The 2012 revisionist western, written and directed by Quentin Tarantino, follows a slave named Django who’s determined to reunite with his wife after she was sold to the owner of the Candyland plantation. Django teams up with a bounty hunter as they set across the south to collect what’s theirs.
The film was stocked with an A-list cast, including Samuel L. Jackson, Leonardo DiCaprio, Kerry Washington, and Christoph Waltz.
Donald Bowers / Getty Images
Earlier this month, Jamie sat down with Vanity Fair for the latest episode of their popular series Scene Selection. The Oscar-winning actor took a trip down memory lane to share some fun tidbits and behind-the-scenes facts about some of his most memorable roles.
“The subject matter, the N-word specifically, Leo had a hard time saying the N-word,” Jamie told Vanity Fair. “We’re doing a read, and Leo says ‘nigger,’ and then he goes, ‘Hey man, hey guys, cut. I just can’t do this. This is not me.’”
“Samuel L. Jackson said, ‘Say that shit, motherfucker! [laughs] It’s just another Tuesday. Fuck ’em!’ And I told Leo, I said, ‘Leo, you know, in slavery days we would never talk to each other. So, I’m not your friend, I’m not Jamie Foxx. I’m Django.’”
“You won’t be able to play that character unless you really understand what slavery was about,” Jamie added. “It was tough. It was horrific. Ain’t no kiki-ing with the slaves.”
Samuel tried to help Leo feel more comfortable getting into character, but it was that last push from Jamie that really set the tone, because once he told Leo not to look at him as a friend, his whole demeanor changed on set.
“So, the next day, I see Leo. I said, ‘Leo, what’s up? L, L, what’s up?’” But Leo didn’t even acknowledge him. It was at that point that Jamie realized Leo took his advice into consideration.
Handout / Getty Images
“He [doesn’]t speak to me. He’s ready,” Jamie added. “[After that], everybody started, you know, digging in.”
Handout / Getty Images
The multi-hyphenate entertainer went on to praise his costars and director for bringing such talent to the set, particularly Samuel, who he believes was robbed of an Oscar nomination for his performance.
Donato Sardella / Getty Images for Giorgio Armani
The way Samuel could switch in and out of his character with such ease still amazes Jamie to this day.
To learn more about Jamie and his past roles, be sure to watch his full Vanity Fair interview below:
In a recent interview, Jamie Foxx revealed that Leonardo DiCaprio repeatedly stopped scenes where he had to use the N-word until Jamie told him to continue. Foxx explained that DiCaprio was uncomfortable with using the word, but Foxx encouraged him to fully embrace his character and the script.
Foxx commended DiCaprio for his dedication to his role and his willingness to push himself out of his comfort zone. This behind-the-scenes insight sheds light on the level of commitment and professionalism that both actors bring to their craft.
The dynamic between Foxx and DiCaprio on set ultimately led to a powerful and authentic portrayal in their film, showcasing the importance of trusting one another as actors and pushing boundaries to deliver a compelling performance.
Batter Jamie Smith has been retained in an unchanged England team for the third T20 against India in Rajkot on Tuesday.
Smith made 22 from 12 balls on his T20 international debut in Saturday’s two-wicket defeat in the second match of the series.
He had come into the England side for all-rounder Jacob Bethell, who missed out through illness but was well enough to train on Monday.
England are 2-0 down in the five-match series.
“You’ve got to believe, haven’t you?” said England fast bowler Mark Wood.
“It’s no good sitting there saying ‘that’s it’. There are three games to play, three chances of a win.”
Wood, 35, has played in both matches of the series so far after being sidelined since August with a stress fracture in his elbow.
In the 5.5 overs he has bowled across the series, Wood has taken one wicket and leaked runs at an economy of 8.83 per over.
“I’ve felt a little bit ‘hitty-missy’,” he said. “I’ve done a couple of good things, it’s great that my pace is up there, but maybe my accuracy at time hasn’t been quite where I wanted it.
“When I haven’t played since August, that’s pretty much expected. Hopefully the more I play, the better I get.”
England team: Ben Duckett, Phil Salt (wicketkeeper), Jos Buttler (captain), Harry Brook, Liam Livingstone, Jamie Smith, Jamie Overton, Brydon Carse, Jofra Archer, Adil Rashid, Mark Wood.
In a surprising move, Jamie Smith has been retained for the third T20 match between India and England in Chennai. The young wicketkeeper-batsman has impressed with his performance in the previous matches, earning him a spot in the playing XI once again.
Smith’s inclusion has raised a few eyebrows, especially with the experienced Jos Buttler waiting in the wings. However, the team management seems keen on giving the youngster more opportunities to showcase his talent on the international stage.
It will be interesting to see how Smith performs in the crucial third T20 match, as both teams look to gain the upper hand in the series. Will he be able to make a significant impact and help England secure a win, or will the pressure of the big stage get to him?
Stay tuned for more updates on this exciting clash between India and England in Chennai. #IndiaVsEngland #T20 #JamieSmith
Back in Action is headlined by Cameron Diaz’s comeback after 11 years away from acting, but Netflix’s most viewed weekend premiere in nearly three years is also Seth Gordon’s return to feature filmmaking.
Gordon — who’s most known as the director behind hit comedies such as Four Christmases (2008), Horrible Bosses (2011) and Identity Thief (2013) — hasn’t made a feature film since 2017’s Baywatch, and while his four films have averaged a box office gross of nearly $183 million each, his absence coincides with the comedy genre’s steady decline at the box office and widespread disappearance from major studio development slates. Gordon doesn’t have the definitive answer for why comedy is no longer the dominant force it once was at multiplexes, but he speculates that it could be a result of the hectic political climate that’s been in effect since 2017.
“[2017] was the time when comedy started to die down. I don’t know if there’s any relationship with that [administration] at all, but the mood of the country certainly shifted around then before Covid took it a step further,” Gordon tells The Hollywood Reporter. “So there’s a lot of us that are hoping for the pendulum to swing the other way. I’m holding my breath for that, certainly. We could use some stuff to laugh at, and it’s been a lot of superheroes and not enough comedy.”
