Future Unrentables: The Sentinel

The Sentinel is exactly like those overblown action movies made for the USA Network or TNT. Add in a few breaks for Axe Body Spray commercials and a tiny, half-visible station identification logo in the lower right hand corner and Clark Johnson's film would perfectly replicate the experience of watching late-late-late night television due to insomnia/depression/cocaine addiction.

This is straight-up television-style storytelling, by which I mean it looks cheap and tends toward uninspired melodramatics in place of anything interesting or cinematic. Johnson has worked mainly in television (he currently directs episodes of "Sleeper Cell," "The Shield" and "Law and Order: Special Victims Unit"). His only previous feature film was the woeful 2003 adaptation of the S.W.A.T. TV show, memorable only for Oliver Martinez's bellicose offer from the trailer - "100 million dorrars!"

As in that film, Johnson directs completely bland, anonymous sequences and then, ever 20 minutes or so, throws in something visually jarring and elaborate, to remind you that you're watching a movie and not a "24" rerun. After a dull opening montage of Secret Service agent Michael Douglas arriving for work, Johnson swings upward for a long CGI tracking shot across the roof of the White House. Not only is the entire set-up totally pointless, but he does a poor job of covering the cuts in what is clearly intended to look like a single shot. Maybe the "La Femme Nikita" TV spin-off (which aired on...wait for it...the USA Network!) was a more appropriate fit for this guy's talents...



It's not only Johnson's fault that The Sentinel veers wildly between boring, stupid and stutifyingly boring. George Nolfi's clumsy script, literally teeming with bad political thriller dialogue and Secret Service jargon, isn't doing anyone any favors. The writing frequently reminded me of those really awful military techno-thrillers that creepy old white guys write for other, even creepier old white guys to flip through while on the can.

"Stock Smithson entered the coordinates into his jiggerator and waited. Once more, he realized he should have trusted his gut. The launch codes and the microlaser were in the possession of Torvald Hammsher, former Danish Resistance Front defector, ex-assassin for the Church of the Zoroaster and all-around son of a bitch. His only hope would be to hijack the XRP-98, rip apart the particle-thermalized security interface and haul ass to Turkmenistan. Provided it wasn't already too late."

So, okay, fine, it's not entertaining. But it is based on a novel (by Gerald Petievich), so it should at least have a decent twist ending. Right? Right?

As it turns out...hell no. Using the process of elimination, it's pretty simple to figure out the bad guy within the first ten minutes. I won't blow it here, in case any of you have any desire to see this shitkicker and are not terribly clever. But I will say this...Only one character doesn't ahve to face suspicion and scrutiny for the film's central crimes. This person is your villain.

I say "central crimes" because, unlike the clearly inspirational In the Line of Fire, an attempted assassination on the President is only one of the movie's many subplots and tangents.

Secret Service agent Pete Garrison (Michael Douglas), like Clint Eastwood's agent before him, became a legend after saving the life of a sitting President. (He's the one who dove in front of Reagan, thereby ruining John Hinckley Jr's chances with Jodie Foster.) Now, he spends his days teaching the next generation how to protect the President. That is, when he's not schtupping the First Lady (Kim Basinger, trying to channel HilRod) on the side.

This novel must have been written with Michael Douglas in mind for the inevitable film version. Who else would be believable as a retirement-age Secret Service agent giving it to the President's wife? He's the ideal combination of capable elder and perv. Unfortunately, this means that the driving romantic relationship in the film is between Michael Douglas and Kim Basinger. Someone might want to do something about that...I just don't think there should ever be a love scene involving actors whose combined ages equal more than 100. Really, I think 80 ought to be the rule, with a few notable exceptions. I know Kate Bosworth wouldn't be realistic as the First Lady, but cut us a break here. You've got Eva Longoria in the movie. Let's put her to some actual use!

Anyway, after about 45 minutes of general mucking-about and pseudo-intrigue, the plot kicks into motion. Someone's planning to kill the president, there's a mole inside the Secret Service and Garrison's being set up to take the fall. Heading up the case is the extremely Jack Bauer-esque David Breceknridge, coincidentally played by TV's Jack Baeur, Kiefer Sutherland. I really hope Kiefer enjoys playing this elite hardass character, because I predict he'll be doing a lot of it over the next few decades.

Along with his sexy new trainee Jill (desperate housewife Eva Longoria), David becomes quickly convinced of Garrison's innocence. The movie kind of shifts at the halfway point from a rip-off of In the Line of Fire to a rip-off of The Fugitive, but it lacks that film's kinetic action, funny supporting characters or...well, anything good or entertaining. The trio of stars - Douglas, Sutherland and Longoria - not only lack chemistry together, but seemingly lack any sort of interest in this material. Douglas is on total autopilot, surprising when you consider that he also produced the film. Sutherland, as I said, falls back on the same steely terrorist-loathing Bauerisms America has come to know and love. And Longoria looks great, but that's all she gets to do. The character's so unneccessary, she might as well be a deaf-mute.

A couple of interesting (not entertaining, but at least interesting) choices Johnson makes...

- Garrison, nominally the film's hero, earns the most downbeat conclusion for any American film character this year. He's methodically stripped of everything during the movie, despite clearly not being guilty of any criminal intention against the President. No fair!

- Longoria and Sutherland are clearly set up for a romantic subplot but it never happens. Possibly because they'd need to pay her more if she actually had any lines.

- The film's set in Washington but doesn't even pretend to have actually been shot there. Eventually, as if admitting his poorly-orchestrated fraud, Johnson officially moves the action to the cheaper Toronto.

- President Ballantine is portrayed by David Rasche, TV's Sledgehammer. (You see what I mean about this being a 2 hour TV show and not a movie?) It is incredibly difficult to look at Rasche and not think about his greatest role. So, when they had to decide what his Secret Service nickname was going to be...why not make it "Sledgehammer"? Instead, Nolfi and Johnson go with "Classic." Waste of a perfectly good comic set-up right there, if you asked me. And, let's face it, if you've read this far into this review, you pretty much have.

- The "villains" behind this attempt on the President's life strike me as neither reasonable nor menacing. We're told that some kind of drug cartel wants Ballantine dead, but surely there would be a better way of going about their criminal business than killing the President of the United States, right? I can't imagine a scenario by which a drug kingpin would be forced to order a hit directly on the Commander-in-Chief. It just seems really difficult and expensive and risky. More trouble than it could possibly be worth.

Which is also a pretty good summation of the experience of watching The Sentinal. 108 minutes of considerably difficult work for no payoff. Look for it in a previosuly viewed bin at your local video store this time next month...