This is easily one of the worst movies we've had the un-pleasure of watching. As you may or may not have noticed in my reviews I compare each movie to Dungeons and Dragons, the worst movie we have ever watched in our little weekly get together. DD was not enjoyable on any level, intentional or unintentional. There are lots of bad movies but often they're so bad that it's actually interesting or enjoyable to watch them, kind of like a car crash or snuff film, but DD was not pleasant in any way, it was just minutes and minutes of failure you aren't interested in seeing. The second worst movie we have ever seen was Stuck on You, horrible but not horrible enough to dethrone DD. Is Rush Hour 3 bad enough to take the top spot?
The original Rush Hour concept was simple; mix 1 part Chris Tucker comedy, with 1 part Jackie Chan high wire action and you've got a killer buddy-action-comedy flick. So what went wrong here?
Gripes:
1st the comedy; it's old, its tired, it ain't there. There are basically three gags in the whole movie and they are recycled ad nauseum. Gag #1 Chris Tucker Yells and Yells and Yells. I don't know what happened to Chris Tucker but the novelty of his yelling has worn off. I believe it wore off somewhere near the end of Rush Hour 1. Gag #2 Chris Tucker Sings Sooooouuuuuul Music and Dances All Kooky. The movie opens with this and it's not funny from the get go. He just looked bored here, like he wanted to leave and had something better to do. He probably did - heck going to take a dump would have been better than this. The guy needs new shtick bad. Note; apparently he got paid 20million for this movie so really he gets the last laugh on us. Gag #3 Jackie Chan talks in Ebonics. Not since Cousin Balky has mangling the english language been used to such ineffective comic effect. Basically this just isn't a funny movie, it's not even funny for not being funny. If you want comedy look elsewhere.
2nd the action: Jackie Chan ain't as spry as he used to be. He's getting old and he can't do all the stunts that he could before. Really he's geriatric at this point and I think the biggest stunt he managed here was jumping and hiding in a big flag. Other wise he just kicks people and jumps over small coffee tables. Not very good. Worse; I guess Tucker got tired of playing the incompetent that messes everything up and he wanted to do some kung fu too. There's even some ridiculous expository dialogue (that Tucker yells at top volume) that explains this. It's stupid and it fucks up the formula; Tucker mucks up in a humourous way, Chan saves him in creative action packed way. Instead they just clumsily hit stuff and chan jumps over a very small table. Whopee. I guess that's the biggest problem here, this movie feels old and tired like it's really been done before, but at the same time it tinkers enough with the tried and true formula to not even give you the pay off seeing something you're used to working. In the end we just tuned out of the movie and let it play out to it's predictable boring conclusion.
What Worked
Say what you will about Brett Ratner he can direct some good action sequences, or maybe that was his second unit. But there are good moments in a car chase scene. That's about it.
So Is it Worse than Dungeons and Dragons?
No. It's not even worse than Stuck on You. Don't get me wrong this is horrible, the worst most uninteresting thing we've seen in weeks. A movie that seeks out your hate gland and tickles it in full force but it has one thing going for it: Money. This movie had a big budget and you can see the dollars on the screen. From the car chases to the predictable scenes of our heroes hanging (and yelling constantly yelling) from the Eifle Tower it all looks so good and that was the most enjoyable thing. DD had nothing like that, it looked like it was made for a hundred bucks even though probably it cost millions, so therefore Rush Hour 3 was better.
Mediocrity Scale
Not Even Mediocre.
Food
We shirked the store bought processed food for delicious home made chocolate cake. Nuff said.
Monday, September 15, 2008
Thursday, September 4, 2008
Street Kings? Kings of the Street?
Shit I just watched it last night and I've already forgotten the title. Anyways Forrest Whittaker and Keanu Reeves are crooked cops in L.A. But then Keanu is crooked to do good and it turns out that Whittaker is just crooked and so is all of Keanu's unit. Also Johnny Flame or whatever is there too and he gets killed. And that doctor guy Bones? Mothers? whatever he walks with a limp and is really raspy he's there too and he appears every once in a while to be all raspy and shit. I'm telling you all of this but you already know this from the first frame of film because it's all really predictable and by the numbers and the big twist isn't really any kind of twist plus there's another twist that is so ridiculous that it's best left ignored. Still I liked it. There's people shooting at each other and murder and it's all rated R and it's kind of fun. I also liked Keanu as this older experienced kind of killer cop guy. I beleived it especially next to the Flalme On guy, I really saw the experienced successful sci-fi franchise veteran next to the new up and commer.
Gripes: Two Words: Forrest Whittaker. I just don't see what people like about this guy, I can't stand him. I don't know why but he just rubs me in a bad way. He always looks like he's about to cry or something. I just want to pinch his cheeks and tickle his belly and say "it's alright don't cry".
What Worked: A guy gets shot throught the back of the head and the front of his face gets blown off, another guy gets machined gunned repeatedly by two guys until he's just kind of jello. I love that kind of stuff, it takes me back to my fondest childhood memories of sneaking into Rated R movies at the local ciniplex.
