Reviewed by Colin Jacobson (April 18, 2024)
Based on the film’s title and the cover art to the left, one might assume 2024’s The Beekeeper offers a drama about a lonely man and his solitary hobby. However, when one realizes Jason Statham plays the lead, expectations shift to presume it’ll offer his usual action fare.
Go with that!
Adam Clay (Statham) keeps bees in rural Massachusetts space he rents from elderly Eloise Parker (Phylicia Rashad). He appears to harbor a dark past but he keeps to himself and only occasionally interacts with Eloise, whose warmth he appreciates.
When scammers steal Eloise’s entire savings as well as charitable money under her care, she commits suicide. Troubled by this incident, Adam conducts a mission of violent revenge, one that gradually reveals both aspects of his history as well as complications given the identities of the criminals involved.
Ever since Hollywood made the first action flick, the genre came with implausible events that often veered into impossible. 2010’s The Other Guys lampooned these unrealistic extremes and reminded us that these films lack much realism.
This trait went even farther into the realm of fantasy with the successful John Wick franchise. The definition of the unstoppable action hero, the Wick flicks depicted a character ridiculously impervious to the laws of physics and the human body.
Beekeeper clearly follows the Wick path. Indeed, it takes matters to an even greater extreme, one that makes the Wick films look nearly believable by comparison.
As a story of a super-skilled operative in pursuit of justice for the common person, Beekeeper bears more than a minor resemblance to the Equalizer films. However, as powerful as he may be, that franchise’s Robert McCall pales in comparison to the deity-like Clay.
I do get why those involved with Beekeeper chose to make Clay so unbeatable. This allowed the story to amp up the action to crazy levels well beyond the usual mano-y-mano.
However, even if we ignore the ludicrous nature of Clay’s survival through all these battles, he simply seems too superhuman. This means the choice to place him against ever bigger and badder foes just creates an increasing disconnect from reality.
For instance, relatively early in Beekeeper, Clay faces off against an agent who theoretically possesses skills on a par with his. He dispatches the combatant with ease.
Again, I get this choice. It tells us that if Clay can take down a peer with so little sweat that he can feasibly handle swarms of opponents.
Still, this decision means that Clay seems too powerful. One assumes that his fellow agents should come with pretty similar skills, so the notion that Clay functions at a radically higher level feels off.
Beekeeper’s plot comes with a slew of contrivances, and a lot of these exist just to place Clay in those ever-increasing battles. The ease with which he slides in and out of challenging situations destroys credulity and makes the story even more difficult to swallow.
Heck, even the basic origin of Clay’s mission stretches logic. After crooks steal all of Eloise's money, she apparently does nothing to correct this.
Eloise doesn't call the banks. She doesn't contact friends or business associates.
Eloise doesn't get in touch with authorities, even though her daughter (Emmy Raver-Lampmann) works for the FBI! Sure, the movie indicates some estrangement between the pair, but seriously?
No – this seemingly well-adjusted older woman blows her brains out instead. Look, I get that an event like this would leave one shaken and distraught, but I find it an enormous stretch to believe Eloise did absolutely nothing after the theft other than kill herself.
Beekeeper takes a patronizing view toward older folks and essentially implies they’re infants who require intense care to avoid mishap. Yes, the elderly are more prone to scams like the one painted here, but this still seems insulting.
And it also makes no sense in this circumstance. We need to accept Eloise as nearly helpless and easily fooled, but yet a charity put her in charge of a $2 million account?
All this said, I recognize that nit-picking Beekeeper probably misses the point to some degree. Audiences don’t see action flicks like this with the expectation of logic and coherent narrative elements.
Does Beekeeper satisfy in terms of its battles and violence? To some degree, but again, the absurdity of Clay’s superheroics distracts.
Movies can depict ultra-skilled warriors without the need to make them as unbeatable as Clay. Indeed, his ability to destroy all comers with such ease makes him less interesting.
That said, the fights offer decent power, and Statham manages better than average acting. Perhaps as a hangover from his role in 2021’s superior Wrath of Man, Statham gives Clay a haunted and withdrawn quality that suits the role and differs from the usual wise-cracking Cockney turn he does.
We also get Josh Hutcherson in a delightfully scummy performance as the ringleader of the phishing operations. He seems to enjoy his departure from the nice guy parts he usually plays and he adds spark to the film.
All of this leaves Beekeeper as a moderately rousing action flick but one with too many flaws due to the depiction of its unstoppable lead. The movie goes too far in that regard, and this saps its impact.
