How is it that a film in French is actually not a bunch of French people in berets smoking cigarettes and discussing the benefits of not bathing? Well, you forget everything about filmmaking except that really cool action will get people interested no matter how bad the acting or story. District B13 proves that not every movie has to be a thinker and not every movie has to be good. I feel a little bad about this review since a family member recommended it to me, but I shoot from the hip. So here you are, the 4 reasons District B13 is actually a horrible film. I do add at least one or two good things as well.
Reason #1: Action does not equal good story.
Pretty simple rule of thumb. No matter how much action is involved in the film it is meaningless unless it fulfills some aspects of the story. So District B13 is set in the future when Paris has become a walled off place divided into districts. Leïto (David Belle) is trying to save his district from the drug lord Taha (Bibi Naceri). In the process, Leïto outruns the thugs, has his sister (Dany Verissimo) kidnapped, thwarts Taha’s attempt, escapes and escorts Taha to the Police who then let him go with Lola and imprison Leïto. If not for the fact that this is all done with Leïto free running all over the city (buy a damn bike or escape faster). We are then later introduced to Damien (Cyril Raffaelli), a cop who now has to go to District B13 to retrieve a bomb stolen by Taha. So of course he needs Leïto. Here comes the buddy movie and more action. Kicks and punches and wall running and jumping… None of this helps explain the story. The film offers lots of glitz, but without the distraction of having to follow a storyline.
Reason #2: Good acting does not mean I kick well.
This is hard to argue since Bruce Lee seems to disprove this at times, but I think he actually acts better than many of the actors in this film. Wooden would be a kind way to discuss the acting. So imagine this, Bloodsport (or any other film from that era) with van Damme not even saying one liners. Bad news. I never got the feeling that District B13 even tried.
Reason #3: Social commentary is hard.
Here is a bone thrown District B13‘s way. There are moments of meaning hidden in the film. What would happen if we decided to wall of districts just because they had bad elements in them? Or how about we just blow them up? It provides a great entry into something meaningful. I am impressed that this was even attempted, considering reasons 1 and 2. It only comes across as meaningless social commentary, more of a tool for the types action and characters presented so that the audience has some believability.
Reason #4: Luc Besson likes to fuck with me.
He writes this film and I think to myself, “self, you liked other films he’s had a hand in even though they could get weird.” So I went into this with an open mind. Then he fucks me be giving me all of this fast paced action but without the Besson substance of The Transporter, Bandidas, or The Fifth Element. Hell, I would even throw in there Kiss of the Dragon. Most are forgettable after a few weeks, but they gave me entertainment and a little bit extra. But District B13 was so awful at times that I was glad it was short. Now I know he is not fully to blame, but too bad. Besson, give me this film with the plot of Kiss of the Dragon, the sci-fi of The Fifth Element, and Salma Hayek.
So where is the good I speak of? The action is outrageous and cool, but it gets tiring. The social commentary could have been better if it was the focus. The film looks good and the cinematographer should be commended. Thats about it. Sorry I can’t pass on the recommendation that was passed on to me, but you have better things to do than watch District B13. Wait until someone watches this and makes a better film.