Both before and after Baywatch, Gordon has quietly been a prolific pilot director and executive producer on a variety of notable television shows including The Goldbergs, Atypical, The Good Doctor, For All Mankind and The Night Agent. The success of Netflix’s Atypical and The Night Agent likely put the Chicago-area native in a favorable position to sell Back in Action, a spy action-comedy that was born out of Gordon’s original premise of how children would impact the espionage careers of Mr. and Mrs. Smith.
Gordon soon attached one of his Horrible Bosses stars, Jamie Foxx, in the role of Matt, a retired CIA operative turned family man. Foxx then took the initiative in order to cast the role of Emily, Matt’s partner in life and spycraft, by making the case to his former Annie (2014) co-star, Diaz, who retired following their 2014 collaboration to focus on motherhood.
“I was told that she wasn’t to be considered: ‘She’s fully retired. Don’t even think about it.’ But Jamie, who is friends with [Diaz] and has known her forever, had the first inkling of a possibility or an openness to reading something,” Gordon says. “They also share a manager, and the two of them got the script to her.”
Co-written by Gordon and Brendan O’Brien, Back in Action’s premise happened to overlap with Diaz’s 11-year hiatus from the screen, as Matt and Emily left the spy game once Emily discovered she was pregnant mid-mission. 15 years later, they’re drawn back in after utilizing their past skills to defend their daughter in what became a viral moment.
“It’s a really unexpected coincidence that the title and some of the themes and her character’s situation [as a retired spy turned mom] lined up with real life,” Gordon admits. “It’s almost as if Back in Action was meant to coax her out of retirement, but I swear it wasn’t. It’s just extraordinary timing and really good fortune and Jamie’s access, frankly.”
In April 2023, with two weeks remaining on the filming schedule, Gordon and co. had to shut down production due to a then-undefined emergency involving Foxx. The multi-talented performer publicly pulled back the curtain in last month’s stand-up special, What Happened Was…, revealing that he endured “a brain bleed that led to a stroke.” But at the time, Gordon only knew what the public knew, which was virtually nothing.
“They were, understandably, really private about whatever was going on. Of course, we guessed what was happening, but we were in the dark like everyone else,” Gordon shares. “There were a lot of crazy hypotheses floating around as you probably remember. So I tried to shut that out and just wait and not assume anything until I heard from his team and from Jamie himself.”
By the time Foxx recovered, the industry was in the midst of a double strike, and so Gordon had to wait patiently for the ability to reunite with Foxx and complete a critical section of the film’s first act in the suburbs.
“If we owed scattered little bits all over the film, I don’t know how that would’ve played out,” Gordon says. “But this was a missing 15-minute chunk, and we really needed it to even preview or screen the film properly. So we had to go back and do that, and hope that everything was going to be okay. And thank God it was.”
Below, during a recent conversation with THR, Gordon also discusses when he first knew that Diaz was “so back,” before looking ahead to his upcoming documentary about one of the four remaining pairs of ruby slippers from The Wizard of Oz.
***
The title, Back in Action, applies to Cameron’s career and the two main characters’ return to spycraft, but it’s also your first feature since 2017. Granted, there were two lost years in this industry, but were you just focused on launching show after show? I didn’t even realize how many notable shows you’ve helped launch (The Goldbergs, The Good Doctor, For All Mankind, The Night Agent).
Yeah, there was definitely a stretch there where I was focused on pilots, and the business has been reeling for a while, especially on the comedy side. People have run away from comedy a little bit. Really great scripts then came around in TV, so I’d try to sell shows. But I’m always responding to interests and natural curiosity, and films take a long time to make. They just do.
Jamie Foxx, Cameron Diaz and Director Seth Gordon on the set of Back in Action
John Wilson/Netflix
Streamers like Netflix have helped pick up the slack with regard to comedy, but overall, why do you think the genre is not as dominant as it once was theatrically?
God, you’d be able to answer that as well as I could. I don’t know if I should be on the record with this or not, but I feel like it coincided with Trump’s first time in the White House. [2017] was the time when comedy started to die down. I don’t know if there’s any relationship with that [administration] at all, but the mood of the country certainly shifted around then before Covid took it a step further. So there’s a lot of us that are hoping for the pendulum to swing the other way. I’m holding my breath for that, certainly. We could use some stuff to laugh at, and it’s been a lot of superheroes and not enough comedy.
Part of me can’t believe that we’re discussing Cameron Diaz’s comeback vehicle. I distinctly remember when she was introduced in The Mask, and the entire theater reacted as if she was already a movie star. So, how did you help convince her to end her extended sabbatical?
I was told that she wasn’t to be considered: “She’s fully retired. Don’t even think about it.” But Jamie, who is friends with her and has known her forever, had the first inkling of a possibility or an openness to reading something. So he was working behind the scenes a little bit, and he didn’t want to get anybody’s hopes up or make promises for something that might not come through. They also share a manager, and the two of them got the script to her. Then we met and really hit it off. So it’s a really unexpected coincidence that the title and some of the themes and her character’s situation [as a retired spy turned mom] lined up with real life. It’s almost as if Back in Action was meant to coax her out of retirement, but I swear it wasn’t. It’s just extraordinary timing and really good fortune and Jamie’s access, frankly.
Director Seth Gordon and Cameron Diaz on the set of Back in Action
John Wilson/Netflix
Yeah, the movie’s storyline parallels Cameron’s maternal-related retirement and comeback 11 years later. Two married spies retire to raise their family, only to be pulled back in 15 years later. Did rewrites of the script lean into that meta quality?
