The Equalizer 2

Lacking the inventiveness of the 2014 first film, this sequel still delivers the same satisfying blend of slow-burn tension and brutal action, but it’s already lost some of its original impact.

Premise:  Robert McCall (Denzel Washington) has found a new lease of life, protecting those who can’t protect themselves.  But an apparent random act of violence leads McCall back to the life he left behind, and to the ghosts from his past at the CIA.

Review:

Director Antoine Fuqua’s 2014 remake of 80s TV show The Equalizer wasn’t exactly a masterpiece, but it had a lot going for it.  Denzel Washington was great in the lead role (would you expect anything less?), bringing a sense of pathos and redemption to the character of Robert McCall, who finds a place for himself in the world by listening to his moral compass and using the skills he learned in the CIA to stick up for the downtrodden in Boston.  It even drew explicit parallels with the book McCall was reading, The Old Man and the Sea, when McCall explains it’s about an old man who meets his greatest adversary just when he thought that part of this life was over.  It also had some memorable supporting characters – in particular the joyously OTT performances from Marton Csokas as hitman Teddy Rensen and David Harbour as corrupt cop Frank Masters – and an inventively violent final showdown in a DIY store.  All of this elevated it from being just another vigilante thriller.

Now I’m not saying that The Equalizer 2 is “just another vigilante thriller”, but it has undeniably lost a little of the spark that made the first film so enjoyable.  The villains, for example, don’t really make any lasting impact with the audience – partly because for the majority of the film it’s a mystery who the actual villains are (although it’s fairly easy to guess).  But none of the antagonists are as memorable as Teddy Rensen or Frank Masters from the first film, or even as memorable as Slavi (David Meunier).  Similarly, the action sequences are slick, well executed and intense, but none can match the visceral impact of the first film’s initial club fight, or its hardware store set finale.

“…McCall isn’t simply out for revenge, he’s out to right wrongs…”

This sequel (which, believe it or not, is Denzel Washington’s first) has at least retained one of the more distinctive and enjoyable elements from the first film, namely McCall’s self-appointed role as guardian angel to Boston’s underdogs.  It’s McCall’s desire to help those who can’t help themselves – usually without promise of gratitude or recognition – which sets the film apart from other revenge thrillers.  For the most part, McCall isn’t simply out for revenge, he’s out to right wrongs, and he offers his targets the opportunity to make amends voluntarily, before he unleashes his justice upon them when they inevitably decline his offer.

I loved how in the first film, no matter how intense McCall’s war with the Russian mafia became, he still had time to stick up for the shop owners who were being extorted by the corrupt cops, or the cashier who was robbed of her wedding ring.  In the sequel, McCall is still out there helping those with “the odds stacked against them”, right from the opening sequence where he pursues a child abducted by her gangster father.  Later, even while the main story is going on, McCall still finds the time to help Holocaust survivor Sam (Orson Bean) and  local youth Miles (Ashton Sanders) with their problems.

That’s not to say that these subplots are always entirely effective – the subplot involving Miles, for example, feels very clichéd, and I couldn’t help but think that realistically, McCall’s actions may have only complicated matters rather than solved anything.  There’s also a slightly unsettling sense of sexism (however well intentioned) arising from the fact that both films have relied on extreme violence against women as a plot device to motivate McCall into taking action.

“…when Denzel Washington’s on screen, all is forgiven…”

I don’t mean for any of the above to put you off seeing The Equalizer 2, I’m just telling you to manage your expectations a little.  This is still an enjoyable action thriller, it’s just not as enjoyable as the first one.  But it still has plenty of nice touches – McCall’s new job as a rideshare driver, for example, provides him with an organic way of finding people in need of help, and the development of his character from the loner seemingly waiting to die at the start of the first film, to a functioning member of his local community at the start of the second film, feels like the sequel hasn’t just hit a reset button.  Returning characters Susan (Melissa Leo) and Brian Plummer (Bill Pullman) have a little more to do this time around, but they do still feel fairly underserved, while new character Dave York (Pedro Pascal) also feels quite underwritten.

But you can forgive all of that, because this is undeniably Denzel Washington’s film, and when he’s on screen, all is forgiven.  Every piece of potentially clichéd writing is like poetry when he delivers it, every threat is laced with violent possibility.  The action, like in the first film, feels clinical and efficient rather than showy and “Hollywoody”, which gives the film series its own violent identity to stand out from similar genre entries.  Denzel clearly feels an affinity for the character (bearing in mind this is the first time he has ever come back for a sequel), but if McCall does return to finish off a trilogy, it would be great if the script could recapture a little bit of the inventiveness that helped elevate the first film.