The colourful 90s saw a number of films experimenting with several visual and audio approaches to distance themselves from the competition. From going hard in the use of pyrotechnics and the production of techno soundtracks to crafting novel slow mo sequences, once could argue that it was a pop culture art medium ready to be embraced by Gen X. However, some initially encouraging results are now seen as a dated relic of the 2000 era while the achieved cultural revolution by a few (e.g., “The Matrix” (1999)) led inevitably to the production of wannabe, albeit less impactful clones in the new millennium. The 2000s were a rather confused era filled with dubious elements. This cinematic decade was dichotomized between ultra, occasionally pointless style that would not make sense in our world and a striping everything down to the bone including characteristics which would deem the films unworthy of the big screen.

The shadow of “The Matrix” was strongly felt till 2003 although nobody would have predicted how serious would the impact of “The Bourne Identity” (2002) be in the action staging and fighting. By the time “The Bourne Ultimatum” (2007) was released, the landscape was completely transformed. Stylish takes were a thing of the past with two of the biggest reboots of famous characters - Batman in “Batman Begins” (2005) and James Bond in “Casino Royale” (2006), incorporating ruthless techniques (e.g., shaky cam style, colorless palette) and thus, cementing the identity of every action blockbuster until the arrival of the next decade. So WTF happened in the 2000s action films?

Wire fu until it was out of fashion

Asian cinema traits such as wire fu and wuxia encounters would dominate the first half of this decade as the de facto way of shooting fights and elaborate stunts. As the years passed by, it was less about their careful integration and more about the presentation of outrageous sequences. After the success of “Mortal Kombat” (1995) and of course, “The Matrix”, the stage was set for Ang Lee’s “Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon” (2000) to captivate worldwide audiences. Then all hell broke loose with movies employing this type of “gimmick” extensively and pointlessly. Some used wires to honor this aesthetic traditionally or to enhance their styles: the first two “Underworld” films (2003, 2006), “The Matrix Reloaded” (2003) featuring perhaps the best American wirework ever, China’s most expensive production back then in Zhang Yimou’s “Hero” (2002), Tarantino’s magnum opus in martial arts that was “Kill Bill volume 1” (2003), Guillermo del Toro’s tremendously underappreciated “Hellboy II: The Golden Army” (2008) and the only collaboration between Jet Li and Jackie Chan in adventurous “The Forbidden Kingdom” (2008).

The rest though mocked extensively the laws of physics with now outdated and ugly looking results. Despite the first “Charlie’s Angels” (2000) being lovable and fun, its sequel 3 years later is a good example of an over-produced and directed movie. Outputs from Jet Li, Steven Seagal (yes really!), Jackie Chan and Jason Statham also suffered from this (e.g., Romeo Must Die” (2000), “Exit Wounds“ (2001), “Transporter” (2002), “The Medallion” (2003)) while others were absolute garbage (“Dragonball Evolution” (2009), “Street Fighter: The Legend of Chun Li” (2009)). By 2008, wire fu was almost obsolete (“The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor”) due to Matt Damon’s Jason Bourne offering realistic, hand to hand combat and stunts while two unknown films - one from France (“Yamakashi” (2001)) and another from Thailand (“Ong Bak” (2003)) will be bringing parkour, contact sparring and Muy Thai to the masses further making a case that unnecessary wires are silly and childish.

Others: “X-Men“, Kiss of the Dragon”, “The Musketeer”, “The One”, “Lara Croft: Tomb Raider”, “Brotherhood of the Wolf“, “Ghosts of Mars”, “Ballistic: Eck vs Sever”, “Blade II“, “Daredevil”, “Cradle 2 the Grave”, “The Matrix Revolutions”, “X-Men 2“, “Bulletproof Monk”, “House of Flying Daggers”, “Kung Fu Hustle“, “Torque“, “The Promise“, “Elektra“, “House of Fury”, “V For Vendetta”, “Unleashed“, “Transporter 2”, “Kill Zone“, “Curse of the Golden Flower”, “Fearless”, “Dead or Alive“, “Ultraviolet“, “Live Free or Die Hard”, “Bodyguards and Assassins“, “Stormwarriors”