Not really. It was born out of a couple things. I went to a Dodgers game with my friend [and producer] Beau Bauman. I actually call it a Cubs game because that’s how I saw it [as a native of Evanston, Illinois]. I was riffing about this notion that came out of nowhere: “What if Jason Bourne had a kid? What would happen in his life?” And Beau was like, “Did that just occur to you right now? I think that’s a movie.” And then we were like, “What if it wasn’t Jason Bourne? What if it’s Mr. and Mrs. Smith and they had kids?” So we kept going back and forth about it, and it just felt like a really promising premise. Then Covid hit, and Beau knew that I always wanted to write something from scratch. I’d done some rewrites on things, but I wanted to create something from the ground up. So we worked on the outline a little bit, and it was partly an expression of being on ice as we all were during Covid. We wanted to get back on set and have this period of Covid come to an end, and some of that DNA is in the concept too. So we realized that there could be a meta quality to it, but we didn’t feel like we needed to lean any harder into it. It was already there. And how often do you hear that about development? It’s pretty rare.
Did Cameron hit the ground running once she got to set? Or did she need a minute to find her sea legs?
Well, before she was even on set, she started training for the stunt sequences. So, in a way, she was already cruising, and one of the first scenes that was scheduled for her was that dramatic scene with Glenn Close in the kitchen. Mother and daughter go at each other, and she completely brought it. That’s really challenging material to do early in the schedule, and it was obvious that she’s a hundred percent still there. She’s still got it. We all looked at each other and were like, “Holy shit, she’s so good.” So we’re all just so glad she’s back.
Glenn Close, as Cameron’s character’s mother, was perfect casting. Did she join right after Cameron’s commitment?
Yeah, it was pretty soon after. It was a scheduling dance above everything. She was one of the first, if not the first, person we went to; she’s perfect for it, obviously. We talked on Zoom and connected really well, but then it just became about scheduling because she had a pretty full schedule. We had to start by December 2022 in order for her to be able to do it, and we had to find that location [in London], so there was typical production mayhem. But she entered pretty early in the process, and just knowing that it might be her helped me clarify and solidify stuff. That’s what also led to creating the Nigel character. He was a very late addition to the script, and he was conceived completely for Jamie Demetriou. I loved him in Fleabag, and I don’t know what we would’ve done if we didn’t get him for something that was created with him in mind.
Apparently, Jamie Foxx was caught off guard by Cameron’s enthusiasm to do stunts. If she was participating, it meant that he couldn’t sit them out. Is that true?
(Laughs.) That sounds like him, and yeah, there’s some truth to that. She brought so much intensity, and she always wanted to be the one who did it, not the stunt person. Of course, there were certain situations where we couldn’t let her do something, but she learned the choreography really well. Sometimes, when you’re cutting stuff together, you need to hide the actor and use the stunt person more, but the opposite was true here. So it put a little bit of pressure on Jamie. She’d done her homework and she was killing it, so he had to step it up too.
Jamie had quite a health scare during the filming of this movie, and thankfully, his recovery went so well that it’s now the subject of a stand-up special on Netflix. How far along were you when it happened?
It landed really late in our schedule after we had shot everything in London already. We had come to Atlanta to do three weeks of work, and a week in is when it happened. So we owed seven or eight days at that point, and it was just scary as hell. As he indicates in the special, they didn’t know exactly what happened. It’s a bit of a mystery what triggers those things, and while we know some of the symptoms, what really happens in there is not fully solved. So we were holding our breath for a long time, and by the time he was better, both strikes were happening. So it was a crazy process, and there were a lot of obstacles along the way.
But you ended up reconvening for some form of additional photography?
We shot the days that we hadn’t finished originally. The suburbs stuff is the one area of the movie that got interrupted, so we just went back and finished all of that. If we owed scattered little bits all over the film, I don’t know how that would’ve played out. But this was a missing 15-minute chunk, and we really needed it to even preview or screen the film properly. So we had to go back and do that, and hope that everything was going to be okay. And thank God it was.
Jamie Foxx and Director Seth Gordon on the set of Back in Action
John Wilson/Netflix
As you said, there was a period of uncertainty. During the early days of the initial assembly, were you pretty anxious that you might be looking at, God forbid, Jamie’s final performance?
I didn’t really let myself go there. I was hoping for the best, and I really had no information. We knew something was up, but they were, understandably, really private about whatever was going on. Of course, we guessed what was happening, but we were in the dark like everyone else. There were a lot of crazy hypotheses floating around as you probably remember. So I tried to shut that out and just wait and not assume anything until I heard from his team and from Jamie himself.
Cancelling the New York premiere was the right call given the harrowing circumstances in L.A. right now, but I’m glad you guys still got to walk down a carpet in Berlin last night. It would’ve been pretty disappointing if Cameron and Jamie didn’t get to mark the occasion after her break and his scare.
Yeah, that’s true, although that’s as much for pictures as anything else. They’ve both done that so many times. It’s just part of the perception.
It’s the mountaintop for the entire experience.
Yeah, you gotta do it.
Emily (Diaz) and Matt (Foxx) struggle to connect with their kids, and I read that you wrote this movie for your son. Were you feeling like these characters? Was this movie a means of connection for the two of you?
Actually, not really. He was a part of the process as I was creating the story, and I would run things by him, so we were connected through it. The disconnect in the family was based on witnessing my sister and my parents fight when I was kid. That’s what informed the conflict, and that’s why the central story arc is daughter-mother-grandmother. Those intergenerational misunderstandings felt like the right way to go. It was an organic and dynamic process as we were working on the script, and that’s just where it headed. But it would be misleading for me to say it was about me and my son.
There was a recent kerfuffle online as a bunch of creatives shot down a report that Netflix has writers write overly descriptive dialogue in case viewers are watching something passively (e.g. folding laundry, checking email). They all said they’ve never received such a note from Netflix. Is that foreign to you as well?
I wasn’t told that. But there was actually a really cool part of the process where the filmmaker is invited to get really specific, if they want to, about what’s going to appear in the subtitles or not. It can be an automated process, but there are certain things that fall between the cracks, so you may want to call attention to stuff that plays visually. A really important part of modern filmmaking is thinking about that element because so many people watch that way. Last night in Berlin, we watched the English version with German subtitles, and because I’ve memorized the movie at this point, seeing what unexpected details they chose to call attention to and not was fascinating. So it’s an additional storytelling tool that you have to take advantage of at this point.
