Independence Day: Resurgence

When I was a kid, "Independence Day" replaced "Speed" as my favorite movie up until that time. I still remember the fun I had watching it at the height of its popularity and it is still a lot of fun today so you will hear me make a lot of comparisons between "Independence Day" and its sequel. I heard rumors about this sequel for years and it ended up taking twenty years for "Independence Day: Resurgence" to be produced. I was glad that director Roland Emmerick & producer Dean Devlin returned as well as many members of the original cast. I also appreciated and enjoyed the "Battle of '96" ad campaign used to promote this sequel. IMAX 3D did help to make this movie visually entertaining and but despite all this, it still wasn't worth the ticket price or the wait. There are many reasons as to why "Resurgence" failed to please a die-hard fan like myself but the biggest reason is the twenty-year gap, which couldn't be helped for the most part. Another reason can be articulated as a couplet: "No Will, no way".

The original film made me a fan of Will Smith and he was such a contributing factor in the success of that movie. He has enjoyed a successful career before and since 1996 but it hasn't been perfect. For example, Will passed up "The Matrix" in favor of "Wild Wild West" and I think passing on "Resurgence" was his latest mistake. A sequel to "Independence Day" has been in the works for the past while and when Will was approached about reprising his role back in 2011, he wanted a fifty million dollar salary and was also more interested in making "After Earth" with his son. While being a father is very important, few people can say that "After Earth" was a success. More recently, a theater manager I know visited Hollywood and he surmised from spending time with studio executives that "Suicide Squad" is also going to be a dud. Both that show and "Resurgence" were produced at the same time and so it appears that Will once again made the wrong call. I also blame 20th Century Fox for not ponying up. I admit that Will's salary request was very high but it might have been money well spent. His inclusion in the sequel could have given the project more credibility and motivated the rest of those involved to make something great. Will Smith's absence however was not the biggest flaw with this sequel. What made the first movie great was the premise that you wake up one more like Will's character and discover 15 mile-wide spaceships floating over every major city around the world. "Independence Day" featured a relatable world similar to ours with the only difference being a global-wide alien arrival. It even explained Roswell and other alleged UFO encounters. The story of "Resurgence" takes place twenty years after a major disaster that killed 3 billion people and numerous cities have been rebuilt. Humans also have colonies on Mars, Rhea and our moon, using the alien tech to upgrade their military. It is no longer a familiar world and therefore we have trouble relating to it. It feels like earth has progressed four times faster than real life. We feel like Marty McFly in "Back to the Future: Part II" as we watch "Resurgence" because the universe we are experiencing is far different from what we saw in the first film. "Independence Day" felt enough like real life to captivate us with its story but with the alien arrival, the historical timeline skewed into a tangent creating an alternate 2016 for "Resurgence". It's alternate for the audience but reality for the characters in the film. We used to be all part of the same universe with a few exceptions but now, that important similarity and the "War of the Worlds" vibe has been lost. Because it took so long for "Resurgence" to be produced, this major flaw could hardly be prevented in my opinion. The best way to have solved these two major problems was if the sequel was made back in the late 90's or early 2000's and Will had agreed to return. The twenty-year passage of time was a very large hurdle for the filmmakers to deal with but it was not a wall. If "Star Wars: Episode VII - The Force Awakens" was successful in introducing new characters alongside some of the most iconic science fiction characters of all time thirty years after "Episode VI" then Emmerick and Devlin could have done the same with their characters and only a twenty-year gap.