Back to the basics + parkour

The now dated Hong Kong wire work was pushed aside to favor mano a mano fights bearing street style realism. They say that fashion takes roughly 30 years to circle back, so it makes sense to enter again an 80s Jackie Chan/Sammo Hung territory with real (and skilled) people doing jaw dropping moves within a variety of genres. Starting a revolution in France, Luc Besson produced “Yamakashi”, the grandaddy of parkour under a comedic context and not so subtle social commentary starring individuals doing sensational jumps, flips and rolls on rooftops; safety mechanisms were nowhere to be found.

Between its prequel in 2004 (“Les Fils du Vent”) and “Banlieue 13” which really cemented parkour as the next big thing under visceral and eye popping stuntwork, an unknown Tony Jaa made his own waves worldwide with “Ong Bak”. Despite a lack of acting versatility, Jaa was muscular, big, flexible and most importantly, cinematically brutal when the occasion called for it. Held by a flimsy plot, the film was an excuse to deliver bone crunching fight sequences paving the way for the far superior and unfortunately forgotten “Warrior King” (2005). Although movie Muy Thai might lacked the otherworldliness of wire fu or the street smarting complexity of Hong Kong, its numerous efficient ways of dispatching goons were undeniable magnetic.

At the same time another storm was brewing in Doug Liman’s “The Bourne Identity”. Matt Damon’s amnesiac CIA agent set an abysmal bar with its shaky cam and real life movements that aim to disarm ASAP an opponent as opposed to glorified kung fu sequences. Others followed suit by either mixing together parkour and this ultra sense of realism or by further amplifying them in isolation (“The Bourne Supremacy” (2004), “Live Free or Die Hard” (2007)). 2008 was the year in which this movement reached its peak with “Taken”, “Quantum of Solace”, “Punisher: War Zone”, “The Incredible Hulk” and Christopher Nolan’s mega-smash hit “The Dark Knight”. All of them contributed to the solidification of a stripped down and dull looking action film with over-explained characterizations and psycho-analysis missing though an important aspect: having fun. When we entered 2009, “Banlieue 13: Ultimatum” and “Gamer” felt like echo of a period where free running and shaky cam were already past their prime.

Nevertheless, some did not find this new style appealing and time has been kind to their outputs. Brutal fights in long takes, crisp sound designs and novel stuntwork are the necessary ingredients to establish unforgettable movie moments. Tarantino proved this in his “Kill Bill” (2003-2004) marathon, “Troy” (2004) had no stunt doubles in their Achilles/Hector skirmish, William Friedkin’s “The Hunted” (2003) featured perhaps one of the best knife duels ever put on the celluloid, “V for Vendetta” (2005) presented a limited number of action work, Jet Li’s “Unleashed” (2005) was easily his best English speaking film and Donnie Yen brought for the first time on the big screen MMA fights in his now classic “Flashpoint” (2007).

Others: “The Punisher”, “Man on Fire”, “Collateral”, “Batman Begins”, “Casino Royale”, “Kill Zone”, “Mission Impossible 3“, “Deja Vu”, “The Bourne Ultimatum”, “Merentau”, “Star Trek”.

Slow mo and bullet time

“The Matrix” aftermath led to an excessive use of slow motion and “bullet time” in every (not only) action movie. Half way through the new millennium, there was a shift away from the use of visual effects tricks and obvious CGI screens. Gone were the days when Neo and Agent Smith’s shootouts stopped our breaths and sent us home scratching our heads. Anything after 1999 was a stylistic alternation that occasionally failed to capture (or to live up to) the same emotions despite a few clever variations (e.g., 360 explosion at the opening of “Swordfish” (2001) and the invention of Gunkata in Kurt Wimmer’s “Equilibrium” (2002)).