In a perfect world, what would you do next?
Boy, I am deep in on a documentary that I’ve been working on for 15 years, so that partly answers your “where the hell have you been” question. (Laughs.) But it’s been completely fascinating, and I’ll be finishing that up. It’s about [The Wizard of Oz’s] ruby slippers. I know the guy that owned [one of the four remaining pairs worn by Judy Garland], and he toured around the country with them. Then they got stolen, and they were presumed gone for ten years until an FBI sting. It turned out these mafia guys were the ones that stole the ruby slippers because they’re worth so much, but then they couldn’t sell them. They couldn’t move the stolen product, and it’s just an amazing story. A couple weeks ago, they sold at an auction for $28 million. So this [former] struggling actor [Michael Shaw], who’s now in his eighties, has closure to this huge saga in his life as a result of how unexpectedly this all played out. So I think it’s going to make for a captivating doc.
*** Back in Action is now streaming on Netflix.
Seth Gordon, the director of the upcoming film “Cameron Diaz Comeback” and “Jamie Foxx Scare,” has been making waves in Hollywood with his latest projects. In a recent interview, Gordon discussed working with Cameron Diaz on her highly anticipated comeback to the big screen.
Gordon praised Diaz for her incredible talent and dedication to her craft, stating that she brought a level of depth and emotion to her role that truly impressed him. He also revealed that Diaz’s performance in the film is sure to leave audiences in awe and solidify her status as one of Hollywood’s most versatile actresses.
But that’s not all – Gordon also shared some exciting news about his collaboration with Jamie Foxx on the thrilling new project “Jamie Foxx Scare.” According to Gordon, Foxx’s performance in the film is nothing short of electrifying, and fans can expect to see a side of the actor they’ve never seen before.
With two powerhouse projects in the pipeline, it’s clear that Seth Gordon is a force to be reckoned with in the world of filmmaking. Keep an eye out for “Cameron Diaz Comeback” and “Jamie Foxx Scare” – these are two films you won’t want to miss.
The last time we saw Cameron Diaz on screen, it was way back in 2014. The star, who had been such a magnetic force in Being John Malkovich, My Best Friend’s Wedding and There’s Something About Mary, had checked out with a trio of pale production line films that represented what we’d grimly come to expect at that stage of her career. Diaz had once easily moved between dark and light as well as large and small, had smoothed out any of her more interesting edges to become one of the industry’s highest-paid yet most boringly unchallenged stars. That year saw her lost in the juvenile comedies The Other Woman and Sex Tape before being horrendously miscast in a dud remake of Annie and not long after, she chose to retire, perhaps feeling as glum over the quality of her films as those of us stuck watching them.
News of her re-emergence, after a decade of focusing on family and an organic wine brand, came at an opportune time, as the industry still struggles to find newer and younger yet equally luminous movie stars to take over from those that came before. Many from that era have found success on Netflix, from Adam Sandler and Jennifer Lopez to Jessica Alba, and so it seemed like the smoothest way for Diaz to re-engage with her fans, partnering with her Annie co-star Jamie Foxx for a broadly appealing action comedy. It’s an easy way back in, a low-effort comeback vehicle quite literally called Back in Action, but the film is only a half-victory at best. While it might prove that Diaz still possesses that same particular magic, it also shows that she should be far more discerning with how she chooses to share it.
She’s far from alone in thinking that action comedy is the best way, though. Recent star pairings like Chris Evans and Ana de Armas, Emily Blunt and Ryan Gosling, John Cena and Alison Brie, Kaley Cuoco and David Oyelowo, Halle Berry and Mark Wahlberg and then Michelle Monaghan and Mark Wahlberg have all also seen the appeal, even if critics have struggled to agree (only Gosling and Blunt achieved a fresh rating with The Fall Guy). The formula – quip, shoot, kiss, repeat – has become rather exasperating for those of us still awake and paying attention with the choice to coast on the surface pleasures of attractive stars allowing for everything around them to suffer. If only a fraction of the big star salaries had been siphoned off for a script doctor then maybe we could have had some real fun here …
As it stands, the mostly rather rote Back in Action is best seen as just an excuse to watch Diaz act again, and she’s as charming as she always has been, especially alongside Foxx, with whom she shares a comfortable chemistry. They’re playing a couple who give up their exciting lives as spies for the safe predictability of suburbia when they become pregnant. But they get sucked back in when their cover is blown and this time, their kids are coming along for the ride.
Director Seth Gordon is no stranger to middling, lose-lose action comedies, having been involved in the writing of The Lost City while directing both Identity Thief and Baywatch and as in those films, there’s no elegance to how the two genres are clumsily smashed together. Watching a couple and then a family limply banter about screen-time or school pick-up while involved in a car chase or shoot-out isn’t enough to tick both boxes. The majority of the dutifully choreographed action sequences are also soundtracked by discordant, wink-wink love songs, like Etta James’s At Last or Nat King Cole’s L-O-V-E, in such a smug and familiar way that it all starts to feel a little like parody, as if we’re watching Action Comedy Movie. The action here is slightly more serviceable (if never remotely exciting) than the comedy, with a script from the Gordon and Neighbours co-writer Brendan O’Brien that settles for tired family sitcom shtick – lazy, exclamation point-heavy one-liners missing all targets entirely, no matter how hard the two stars might try.
While Diaz and Foxx might acquit themselves without any real shame, their supporting cast aren’t quite as lucky. Andrew Scott comes off lightest, just seeming a tad lost as the underwritten big bad, but Glenn Close, as Diaz’s British mother, and her love interest, played bizarrely by Jamie Demetriou, are not quite as lucky, both going super size with go-for-broke pantomime performances, aiming to steal scenes but leaving us with only secondhand embarrassment.
One hopes this is just what Diaz needed to get warmed up again and her next, a role alongside Keanu Reeves in the dark Hollywood-set comedy Outcome should be more rewarding. Back in Action takes her back in time.
and Jamie Foxx, two powerhouse actors in Hollywood, have teamed up for the new Netflix comedy “Back in Action.” The film follows the story of two former partners in crime who reunite for one last heist.