The next problem with "Resurgence" I wish to point out is a flaw that can found with many action films: pacing. The first movie had great pacing in that the movie wasn't exhausting to watch. Character-building moments and exposition scenes contrasted the amazing action scenes to create entertainment. "Resurgence" on the other hand had very few moments where we get to take a break and emotionally connect with the new characters. I also didn't have fun watching the exposition scenes unlike in the first movie. The characters during the attack in 1996 reached an all-time low point with apparently no hope until "Eureka": David gets an idea. Also, "Independence Day" took place over the course of three days but its sequel mostly takes place on one day. Furthermore, it felt too coincidental that another alien attack happens again on July 4th. I would have been happier with a month-long war and the people of Earth choose July 4th as a symbolic date for a final major offensive. "Resurgence" was 20 minutes shorter than its predecessor and so it is no wonder that it felt like too much story was packed into one movie. Besides the pacing problems, a common flaw that I am seeing with many sequels these days is that cinematic elements were changed that shouldn't have been changed. At the same time, the filmmakers failed to alter the elements that should have been altered and originality was lost. With any sequel, we watch it in hopes that we will get the same experience as last time but what we subconsciously want is a new adventure that provides the same kind of fun. It is a fine line that results in most sequels falling at least a little short of expectations. With "Resurgence", the plot did not flow naturally in part because the references with the original film were too obvious. There are so many examples of this but the most annoying were pulling the same kind of trick that the aliens did, poking fun at the aliens' impending doom to their faces and the President Whitmore speech. The narrative of the first film was a lot of fun because you meet a variety of characters in relatable situations and they come together almost by accident to save the world. At the start of the film, you aren't told all of the back-stories but they are revealed throughout the adventure as needed. The characters arrive at Area 51 in certain groups but then split off into unlikely teams on the 4th of July. In "Resurgence", the same kind of narrative was attempted but failed. Firstly, we were not given enough time to get to know the new characters and because of new world created by the Battle of '96, the new characters aren't very relatable. It would have been better to have the movie start out with Jake and Patricia actually looking at houses in D.C. while Dylan is living in L.A. near his mom. The relationship between Jake and Dylan could have also been given more attention. This part of the movie felt carelessly included. There was variety with the new characters we were introduced to but some weren't given enough screen time like the kids on the bus, the sailors on the boat watching the drilling and the African warlord. Additionally, Presidents Lanford and Adams felt flat and Floyd was annoying more than funny. I was hoping that the new characters through happenstance would have to unite with the returning ones but that didn't happen. To summarize, the filmmakers should have made the allusions to the original film less noticeable except the narrative, which could have been more reminiscent.

I would now like to mention a few miscellaneous flaws as well as some aspects of the sequel that I liked. Some of the ideas thought up for this movie were good such as a queen of the aliens and a destroyer that was able to land back in 1996 in Africa. Whitmore's mental connection to the aliens should have been much less at the start of the movie or non-existent. On July 4th, 1996, he seemed unaffected by his telepathic experience the day before so why twenty years later is he loosing his mind? The filmmakers could have had Okun wake up and attempt to warn the world instead. It seems as though the filmmakers forgot that David gets airsick. Instead, he comes across as a person who hates to fly and that bothered me. David's nausea was a great source of comedy first time around. A bigger flaw with the story though is Julius getting to Area 51 from the east coast so fast. It appears to have been accomplished in only one day despite the fact he is trying to conserve gas. Also, what do he and the kids with him contribute to the plot? It feels as though they arrive at a football game just in time for the kickoff but didn't bring the money they owe for their seats. In the middle of the show, the trap that the aliens lay for the fighters felt too apparent. The overall plot of the sequel was not completely predictable but it did have predictable moments like the alien trap and that got to me. I liked Whitmore's final line in the movie but this could have been given more drama because it fell short its potential impact on the audience. "Resurgence" did have an epic scale and I enjoyed the reveal of new mothership. The first movie had a lot of improvised lines and scenes so I hope that tradition was continued but I couldn't tell if it was. My favorite part of this sequel was that the new White House was very nearly destroyed again. The shot of the White House blowing up in "Independence Day" is probably one of the most important special effects of the 90’s and so to tease us with a repeat was really funny. I love how Russell Casse's name was on the monument at the start of the movie but in my opinion, he should have had his own memorial like Steven Hiller and Marilyn Whitmore. A final big mistake I wish to point out is that David Arnold did not return to compose the score. While they included his theme, music does so much for the emotion that the film exudes. It would also have been nice to see production designer Patrick Tatopoulos's name in the credits but I guess he was working on "Batman v Superman" instead. One thing that made this sequel tolerable was the returning cast members, many of whom I have not seen act in a very long time. In the cases of Bill Pullman and Brent Spiner, the last time I saw them in a live action film was "Independence Day"! The last time I saw a movie with Jeff Goldblum was the late 90's! My favorite new actor was Joey King because I liked her in "Oz the Great and Powerful". Jake was somewhat of a nice replacement for Steven Hiller but Liam Hemsworth is no Will Smith. I was so happy to see Robert Loggia return to briefly portray William Grey. I love how Grey became president after Whitmore and I also love the little moment they have in this movie. By the way, this was Loggia's last film before dying in 2015.

In many ways, "Independence Day: Resurgence" did not feel like a true sequel and I feel the world didn't need a sequel to the 1996 blockbuster in the first place. The Battle of '96 was so epic that you can't hit the reset button as easily as in other franchises. The absence of Will Smith and unavoidable twenty-year passage in time ruined almost all chance for "Resurgence" to be truly entertaining. The end of the movie of course left room for a third film but the filmmakers have stated that "Resurgence" must be successful enough to warrant another movie. I hope they get the hint. This film does affect how I view the first movie but over time, this sequel will become less relevant if I don't see it again. That's what many die-hard movie fans forget: If you hate a sequel, then let go of your disappointment and focus on the previous installments.

3 Stars