Some fared better than others due to a good vision and a strong emphasis in traditional entertainment and storytelling (e.g., “X-Men” (2000), “Charlie’s Angels”, “Brotherhood of the Wolf” (2001), “The Mummy Returns” (2001), “Spiderman“ (2002), “I, Robot” (2004), “Sherlock Holmes” (2009) and “Watchmen” (2009). The exception however, came in Nightcrawler’s stunning White House attack which saw director Bryan Singer giving a whole new meaning to the aspect of slow mo in the superior sequel “X-Men 2” (2003) with jaw dropping results that remain to this day unmatched.

But, most peeps would remember (or not) flicks such as “Romeo Must Die”, “Mission Impossible 2” (2000) and “The Art of War” (2001) all featuring varied quality of slow mo or bullet time effects which the majority of these implementations looking cheap and out of place. Those known for style remained unscathed due to the technological panache attached to their outputs (e.g., Michael Bay). From 2005, only a handful flicks will use slow mo (“Ultraviolet” (2006), “Max Payne“ (2007)) let alone bullet time (Ninja Assassin” (2009)). The influence of the Paul Greengrass and Christopher Nolan style of filmmaking depriving everything from style was felt everywhere and for almost ten years being the norm in shooting action until the appearance of a particularly stoic assassin (“John Wick” (2014)).

Others: “The One”, “Exit Wounds”, “Ballistic: Eck vs Sever”, “Transporter”, “Resident Evil”, “Blade II”, “The Rundown“, “Bad Boys II”, “The Matrix Reloaded“, “The Matrix Revolutions“, “Cradle 2 the Grave”, “Underworld“, “Charlie’s Angels: Full Throttle”, “Resident Evil: Apocalypse”, “Spiderman 2”, “Kung Fu Hustle“, “House of Flying Daggers“, “Alien Vs Predator“, “The Island”,“V for Vendetta“, “Curse of the Golden Flower“, “Underworld: Evolution”, “300”, “Spiderman 3”, “Transformers”, “Hitman“, “Speed Racer“, “Wanted“, “Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen”, “G.I.Joe: Rise of Cobra“, “Underworld: Rise of the Lycans“.

Get your vomit bag out: its Shaking time

The avoidance of in camera effects like bullet time, slow mo, wire fu in combination with a newer, edgier way of shooting action led to a lazy disdain for wide framing to capture fight choreography and stunts. Instead, creatives used close ups and shaky cam to give an additional feeling of enhanced realism during car chases, close encounters and explosions making them frankly, impossible to follow or comprehend. Initially the results were encouraging despite audiences trying to orient themselves on the big screen. After all, “The Bourne Identity” was not aiming to have flashy choreography or gratuitous car chases.

However, Paul Greengrass took this approach to the extreme with the superior and more commercially successful sequel “The Bourne Supremacy” resulting in the development of a new school of thought. Every director not keen to do action would utilize this approach. While those from Hong Kong were all about making a rather banal story to support insane stunts and extended fight sequences, in the 2000s West, there was the opposite effect. Even though your motion picture requires a hearty amount of action, by shaking your camera left and right, it renders the proceedings unwatchable. There is a reason that no one remembers any sequences from that decade which happened to employ this style.

A year after “Supremacy”, Nolan made “Batman Begins” demonstrating a lack of action understanding with incompetent editing, confusing geography and an overbearing amount of close ups. This surprisingly well received tactic inspired a new generation of filmmakers to reject the tradition of Hong Kong, the Hollywood greats and those who leaned heavily towards a specific aesthetic. Yet, it has not aged well putting films into the unworthy of repeated viewings sphere. The worst offenders were “Resident Evil: Apocalypse”, the disaster of “Blade Trinity” (2004), “Crank” (2005), “The Bourne Ultimatum”, “Quantum of Solace” and “Taken”.

Others: “Man on Fire”, “Elektra”, “Deja Vu”, “Mission Impossible 3”, “Shoot’ Em’ Up“, “The Kingdom”, “The Dark Knight”, “District 9”, “Gamer”, “Star Trek”, “Crank: High Voltage“, “Sherlock Holmes”.