While the premise of the film sounds promising, the execution falls flat. Diaz and Foxx seem to be going through the motions in their roles, lacking the chemistry and energy that made them such beloved actors in the past. The jokes feel forced and the plot is predictable, leaving the audience feeling underwhelmed.
Despite the lackluster performances, there are some redeeming qualities to “Back in Action.” The action sequences are well done and the film has a stylish aesthetic. However, these moments are not enough to save the overall film from being forgettable.
In conclusion, “Back in Action” is a disappointing effort from two talented actors. While it has its moments, the lack of chemistry between Diaz and Foxx, as well as a weak script, make this a film that is best left unwatched.
Tags:
Back in Action review, Cameron Diaz, Jamie Foxx, Netflix comedy, Cameron Diaz movie, Jamie Foxx film, comedy movie review, Back in Action 2022, Cameron Diaz and Jamie Foxx, Cameron Diaz Netflix film, Jamie Foxx comedy, Cameron Diaz comedy film.
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it’s investigating the financials of Elon Musk’s pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, ‘The A Word’, which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.
It is funny that in the same week that the Oscar-tipped epic The Brutalist was engulfed in a controversy about its (relatively minor) use of AI, audiences were presented with the first entirely AI-generated movie! Or at least what you imagine an entirely AI-generated movie would be: Netflix’s shiny, sterile Back in Action, a film so dismayingly soulless that it could mark a new low in Hollywood creativity.
Why Cameron Diaz chose this to be her first film in a decade is just one of the many mysteries kicked up by Back in Action, which is currently sitting atop Netflix’s Top 10 list. Others include: “When did Andrew Scott forget how to act?”; “What karmic debt does Glenn Close owe Netflix on the heels of this, The Deliverance and Hillbilly Elegy?”; and “What is the rate of return for a straight-to-streaming blockbuster that rented out the Tate Modern for an action setpiece, then staged a combined speedboat and motorbike chase along the Thames?”
Mainly, though, you’re left wondering why any real sense of style or creative vigour has dropped out of films like these, with their devotion to standard action genre plot tropes and faint duplication of older, better movies. Back in Action casts Diaz and Jamie Foxx as a spy couple who unexpectedly get pregnant and decide to go off-grid, only for their past to catch up with them – and their clueless-to-their-parents’-old-jobs children – 15 years later. A rotation of nondescript bad guys wants hold of “The Key”, a MacGuffin of such criminal vagueness that it may as well have been called “The Object” or “The Thingamajig”. See, in the wrong hands The Key can drain entire city blocks of power, and only Foxx’s character knows where The Key is hidden.
Diaz and Foxx, with kids in tow, hightail it to London to seek protection from Diaz’s mother, a wealthy ex-spy played with a curiously erratic English accent by Close. She, meanwhile, is in a relationship with an eccentric Brit played in peak “Jack Whitehall-coded comic relief” mode by Stath Lets Flats’s Jamie Demetriou. And all of these characters soon find themselves pursued not only by an MI6 spy (Scott, crushingly vacant) but also by a CIA operative played by Friday Night Lights’s Kyle Chandler, one of the greatest American TV stars of the Noughties, here reduced to delivering stern reams of exposition in between gunfights.
Typically, the combined star power in Back in Action should be able to compensate for everything else. But there is no crackle between Foxx and Diaz, two charismatic, dependable movie stars who nonetheless operate on different comic wavelengths – he the cocky smart alec, she the sunny free spirit. And it’s debatable whether the pair were even together most of the time. Foxx was hospitalised during filming after experiencing a near-fatal stroke, meaning a body double was used in a number of scenes that he was unable to shoot. That might explain why the camera so consistently cuts between static shots of his and Diaz’s individual heads, as if to paper over the fact that they weren’t in the same place.
It’s all depressingly tossed together, crudely edited and almost impressively unfunny. But maybe that’s the point. A recent report in the arts magazine n+1 claimed that Netflix bosses have been asking screenwriters to make sure their characters “announce what they’re doing so that viewers who have [the] programme on in the background can follow along”. They allegedly want “casual viewing” content, meaning things you don’t really have to pay attention to. Back in Action is more or less this in practice: a collection of sounds, images and explosions, stripped of characters or jokes. It’s a vague approximation of moviemaking, to be watched between swipes of your phone, or while untangling plug cables in your living room.
Send it back: Cameron Diaz and Jamie Foxx in ‘Back in Action’ (Netflix)
Back in Action certainly isn’t the first of its kind to feel like this – between Netflix, Prime and Apple TV+, there is now an entire subgenre of speedily forgotten movies in which Ryan Reynolds types tangle with beautiful women armed with pistols and sass, from the Chris Evans/Ana de Armas flop Ghosted to the Mark Wahlberg/Halle Berry actioner The Union. But Back in Action feels the most egregious, perhaps because it stars an actor quite literally beamed in from a very different era in film production. Even Diaz’s worst movies had a sense of style to them, or a feeling that people were actively trying to make something halfway decent. Knight & Day, her Back in Action-style globetrotting caper with Tom Cruise, was released 15 years ago, and its gags, stuntwork and general spectacle feel almost herculean in comparison to the thrifty nothingness of her new film.
The biggest worry here, though, is not that a film like Back in Action is phoning it in, but that it – and films like it – are rewiring our understanding of what these kinds of movies are. An era of “casual viewing” shouldn’t mean lowered expectations, or cut corners, or rote storytelling. Action movies can be better. Should be better. And, up until very recently, really were better. If films are to survive amid a deluge of content fighting for our collective attention span, effort must be made. All Back in Action does is twist the knife in further.
‘Back in Action’ is streaming on Netflix
Get ready for another lackluster Hollywood film, as Cameron Diaz and Jamie Foxx team up for a new Netflix movie that is sure to disappoint. Titled “Back in Action,” this film seems to be a desperate attempt to cash in on the star power of Diaz and Foxx, rather than offer anything innovative or original.