Worse Thank Dungeons and Dragons? No. It did not incite any hate or desire to track down the movie makers, chain them to a wall, whip their backs, then pour lemon juice on the wounds like DD did.
Mediocrity Scale: A bit above Mediocre Violence.
Food: We started with a litre each of Sinful Cookie or something Ice Cream. Sweet, pretty creamy cheap Safeway Ice Cream that gave me bad farts and weird poo due to my mild lactose intolerance. Next we followed it up with some Pringles Restaurant Special Chips in Hamburger flavour. Yes that's right Hamburger. There were pictures of Hamburgers on the box to signify that it was indeed Hamburger flavour. Unfortunately it just tasted like a combo of ketchup, cheese, and smoke flavour and was quite disappointing. We didn't even finish it. To drink the always venerable Coke Zero.
Gripes: Two Words: Forrest Whittaker. I just don't see what people like about this guy, I can't stand him. I don't know why but he just rubs me in a bad way. He always looks like he's about to cry or something. I just want to pinch his cheeks and tickle his belly and say "it's alright don't cry".
What Worked: A guy gets shot throught the back of the head and the front of his face gets blown off, another guy gets machined gunned repeatedly by two guys until he's just kind of jello. I love that kind of stuff, it takes me back to my fondest childhood memories of sneaking into Rated R movies at the local ciniplex.
Worse Thank Dungeons and Dragons? No. It did not incite any hate or desire to track down the movie makers, chain them to a wall, whip their backs, then pour lemon juice on the wounds like DD did.
Mediocrity Scale: A bit above Mediocre Violence.
Food: We started with a litre each of Sinful Cookie or something Ice Cream. Sweet, pretty creamy cheap Safeway Ice Cream that gave me bad farts and weird poo due to my mild lactose intolerance. Next we followed it up with some Pringles Restaurant Special Chips in Hamburger flavour. Yes that's right Hamburger. There were pictures of Hamburgers on the box to signify that it was indeed Hamburger flavour. Unfortunately it just tasted like a combo of ketchup, cheese, and smoke flavour and was quite disappointing. We didn't even finish it. To drink the always venerable Coke Zero.
Monday, August 25, 2008
10,000 BC
We avoided renting this one for a long time. There it sat on the shelf at the video store, mocking us - daring us to rent it. Week after week we ignored it, pointing at it jokingly, asking ourselves when we would be desperate enough to rent this movie called "10,000 BC".
Well, we finally succumbed, as I knew we eventually would. If you haven't seen the movie and are wondering what it was like, the best description I could give you would be to imagine crossing Clan of the Cave Bear with Ice Age, with maybe a little Conan the Barbarian and 300 thrown in.
The story starts with the tale of a young hunter who has a crush on the most beautiful girl in his tribe - a girl with some sort of prophecy associated with her. The young man is not altogether that popular with his fellow tribe-mates after his father, the lead hunter of the tribe, abandons them when his son is a small boy. Since this boy is the lead, you know he's going to prove himself on his first hunt, proving his worth against a mammoth that looked about as realistic as an animal from the aforementioned Ice Age.
Having proven himself to the "haters" within the first 20 minutes of the film, the film gets going when the beautiful girl is kidnapped by a proto-islamic Thulsa Doom thug leading our hero and a few of his tribemates on a cross counry search worthy of Aragorn, Gimli and Legolas. Gathering the support of the united nations along the way, our hero finally finds himself in Egypt where he leads a slave rebellion against the King and some more bad CGI animals.
It's been awhile since we've seen a movie this bad. How hard would it have been to make the film a little bit more Dragonslayer or Beastmaster and a little bit less Apocalypto? This film didn't even throw us a bone like Apocalypto did with the Jaguar scene.
Pain score: 7.5 out of 10.
Fittingly, the snacks were bad as well. We had some kind of baked cracker snacks called Crispers. It was a real disgrace to eat something so healthy and we couldn't even finish a single bag of the cardboard "chips".
Well, we finally succumbed, as I knew we eventually would. If you haven't seen the movie and are wondering what it was like, the best description I could give you would be to imagine crossing Clan of the Cave Bear with Ice Age, with maybe a little Conan the Barbarian and 300 thrown in.
The story starts with the tale of a young hunter who has a crush on the most beautiful girl in his tribe - a girl with some sort of prophecy associated with her. The young man is not altogether that popular with his fellow tribe-mates after his father, the lead hunter of the tribe, abandons them when his son is a small boy. Since this boy is the lead, you know he's going to prove himself on his first hunt, proving his worth against a mammoth that looked about as realistic as an animal from the aforementioned Ice Age.
Having proven himself to the "haters" within the first 20 minutes of the film, the film gets going when the beautiful girl is kidnapped by a proto-islamic Thulsa Doom thug leading our hero and a few of his tribemates on a cross counry search worthy of Aragorn, Gimli and Legolas. Gathering the support of the united nations along the way, our hero finally finds himself in Egypt where he leads a slave rebellion against the King and some more bad CGI animals.