A case of PG-13-nitis

With realism came the absence of blood and subsequently, sexiness. Gone are the 80s notions where nudity and curse words were ok. Despite being able to show on screen more brutal tactics of murder or the gunning down of several innocent bystanders, 2000s action films did not dare to show any naked bodies or a spec of blood.

Therefore, the era of realistic PG-13 begun. Movies will not have any gasp! elements like “The Temple of Doom” (1984) did or resembling anything close to the R-rated fun of “Con Air” (1997). Instead people are getting killed by invisible bullets (goodbye squibs) and single stab wounds off screen. Although some would resist that trend (“Blade II“, “Bad Boys II”), famous adult franchises would become child friendly (e.g., “Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines“ (2003), “Blade Trinity“, “Batman Begins“, “Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of Crystal Skull“ (2008)), with some receiving unrated (i.e., CGI blood) cuts courtesy of DVD’s popularity (e.g., “Alien Vs Predator“, “Live Free or Die Hard”, “Death Race” (2008). Even directors known for their R-rated outputs like Michael Bay (“Island”, “Transformers”, “Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen”), Guillermo del Toro (“Hellboy” (2004)), and James Cameron (“Avatar” (2009)) would cut down their movies to captivate the cinematic needs of teens and increase the box office revenue.

Others: “Mission Impossible 2”, “The Fast and the Furious”, “Die Another Day”, “League of Extraordinary Gentlemen”, “Chronicles of Riddick“, “Van Helsing”, “I, Robot”, “Mr and Mrs Smith”, “The Island”, “Taken”, “The Dark Knight”, “Iron Man”, “Hellboy II: The Golden Army“, “The Incredible Hulk“, “Quantum of Solace”, “Sherlock Holmes”, “Terminator: Salvation”.

CGI overload: Digi Doubles and Digital Crowds

The PG-13 rating provided the ability to attract larger, younger and more easily to please minds who are easily seduced by the new and flashier cinematic presentations. George Lucas’ “Star Wars Episode I: The Phantom Menace” (1999) began this trend with its larger-than-life use of CGI to create battles and crowds on an epic scale, to form the first fully fledged CGI character (Jar Jar Binks) and digi doubles for shots impossible to perform with real actors. If you include the novelty of “The Matrix” and “The Mummy” (1999) for environments and elements and voila! CGI was the solution for every logistical problem that you might have in your shooting schedule.

CGI although was utilized in small doses, as the years passed, it became a centralized tool to attract moviegoers with directors and producers betting on the novelty of special effects instead of the story. The verdict is of mixed emotions: some have stood the test of time, others looked laughable then and look laughable now.

Even Peter Jackson’s mighty “Lord of the Rings” (2001-2003) is not immune with a digital Gimli and (especially) Legolas committing impossible feats which in the days of 4K are easily noticeable. The most glaring ones can be witnessed In the “Matrix” sequels; replicating Keanu and Hugo as digital doubles undermined the flawless wire and stunt work that came before, their appearance being way too rubbery and unrendered. Early superhero flicks were also full of digi doubles: Sam Raimi’s initially groundbreaking “Spiderman”, the forgotten “Daredevil” (2003), Pitof’s “Catwoman” (2004) (!) catastrophe and del Toro’s beloved “Hellboy”.

Ambition was in spades in the 2000s seeing action movies attempting to outdo each other with bigger battles and bolder CGI. It is was natural for directors to increase the computers’ capacity for more spectacular clashes: “Gladiator” (2000), the “Lord of the Rings” trilogy, “Alexander” (2004), “300” (2007), “Resident Evil: Extinction” (2007), “The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor” and James Cameron’s “Avatar” all featured massive crowds and complex shots of thousands of individuals fighting each other in a variety of real and fictional environments. Kiwi Peter Jackson stood out the most by finding a unique way to present dynamic skirmishes between men, elves, orcs and goblins, a sight barely glimpsed initially in his “Fellowship of the Ring” (2001) and then perfected in his “Two Towers” (2002) a year later.