Despite both actors having proven themselves as talented performers in the past, “Back in Action” feels like a step backwards for both of them. The plot is generic and uninspired, following a mismatched pair of detectives who must work together to solve a crime. Sound familiar? That’s because it’s a tired trope that has been done to death in countless other buddy cop movies.
It’s disheartening to see two talented actors like Diaz and Foxx wasting their talents on such a formulaic and unoriginal project. It seems that Hollywood has run out of fresh ideas and is resorting to recycling tired clichés in the hopes of turning a profit.
As audiences, we deserve better than this. We deserve films that challenge us, inspire us, and make us think. “Back in Action” is not that film. It’s a lazy, uninspired cash grab that does a disservice to both its actors and its audience.
So, if you’re looking for a truly engaging and original film to watch, you may want to skip “Back in Action” and look elsewhere. Hollywood may be running low on creativity, but that doesn’t mean we have to settle for mediocrity.
In “Back in Action,” a domestic spy caper as generic as its title, Jamie Foxx and Cameron Diaz, as CIA operatives who’ve become a romantic couple, attend a kids’ birthday party thrown by a cyberterrorist from Belarus whose safe they’re planning to break into. But their identities are unmasked in about five minutes. They have to fight their way out of the criminal’s mansion, which they do in an extended sequence of bone-breaking face-offs, all accompanied by Frank Sinatra singing “L.O.V.E.” (“L…is for the way you look… at me…”). The song, as it’s used here, lays on the ironic jauntiness with a trowel. It’s the film’s way of saying: Nothing’s at stake, don’t take it seriously, turn off your brain and sink into the warm bath of this Netflix product-of the-week (because that’s all it’s here for).
Seth Gordon, the director of “Back in Action,” thinks in cartoon-reality terms. He thinks that’s his job, and setting ultraviolent action sequences to old standards is just about the only playbook “Back in Action” has. Our heroes are on an MI6 plane when they’re ambushed by the flight attendants, whom they proceed to lay waste to as Sinatra sings “Ain’t That a Kick in the Head” (haha). The pilot gets shot, the plane is going down, but there’s Frank, bopping away. Later, Foxx and Diaz use gas-station hoses as flamethrowers to incinerate some thug attackers; the images of people burning alive are accompanied by Etta James singing “At Last” (“At last, my love has come along…”). They win the fight, but make no mistake: This is the entertainment strategy of a misanthropic hack.
After that plane crashes, Matt (Foxx) and Emily (Diaz), who is pregnant, seize the opportunity to fake their own deaths and begin a normal life. The film then cuts to the present day, where they’re suburban parents, with two kids, 14-year-old Alice (McKenna Roberts) and 12-year-old Leo (Rylan Jackson). But they’re drawn back into the fray after they tail Alice to a nightclub, where she’s in the company of some older dudes. They take her out of the club by beating up a couple of the other partiers — a flagrantly implausible scenario, though it’s necessary so that a cell-phone video of it can go viral and out them as former spies.
With their kids now along for the ride, the family flies to London, where Matt has stashed the ICS key, the film’s super-dull MacGuffin. If they retrieve it and return it to the CIA, they can use it for leverage to gain immunity. But the key is the thing everyone wants, including their old terrorist foes…
Watching “Back in Action,” it feels like some producer took the original, overblown, raucous-with-gunfire-and-highway-crashes 2005 movie version of “Mr. & Mrs. Smith,” the one that wasted Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie, and said, “Bring me something just like this — except don’t make it so goddamn intellectual! I want it dumber, louder, without all that wimpy dialogue.” There isn’t much of an espionage plot to “Back in Action.” Basically, the movie consists of Foxx and Diaz beating the living shit out of people — and, in between, acting as breezy and clueless and innocuous as if they were playing the parents in a reboot of “Family Ties.”
The two actors are appealing; they’ve got marriage-as-domestic-fight-club chemistry. And when Glenn Close shows up as Emily’s British mother, a former superspy herself, the film calms down for a bit — and perks up. Close’s Ginny has an assistant, Nigel (Jamie Demetriou), who is a spy-in-training and also her lover, even though he’s at least 40 years her junior. And Nigel, it turns out, does not know what he’s doing. This produces a funny sequence, where he has to save London by tapping the right things into a laptap, and he reacts exactly as most of us do when confronted with the infuriating digital-logistical hoop-to-jump-through-of-the-week. But the real reason Nigel’s unsureness is such a balm is that everyone else in “Back in Action” (heroes, villains, kids) is so cocksure at every moment that the film leaves no room for any comic-thriller ingredient beyond boring one-dimensional badass certitude.
Jamie Foxx and Cameron Diaz are set to star in an upcoming generic spy caper film that promises to be action-packed and full of humor. The dynamic duo will team up to take down an international crime syndicate in this thrilling adventure.
Foxx, known for his roles in films like “Django Unchained” and “Ray,” will bring his signature charm and wit to the role of a suave secret agent. Meanwhile, Diaz, best known for her roles in “There’s Something About Mary” and “Charlie’s Angels,” will play a talented and fearless spy who is not afraid to get her hands dirty.
The film is sure to be a rollercoaster ride of twists and turns as Foxx and Diaz navigate through a web of lies, deception, and danger. With their undeniable chemistry and star power, this dynamic duo is sure to captivate audiences and deliver a memorable cinematic experience.
Stay tuned for more updates on this exciting project as it develops!
Jamie Foxx’s glorious return from his health scare continues, as the actor’s new film, Back In Action, has become one of Netflix’s biggest film debuts in years.
On Tuesday (Jan. 21), Variety reported that Back In Action, Foxx’s comedic action-thriller co-starring Cameron Diaz, amassed 46.8 million views in just three days following its release last Friday (Jan. 17).
This makes Back In Action the most successful English-language film release on Netflix since The Adam Project, which premiered on the platform in March 2022.
