In the early 1990s, you would be hard pressed to find a director with a bigger pair of back to back hits than filmmaker Andrew Davis’s Under Siege (1992) and The Fugitive (1993). The latter, which earned almost $400 million against a reported $44 million budget, has gone on to be a contemporary classic in the thriller genre — something that was hardly a guarantee, after a long and troubled development and production. Speaking with ComicBook.com in support of the movie’s 30th anniversary re-release recently, Davis talked about the movie’s verisimilitude, as well as the big, theatrical presentation that makes it continue to speak to audiences.
Videos by ComicBook.com
The Fugitive was one of a number of action-thrillers that hit in the early and mid 1990s, pitting big-name stars against long odds. In Davis’s view, it’s the theatricality of the movies that make them appealing, while the realism of more modern movies can sometimes ice out audiences who aren’t paying close attention to detail.
“The pace of the movie and the rhythm of the movie…it’s an interesting fine line between things that are so fast-cut now that you can hardly follow what’s going on,” Davis told ComicBook.com. “And people who mumble when they talk now, it’s kind of reality…you have actors who mumble to keep it real, and you can’t understand the words. So I think it’s got a classic structure in terms of the information that’s being given to people, and how you follow it.”
He also talked with us about the bigger picture of The Fugitive, and how people’s innate distrust of corporate power and influence likely helps keep the movie relevant years later.
“Certainly, there’s been a lot of discussion about the role of pharmaceutical companies and their dastardly doing of putting out drugs that were hurting people,” Davis said. “That’s what the basic story of The Fugitive is, is about a doctor who says, ‘This Provasic stuff is causing people to bleed,’ and they have to shut him up, because they wanted to make money. So that’s very relevant today. I think there’s been so much discussion about the role of pharmaceutical companies, and their ability to manipulate things. Now, they’re not all bad — my son’s a doctor, and it’s very difficult to bring something to product, but I think that’s why it’s relevant today.”