Others: “The Patriot“, “The Mummy Returns”, “The Scorpion King”, “Hero“, “Star Wars: Episode II: Attack of the Clones”, “Blade II”, “Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines”, “The Matrix Reloaded”, “The Matrix Revolutions”, “Pirates of the Caribbean: Curse of the Black Pearl”, “Spiderman 2”, “Van Helsing“, “I, Robot”, “Blade Trinity“, “Catwoman“, “Troy”, “Fantastic Four“, “Kingdom of Heaven“, “Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith”, “V for Vendetta”, “The Promise”, “Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man’s Chest”, “Eragon”, “Ultraviolet“, “X-Men: The Last Stand“, “Curse of the Golden Flower”, “300”, “Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer“, “Spiderman 3”, “Pirates of the Caribbean: At World’s End”, “Hancock“, “Iron Man“, “The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor”, “G.I.Joe: Rise of Cobra”, “Dragonball: Evolution”, “Terminator: Salvation”, “Ninja Assassin“.

Groundbreaking special effects

Digital crowds though were nothing when compared against the overall visual innovation of the 2000s. While “Gladiator” brought back epic filmmaking, many decided to push the boundaries on what we could accomplish visually on the big screen. “The Matrix” sequels tried really hard to push the envelope by multiplying Agent Smith a hundred times in The Burly Brawl to mixed results and George Lucas embraced the onset of the digital technology with each subsequent “Star Wars” prequel. Peter Jackson reinvented the fantasy game in “Lord of the Rings” by adding clever in-camera tricks to change perspectives and showcasing a pitch perfect mo-cap performance from Andy Serkins as Gollum. “X-Men 2” gave us the Nightcrawler effect blending several stuntpeople in one frame while “Pirates of the Caribbean: Curse of the Black Pearl” (2003) and its sequel created living dead and the stunning Davy Jones who many thought it was Billy Nigh under heavy prosthetics.

Michael Bay’s “Transformers” boasted photorealistic robot like organisms that you could not separate them from the actors with Optimus Prime being composed by 10,000 moving parts alone! Between the incorporation of fully digitally rendered characters composed of every element (e.g., Sandman in “Spiderman 3” (2007)) or texture (e.g., “Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer“ (2007), “Avatar”), we also got the digital palette revolution courtesy of Robert Rodriguez’s comic book accurate “Sin City” (2005) and two years later in Zack Snyder’s “300”, with both motion pictures, especially the latter creating an army of slick visuals imitators, hypersaturated cinematography and minimal set design (e.g., “Ultraviolet”, “Storm Warriors” (2009)).

Complex villains and heroes

You could argue that 2000s action flicks placed a lot of emphasis on style over substance but this would be a fatal mistake. Films attempted to reboot beloved franchises with newer, and more emotionally complex heroes and villains discussing moral dilemmas in the context of a greater mythology and an increasingly complex world. Gone are the days where the hero could mow down armies of baddies without repercussions or a tendency to showcase some form of psychopathy (e.g., “Batman Begins”, “V For Vendetta”, “Casino Royale”). On the opposite spectrum that also means more layered antagonists too, each one having their own valid reasoning behind their acts of terror, horror, greed, ambition and betrayal. Commodus (“Gladiator“), Magneto (“X-Men“), Bill (“Kill Bill Volume 1”, “Kill Bill Volume 2”), Hector Barbossa (“Pirates of the Caribbean: Curse of the Black Pearl”), Ras’Al Ghul (“Batman Begins”), Darth Vader (as Anakin Skywalker in “Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith“), Davy Jones (“Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man’s Chest”, “Pirates of the Caribbean: At World’s End“), Sandman (“Spiderman 3“), The Joker (“The Dark Knight“) and Prince Nuada (“Hellboy II: The Golden Army“) are some wonderful examples of in depth characterization supported by clever storytelling rallying audiences to their cause. Just because you aim for the masses, does not mean you can’t have the brains to go with it.

Others: “X-Men 2“, “Spiderman 2”, “Collateral“, “The Promise”, “X-Men: The Last Stand“, “Watchmen“, “Star Trek”.