Jamie Foxx attends the “Creed III” European Premiere at Cineworld Leicester Square on February 15, 2023 in London, England.
Back in Action finds Foxx playing opposite Diaz in the role of CIA spies who left the field to start a family together, but are forced to rely on old tactics after their cover is blown.
Featuring a cast that includes Kyle Chandler (Friday Night Lights), Glenn Close (Fatal Attraction) Andrew Scott (All of Us Strangers), Jamie Demetriou (Barbie), McKenna Roberts (Skyscraper), and Rylan Jackson (Dungeons & Dragons: Honor Among Thieves), Back In Action marks Foxx and Diaz’s third film together.
The reunion is one that the Academy Award winner says he has been looking forward to for years.
Jamie Foxx, Jamie Demetriou, Cameron Diaz and Seth Gordon attend the photocall for “Back In Action” at Cheval Three Quays on January 17, 2025 in London, England.
“A lot of people don’t know this, but after Cameron and I did Any Given Sunday and Annie together, we became friends in real life — and I’ve been begging her to come play with me again,” said Foxx, who also served as an executive producer of Back In Action.
“We all know there’s just something about her…,” the jokester added, referencing Diaz’s popular 1998 film, There’s Something About Mary.
Back In Action marks Jamie Foxx’s second Netflix release since being hospitalized after falling ill in April 2023. In December 2024, the Texas native released the Netflix comedy special, What Had Happened Was, his first stand-up film in over two decades.
Jamie Foxx attends the world premiere of Netflix’s “Day Shift” at Regal LA Live on August 10, 2022 in Los Angeles, California.
Jamie Foxx’s latest action-packed thriller, ‘Back In Action’, has taken Netflix by storm, marking the streaming platform’s biggest movie debut in years. The film, which stars Foxx as a former special ops agent seeking revenge against his former team, has garnered rave reviews from critics and audiences alike.
With its heart-pounding action sequences, gripping storyline, and stellar performances from the cast, ‘Back In Action’ has quickly become a must-watch for action movie fans. Foxx’s charismatic portrayal of the lead character has been hailed as one of his best performances to date, further solidifying his status as a Hollywood powerhouse.
The success of ‘Back In Action’ on Netflix serves as a testament to the streaming platform’s ability to deliver high-quality, blockbuster entertainment to its subscribers. As more and more viewers turn to streaming services for their movie-watching needs, it’s clear that Netflix is leading the charge in providing top-notch content for audiences around the world.
If you haven’t already checked out ‘Back In Action’, now is the perfect time to do so. Grab some popcorn, settle in on the couch, and get ready for a wild ride with Jamie Foxx in this adrenaline-fueled thriller. You won’t be disappointed!
“The last time we saw Cameron Diaz on screen, it was way back in 2014,” said Benjamin Lee in The Guardian.
“That year saw her lost in the juvenile comedies ‘The Other Woman’ and ‘Sex Tape’, before being horrendously miscast in a dud remake of ‘Annie’; and, not long after, she chose to retire, perhaps feeling as glum over the quality of her films as those of us stuck watching them.” Now, however, she has returned in the Netflix action-comedy “Back in Action”, in which she and Jamie Foxx play a couple who have given up their exciting lives as spies to raise a family in the suburbs – only to be “sucked back in” when their cover is blown.
‘Comfortable chemistry’
The film is pretty formulaic, and it does make you wish that a fraction of its stars’ salaries “had been siphoned off for a script doctor”, but Diaz is as charming as ever, and she shares “a comfortable chemistry” with Foxx, her old friend.
Subscribe to The Week
Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.
SUBSCRIBE & SAVE
Sign up for The Week’s Free Newsletters
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
This is a three-star film “made for those times at which only a three-star film will do”, said Robbie Collin in The Telegraph: “vivaciously, even triumphantly, OK”, it is “ideal entertainment for an afternoon or evening when the eyes and ears say ‘yes’ and the brain says ‘thanks, but I’ll probably just leave you guys to it’”.
‘Wasted in insubstantial roles’
Though it does feel “highly processed”, you may feel, as you watch Diaz and Foxx “do their thing”, a bit sad “that Hollywood ever gave up” on easy-to-please movies like this.
You’ll see the “third-act ‘twist’ coming a mile off”, said Ben Travis in Empire, and Andrew Scott and Kyle Chandler are “wasted in insubstantial roles”. But Back in Action is a fun, “fizzily watchable” treat. A word to Diaz: “Next time don’t leave it so long, eh?”
Explore More
Get ready for some high-octane excitement because Cameron Diaz and Jamie Foxx are teaming up for a new action film titled “Back in Action.” This dynamic duo is sure to bring the heat as they take on a dangerous mission that will push them to their limits.
The film promises to be a thrill ride from start to finish, with Diaz and Foxx showcasing their incredible chemistry and impressive action skills. From intense fight scenes to heart-pounding car chases, “Back in Action” is guaranteed to keep you on the edge of your seat.
But what sets this film apart from other action movies is its unique twist – the entire story takes place in a highly processed, hyper-realistic world where nothing is as it seems. With mind-bending visuals and unexpected plot twists, “Back in Action” will keep you guessing until the very end.
So buckle up and get ready for the ride of a lifetime with Cameron Diaz and Jamie Foxx in “Back in Action.” This is one action film you definitely don’t want to miss.
The film industry has always had a soft spot for reunions, and Back in Action is no exception, reuniting Jamie Foxx and Cameron Diaz in a bid to recapture their past glories. However, this film feels more like an easy, breezy ride down memory lane rather than a memorable cinematic experience.
Back in Action stars Cameron Diaz and Jamie Foxx in lead roles.
In this latest offering, Emily (Diaz) and Matt (Foxx) are former intelligence agents now grappling with the mundane yet chaotic life of suburban parenting. Their characters, portrayed with an endearing chemistry by Foxx and Diaz, hark back to their action-packed days with a longing that feels both genuine and humorous.
