6 feet 4 inches, his nose chiseled and bent, the Irish-born actor looks like he’s been through the blender a fair few times and stepped out with his dignity still in tact. There’s the appeal in Neeson as action man.
This year alone, Neeson has appeared in 5 movies, all action movies (or variants of), and all of which have been successful at the box office. In The Grey, which was pegged humorously by fans as “Liam Neeson vs. CGI wolves”, Neeson can be glimpsed amidst the white Alaskan wilderness with broken bottles taped to his hands, practically daring a pack of vicious, snarling dogs to come at him. That’s badassery defined, of course, and there’s no denying the simple pleasures gained from seeing absolutely anybody willing to take on their enemies in such a bizarre fashion. But is Neeson destined to do this kind of schtick forever? What happened to Liam Neeson the actor?
It all started with Taken, of course, which became a certified cult classic in the months following its cinematic release when it came out on DVD with new scenes of added violence. Although Neeson had appeared in a few action-orientated films before Luc Besson cast him as former-CIA operative Bryan Mills, there was a kind of induced irony in watching him charge around Paris, killing everybody who stood in his way and not giving a single solitary shit, given his associations with more serious performances. The joke wasn’t on Neeson, of course, because it was something of an inspired revelation to see Oskar Schindler taking down an army of bad guys in graphic detail. But nowadays this easily cloned and unstoppable Neeson character seems to be verging into a territory reserved for jokes that have run their course. Neeson is a good action star, but he’s also a much better and more honed actor capable of a lot more.
Taken 2 hopefully marks the beginning of the end with regards to this period, which I admit, has been a throughly enjoyable one. A generic action thriller in every sense, Taken 2 perfectly showcased how odd trends like these can fall flat. Neeson is 5 years older than he was in the original flick, and it shows: Bryan Mills is sluggish and wrinkled now, Neeson far less capable of handling action sequences with the same gusto he injected in previous efforts. Taken 2 was pretty much universally derided by both critics and fans, and that wasn’t necessarily Neeson’s fault: there was no spark to the movie, nothing special about it, and almost nothing for its actors to do.
Which is why Neeson needs to get his teeth back into the meatier roles. Consider his wonderful, note-perfect performance as Oskar Schindler, which came endowed with such masterful levels of sorrow and melancholia and honesty – the picture truly might not have worked without him. And what about Alfred Kinsey, the famous professor who came to revolutionise the way we think and talk about sex, who remains one of Neeson’s most complex and rounded characters to date. It’s not that Liam Neeson should steer away from action vehicles entirely; it just seems unfortunate that a bunch of generally middling thrillers should be the work he is remembered by.
Is it time for Neeson to shake things up a bit, then? I think so, before he finds the joke is suddenly on him. In times of retrospect, it seems an even bigger shame that he didn’t find himself cast as Abraham Lincoln in Steven Spielberg’s upcoming biopic as was originally rumoured. Now that would have been a star turn worthy of the man.
We are currently seeking Film contributors on WhatCulture. To find out more about the perks of being a Film contributor, click here.
8 Comments
I look at Liam Neeson the same way I look at Nicolas Cage.
They proved themselves as “serious” actors in the 90s, and now they do roles that are attractive to them. Fun. Out there. And it’s their right, considering it’s what their occupation allows: the right of choice.
People who say Cage is a bad actor go by his recent flops, which makes no sense. I don’t defend his movies, but I defend him. Same with Neeson. I don’t defend Battleship, but I’d cock an eyebrow up at someone who said he couldn’t deliver a fantastic performance.
There is no “joke” for either man. They’re doing exactly what they want. And paying the bills.
The point is, these action movies are – for the most part – bad. Neeson is better than “rotten” action movies with nothing new to say or do. And those generic Nic Cage movies are all above Nic Cage, too. And like you said, many people don’t remember that he was once a great actor.
People like to see aging actors take on extreme roles. Films like “Red” and “The Expendables” are proof. They’re movies that aren’t trying to be anything new and explosive. They’re just fun and trying to make a buck.
I don’t think Neeson is getting any kind of spiritual epiphany or awakening for taking these roles, but if he’s adept and believable in them, then who really cares?
If Neeson or Cage or Russell Crowe or whoever just made bad action movie after bad action movie until they died, are we going to call them “jokes?” Are we that fickle, after sitting there, watching them win Oscars and provide some of the best performances in cinema? Are we really so pompous that we’ll say, “Oh, remember when they were ‘good?’” Frankly, I just can’t care enough. I’m a fan of their old films. I’m a fan of their work. Their involvement in any future projects doesn’t make me “pine for the days of old” because the fact is, we have those movies to re-watch virtually anywhere and anytime we want.
We can cry out, “Make better movies like you used to!” but an actor doesn’t seek out roles based on how an audience we’ll perceive them. An actor picks roles that he or she finds somewhat relevant, exciting, or fun. And, honestly, we just have to get over it.
It’s a good write-up and sparks discussion, and for that, you should be commended as the author.
*will perceive them
Thing is, Nic Cage IS A joke nowadays, and nobody respects him anymore. Which is what this article is about. Before it happens to Neeson. Nic Cage does those films cause he’s bankrupt.
I think what is missing here is that Neeson is making HUGE money doing crap movies. as long as they pay him and we pay to see him, he’ll keep doing crap movies. He’s now a CARICATURE of the hollywood male movie star, dating women 20 plus years younger and stupid action movies. He’s like a poor man’s George Clooney without the social responsibility or Oscar-caliber films. That being said, I saw Taken 2, and yes, it was garbage, but it was fun, so joke’s on me, not Neeson.
The joke’s on you? And that’s a good thing?
He will find you and he will kill you :-) Seriously, I don´t think anybody doubts Neeson. Taken worked precisely because he is also a great actor and was believable. Grey wasn´t an action movie at all, the scene you mentioned was like 30 seconds before the end. It was a thriller and a good one. He IS a movie star, he is one of those rare actors who people go to see. They are not going to see a movie but “another movie with Liam Neeson kicking ass”. What other actor can say that? NOt even the biggest “stars” these days can´t sell a movie he can – last Johnny Depp´s movies flopped and those with Clooney or Pitt were not hits and if they were, then not because of them. Neeson sells movies, that´s an actor does. I am perfectly fine with him doing this. He deserves all success and fun in life after his wife tragically died.