Strong(er) female roles

After the advent of heroic females kicking ass in the 90s, it was inevitable to have ladies taking a huge slice of cinema and create their own versions of compelling leads. Filmmakers championing the power of women without sacrificing an ounce of femininity were everywhere.

At least four icons were established at the pantheon of pop culture: The Bride (“Kill Bill Vol 1”, “Kill Bill Vol 2”), Alice (“Resident Evil”, “Resident Evil: Apocalypse”, “Resident Evil: Extinction”), Lara Croft (“Lara Croft: Tomb Raider”, “Lara Croft: Tomb Raider: The Cradle of Life” (2003)) and Selene (“Underworld”, “Underworld: Evolution”). Moviegoers did not seem to particular care about the quality of the produced outputs. Instead they were more emotionally invested to roles that did not ooze masculinity, one liners or degrading humor (e.g., “Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon”, “Brotherhood of the Wolf”, “Hero”, “Kung Fu Hustle”). Even certain aspects of Hong Kong and Japanese cinema were improving (e.g., “Azumi” (2003), “House of Fury” (2005)) with Zhang Yimou making extravagant epics around capable women who are not afraid to get their hands dirty (“House of Flying Daggers”, “Curse of the Golden Flower”). This new breed of protagonist was more emotionally flexible, smarter and faster and could easily lay waste to a variety of tough looking opponents through combination of wits, skill and strength. This decade also saw two female led superhero flicks (four if you count the terrible “Fantastic Four” films) with albeit, below mediocre results (“Catwoman”, “Elektra”).

Others: “X-Men“, “The Mummy Returns”, “The Fast and the Furious“, “Die Another Day”, “Star Wars Episode II: Attack of the Clones”, “Daredevil”, “The Matrix Reloaded”, “The Matrix Revolutions”, “X-Men 2“, “Blade Trinity“, “Torque“, “Banlieue 13”, “Van Helsing”, “House of Flying Daggers”, “Catwoman“, “Mr and Mrs Smith”, “Elektra”, “Fantastic Four“, “V for Vendetta”, “Transporter 2“, “Casino Royale”, “X-Men: The Last Stand“, “Curse of the Golden Flower”, “Death Proof”, “Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer“, “Wanted”, “The Dark Knight”, “The Kingdom“, “Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of Crystal Skull“, “The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor”, “Avatar”, “Banlieue 13: Ultimatum”, “G.I.Joe: Rise of Cobra”, “Underworld: Rise of the Lycans“, “Fast and Furious”.

Larger than life car chases

While yes, special effects were the primary source of inspiration (and aspiration), certain filmmakers sought to outdo - at least in the technical department, what was done before in terms of a car chase. Honestly, there has not been a decade featuring so many car chases which resulted in the destruction of hundreds of (expensive) cars and other vehicles just for the sake of entertainment.

Beginning with a leather coat wearing Tom Cruise in “Mission Impossible 2”, even single director had to have some sort of chase - whether this involved a double decker bus (“The Mummy Returns”) or a flying one(!) (“Swordfish”), hovercrafts and invisible automobiles (“Die Another Day”), machine-looking aliens (“Transformers”, “Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen”) or robots taking over (“I, Robot”). Few though took it to the next level featuring lengthy car chases that since their release have became the stuff of legend due to the amount of sheer demolition involved in their production.

Just in 2003, we had the 3 biggest and most expensive car chases of all time: “Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines”, “The Matrix Reloaded” and “Bad Boys II” all competing with each other when it came down to who had destroyed the largest numbers of cars. “The Matrix” sequel got extra flair due to its constructed 1.4 mile long freeway that allowed for some truly amazing shots. “Terminator 3” on the other hand blended CGI and technical finesse to create a very expensive but not as thrilling as they would have wanted firework which involved the destruction of a few buildings in the process while Michael Bay in his “Bad Boys II” went full Michael Bay showcasing sensational mayhem around a car carrier and a … boat.