From the outset, the film establishes its comedic tone, which, surprisingly, delivers some unexpected laughs. Foxx and Diaz, despite initial doubts about their on-screen rapport, manage to create a fun and natural dynamic that carries the film through its more predictable moments. Their performances are the highlights, showing that both actors still have the charisma and talent to make even the most familiar tropes enjoyable. Diaz, in particular, proves that her magic on screen has not diminished, even if the script she’s given does little to challenge or showcase her full capabilities.
The plot revolves around the couple’s past catching up with them when their identities are compromised, forcing them back into the world of espionage, this time with their children in tow. This premise sets up a series of action sequences that, while not particularly thrilling or innovative, are competently handled. The action is underscored by a soundtrack that feels both nostalgic and slightly mocking of the genre’s clichés, with songs like Etta James’s At Last playing during less-than-glorious moments, adding a layer of irony that sometimes works and at other times feels forced.
However, the film’s attempt to blend family dynamics with high-octane action falls flat. The dialogue, meant to be witty, often resorts to tired sitcom clichés, missing the mark for both humour and depth. The screenplay by Brendan O’Brien lacks the sharpness needed to elevate the material beyond the ordinary, leaving much of the comedic heavy lifting to the stars themselves.
Supporting performances vary in impact. Andrew Scott, as the antagonist, seems somewhat misplaced, while Glenn Close and Jamie Demetriou venture into over-the-top territory, their efforts more cringe-inducing than captivating. Their attempts at scene-stealing are more about volume than substance, which unfortunately detracts from the film’s overall enjoyment.
While Back in Action serves as a delightful reminder of why we love Foxx and Diaz, the film itself doesn’t offer much to remember. It’s a light, breezy watch that won’t linger long in one’s memory but provides enough entertainment for a pleasant evening. It’s a testament to the stars’ enduring appeal rather than a landmark in action-comedy filmmaking. In essence, it is an easy, low-effort comeback vehicle that proves Diaz’s charm is intact, though she might want to choose her next projects more judiciously to truly shine once more.
Get ready for some high-octane thrills and lackluster humor, because Jamie Foxx and Cameron Diaz are back on the big screen in their latest action flick, “Back in Action.”
In this subpar movie, Foxx and Diaz play a pair of charming yet cliched characters who are thrown into a series of predictable and unexciting action sequences. From car chases to fight scenes, there’s nothing in this film that hasn’t been done a thousand times before.
Despite their best efforts, Foxx and Diaz struggle to breathe life into their flat characters, relying on tired jokes and over-the-top performances to try and salvage the lackluster script. It’s a shame to see such talented actors wasted on a film that feels like a cheap knockoff of better action movies.
Overall, “Back in Action” is a forgettable and uninspired film that fails to deliver on its promises of excitement and humor. Save your money and skip this one at the box office.
Republicans are taking on the recipients of President Joe Biden’s preemptive pardons, issued on the same day he will leave office. Among those targeted is Rep. Jamie Raskin, who was part of the House committee that investigated President-elect Donald Trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 election.
In that context, Republicans in the House Oversight Committee brought back a clip from Raskin saying that “the seeking of pardons is powerful demonstration of the consciousness of guilt, or at least the consciousness that you may be in trouble.” It is unclear whether Raskin actively sought a pardon from Biden.
Lyin’ Hypocrite Jamie Raskin got a pardon for his role in the sham January 6 Committee.
Here’s what Raskin said in his own words about preemptive pardons: “The seeking of pardons is powerful demonstration of the consciousness of guilt, or at least the consciousness that you may… pic.twitter.com/k0Z3Ol2i9U
Biden himself had said in 2020 that the concept of preemptive pardons “concerned” him “in terms of what kind of precedent sets and how the rest of the world looks at us as a nation of laws and justice. You’re not going to see in our administration that kind of approach to pardons,” he told CNN back then.
The outgoing president justified his decision by saying that the recipients have “been subjected to ongoing threats and intimidation for faithfully discharging their duties.”
“I believe in the rule of law, and I am optimistic that the strength of our legal institutions will ultimately prevail over politics. But these are exceptional circumstances, and I cannot in good conscience do nothing. Baseless and politically motivated investigations wreak havoc on the lives, safety, and financial security of targeted individuals and their families. Even when individuals have done nothing wrong—and in fact have done the right thing—and will ultimately be exonerated, the mere fact of being investigated or prosecuted can irreparably damage reputations and finances,” Biden added during a passage of his statement.
Dr. Anthony Fauci, the former head of the NIH, thanked Biden for the preemptive pardon but emphasized that he has not committed any crimes.
“I really truly appreciate the action President Biden has taken today on my behalf. Let me be perfectly clear, Jon, I have committed no crime, you know that, and there are no possible grounds for any allegation or threat of criminal investigation or prosecution of me,” Fauci told ABC News journalist Jonathan Karl.
He went on to say that he is grateful because the chance that he would indeed be investigated under the Trump administration would have created “immeasurable and intolerable distress on me and my family.”
In a shocking turn of events, Democrat Jamie Raskin’s past comments about preemptive pardons have come back to haunt him. Raskin, who has been a vocal critic of President Trump’s use of pardons, is now facing scrutiny for his own remarks on the subject.
In a 2016 interview, Raskin expressed support for the idea of preemptive pardons, stating that they could be a useful tool for preventing political prosecutions. However, now that Raskin’s own actions are under scrutiny, his past comments are being used against him by his political opponents.
Critics are accusing Raskin of hypocrisy, pointing out that he is now singing a different tune when it comes to preemptive pardons. Some are calling for Raskin to resign or face consequences for his previous statements.
Raskin has not yet responded to the controversy, but it remains to be seen how he will address the issue moving forward. Stay tuned for updates on this developing story.
![]](https://s.yimg.com/ny/api/res/1.2/QcRsFwxEiQcKtLObTOmp8g--/YXBwaWQ9aGlnaGxhbmRlcjt3PTk2MDtoPTQ3Nw--/https://media.zenfs.com/en/buzzfeed_articles_778/f92ee1f5915b9ffc02f9c1d8a5df0be6)
