Die hardly

The old adage goes, "those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it". This is a phrase that doesn't exactly hold true in Hollywood. Instead, studios tend to repeat history because they do remember the past. When a formula works, they reuse it time and time again. One of the most frequently used formulas is the Die Hard formula. For the past 25 years since the original Bruce Willis film hit theaters, Hollywood has frequently used the 'one man overcomes the odds to defeat a group of evil terrorists' trope. It's one thing when we are talking about a sequel to the franchise (which we already saw this year). It's another thing when it's a completely separate film that borrows the framework. So then, what are we to make of a film that not only uses the trope but then also uses the exact same context and setup as another film that was released mere months before it?

That is the question were left answering as White House Down, the latest film from master of disaster Roland Emmerich, hits theaters. Just like Olympus Has Fallen (a film which I have yet to see) did this past spring, our country has been put into peril as terrorists infiltrate the White House and hold our government hostage. Playing the role of John McLain this time (right down to the white tank top) is Channing Tatum playing John Cale, a security guard for the Speaker of the House who has aspiration of working for the Secret Service.

When all hell breaks loose, Cale finds himself as the lone guy able to help protect President James Sawyer (Jamie Foxx, doing a not so subtle job of actually playing President Obama). The two scamper through the White House hoping to avoid death while also trying to eliminate the bad guys. Of course, the film finds time to have this racially mismatched duo crack wise with each other during the down moments, which feels cribbed from Die Hard 3.

We then move on to borrowing from the fourth Die Hard film as the protagonist's kid is put into peril. In this case, the moppet is Joey King, playing Cale's daughter. She's a political junkie who happened to be visiting the White House with her father at the time of the attacks. And of course, to remind us that the apple doesn't fall too far from the tree, we get several scenes of her finding ways of talking tough and standing up to the terrorists, even though most 10 years would be absolutely petrified by the events that occur in the film.

And if you thought that Die Hard 2 was ignored, you'd be wrong. These domestic terrorists are able to gain access to these government buildings with embarrassing ease largely because of their being at least one, if not more, moles within the President's administration. Apparently, in this America, the concept of background checks is the only thing that is too far-fetched.

I will grant you that director Roland Emmerich will never be confused as someone who makes sophisticated films. If you've seen any of his previous films, you'll know that they require you to stop thinking and just enjoy the goofy ride. I've been able to do that with some of his past films because they are so outlandish in their attempts at putting people in peril. However, after completely destroying the world in 2012, he really had no way of topping himself and thus this film feels like a let down. There are a few moments of zany inspiration, like a rocket launcher being used during a car chase on the front lawn of the White House, but it overall just felt like a noisy rerun of better action films.

There's an attempt to add some gravitas to the picture through its casting. James Woods is the retiring head of the Secret Service. Maggie Gyllenhaal is a Secret Service agent. And Richard Jenkins plays the aforementioned Speaker of the House. They all manage to keep a straight face through this silly plot, but their presence alone isn't enough to improve the overall quality of the film. As for Tatum and Foxx, they seem to be having fun in their respective roles, but they also come off as pale imitations of the real or fictional person they are emulating.

For a film like this to work, there needs to be a true sense of fun, which is absent here. You have to slog through a half hour of obvious exposition to set up every single plot payoff that will come in the film's finale. And as the action starts to pick up, the film spends too much time trying to figure out how reverent it should be when it comes to depicting a White House under siege. I also could have done with one or two fewer twists that come near the films end that unnecessarily overcomplicate the film's plot. I don't have a problem when a film liberally borrows from a successful formula, but White House Down follows it so dutifully that it prevents the film from being the escapist fun that it should be. Grade: C