Things calmed down though as the realism of Jason Bourne kicked in limited exposure towards flashy explosions and car flipping (excluding Michael Bay of course): “The Bourne Supremacy”, “Batman Begins”, “Death Proof”, “The Dark Knight” are prime examples. As we headed towards 2010, you would either have extravagant, larger than life set pieces (Paris chase in “G.I.Joe: Rise of Cobra”) or simple chases with frenetic editing (“Death Race”).

Others: “Gone in 60 Seconds“, “The Fast and the Furious“, “The Bourne Identity”, “XXX“, “Star Wars Episode II: Attack of the Clones”, “League of Extraordinary Gentlemen”, “The Italian Job“, “2 Fast 2 Furious”,”Torque”, “The Island”, “Deja Vu“, “The Fast and the Furious: Tokyo Drift”, “Hot Fuzz”, “Live Free or Die Hard”, “The Bourne Ultimatum“, “Wanted”, “The Kingdom”, “Transporter 3“, “Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of Crystal Skull”, “The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor”, “Quantum of Solace”, “Speed Racer“, “Terminator: Salvation”, “Fast and Furious”.

Huge budgets

Everything listed above comes with a hefty price. When a typical action flick in the 90s would cost around $30 to $50 million dollars (in Hollywood) or a couple if these were non-US productions, in 2000s they would cost roughly on average $150 million dollars. Non-American flicks were looking around $30 million showcasing their most expensive productions to date; France with “Brotherhood of the Wolf” at $29 million, Russia/Germany with “Mongol” (2007) at $18 million, China with “Hero” at $30 million, “The Promise” (2005) at $35 and the “Curse of the Golden Flower” (2006) at $45 million are some examples of money well spent to tell stories from different cultures. Although “Episode I” was expected to have cost so much money since it encompassed grand scale filmmaking, motion pictures like “Mission Impossible 2” at $125 million became a norm. Michael Bay’s flicks in the 2000s (excluding “Pearl Harbor” (2001)) cost together a whooping $613 million dollars! The gates were open for all types of epics even if the typical description was not that of an epic: superhero ones (“Spiderman 2”-$200, “X-Men: The Last Stand”-$210, “Superman Returns” (2006)-$204, “Spiderman 3”-$250, “The Dark Knight”-185), spy adventures (“Die Another Day”-$142, “Quantum of Solace”-$220), forgotten genres (“Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man’s Chest”-$225, “Pirates of the Caribbean: At World’s End”-$300), epics (“Troy”-$185) and highly anticipated sequels (“The Matrix Reloaded”-$150, “Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines”-$187, “Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of Crystal Skull”-$185, “Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen”-$200, “Terminator: Salvation”-$200) were consuming so much money that only a handful were truly successful at the global box office.

Others: “Gladiator”, “Lara Croft: Tomb Raider”, “Spiderman”, “Star Wars Episode II: Attack of the Clones”, “Minority Report“, “Bad Boys II”, “X-Men 2”, “The Matrix Revolutions”, “Charlie’s Angels: Full Throttle”, “Pirates of the Caribbean: Curse of the Black Pearl”, “Van Helsing”, “I, Robot”, “Chronicles of Riddick”, “Batman Begins”, “Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith”, “Mr and Mrs Smith“, “The Island”, “Casino Royale“, “Mission Impossible 3“, “Transformers”, “Live Free or Die Hard”, “The Bourne Ultimatum”, “Doomsday”, “Iron Man”, “The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor”, “X-Men Origins: Wolverine”, “Avatar”, “G.I.Joe: Rise of Cobra”, “Star Trek”.

Final thoughts

Was the early noughties the best decade for action? Time will tell. So far though, only a handful of movies have managed to age well and being remembered in action lists. Even fewer offered pop culture moments which defined and influenced the genre’s direction. The inclusion of more effects with larger budgets and banal methods of filmmaking like shaky cam had a downfall in quality leading to an opening for difference source material (i.e., comics and comic books). Yet, there was a persistence in offering more intriguing heroes and villains. While the action was not that memorable, new characters became instantly icons beloved by many around the world. Most importantly, 2000s action films were not as fun as their predecessors.