It's been awhile since we've seen a movie this bad. How hard would it have been to make the film a little bit more Dragonslayer or Beastmaster and a little bit less Apocalypto? This film didn't even throw us a bone like Apocalypto did with the Jaguar scene.
Pain score: 7.5 out of 10.
Fittingly, the snacks were bad as well. We had some kind of baked cracker snacks called Crispers. It was a real disgrace to eat something so healthy and we couldn't even finish a single bag of the cardboard "chips".
Sunday, August 10, 2008
10,000 b.c.
A bunch of tribesmen who speak in really short serious sentences (akin to Lothar of the Hill People) track down a bunch of pre-Muslim Muslims who stole some of their friends and a very special girl with blue eyes. Their journey leads them to befriend many noble humorously dressed African tribesmen and they and digital Mamoths, Sabertooths and Ostritches overthrow the evil pre-Egyptian Egyptian emperor and free all the slaves. Yay. This is a movie for everyone. So it sucks. It takes it self very seriously but is totally and completely ridiculous. At about the 45minute mark my brain completely shut down and I was actually able to enjoy the rest of the movie, so I recommend lowering you mental activity to basic brain stem function before starting the film and you'll have a great time.
Gripes: Bad CGI. Stilted terrible expository dialogue about lots of plot lines and ideas about long lost fathers, ancient tribes, old mothers, spirtis, and all of them go absolutely nowhere. PG rating takes all credibility away (that blue eyed girl would have been raped ten times before she even made it a mile) Terrible CGI. Racism? Maybe that's too harsh, how about extreme stereo types.
What worked: Any time the movie forgot that it had to be a big summer block buster with CGI and lots of plot and just settled into telling the story of a bunch of guys going to save a bunch of other guys I could actually pay attention and get interested.
Worse than Dungeons and Dragons?: No. But at the start I thought it might be close however it never reached the heights of pure outrage and hatred that DD did.
Mediocrity Scale: Pretty Mediocre
Food: Cream Soda Crush which was just syrupy and sweet. We also ate Crispers Ranch flavour, and Sour Cream and Onion flavor. If I had to break down the experience of eating them to its most basic I would have to say thin cardboard strips coated with salt. We did not finish either pack. Normally we fight to the end to finish whatever we have.
Gripes: Bad CGI. Stilted terrible expository dialogue about lots of plot lines and ideas about long lost fathers, ancient tribes, old mothers, spirtis, and all of them go absolutely nowhere. PG rating takes all credibility away (that blue eyed girl would have been raped ten times before she even made it a mile) Terrible CGI. Racism? Maybe that's too harsh, how about extreme stereo types.
What worked: Any time the movie forgot that it had to be a big summer block buster with CGI and lots of plot and just settled into telling the story of a bunch of guys going to save a bunch of other guys I could actually pay attention and get interested.
Worse than Dungeons and Dragons?: No. But at the start I thought it might be close however it never reached the heights of pure outrage and hatred that DD did.
Mediocrity Scale: Pretty Mediocre
Food: Cream Soda Crush which was just syrupy and sweet. We also ate Crispers Ranch flavour, and Sour Cream and Onion flavor. If I had to break down the experience of eating them to its most basic I would have to say thin cardboard strips coated with salt. We did not finish either pack. Normally we fight to the end to finish whatever we have.
Tuesday, August 5, 2008
The Bank Job
Jason Statham is awesome. One of my favorite action film actors working today.
The Bank job is the story of a group of small time crooks who, under the pretense of being presented with a score too big and easy to pass up, are actually being manipulated to steal the contents of a security deposit box containing some X-Rated photographs of a royal personnage.
There is a subplot involving the UK version of Malcolm X who supposedly is using the photos to blackmail the british government in such a way that the powers that be feel that hiring some crooks to steal the photos is a better plan than to send in some secret agents to do the job.
But like any good Hitchockian thriller, the whys and wherefores are less important than the journey and the predicament our hero finds himself in.
The movie which takes place in the '70s feels quite a bit like a Guy Ritchie movie, or a low-rent version of Ocean's 11 (the remake (which is fabulous), not the original (which sucks)). The actors all acquit themselves well and the script keeps the action moving along with the requisite suspense and "will they get caught" moments.
Of course like any movie we sit down to watch together, The Bank Job is not without it's share of problems, most notably a few slow periods where the film drags a bit between the good parts. Overall I don't have a lot to complain about, but I'm happy I didn't pay full movie theatre fare.
Pain Score: 3 out of 10.
The Bank job is the story of a group of small time crooks who, under the pretense of being presented with a score too big and easy to pass up, are actually being manipulated to steal the contents of a security deposit box containing some X-Rated photographs of a royal personnage.
There is a subplot involving the UK version of Malcolm X who supposedly is using the photos to blackmail the british government in such a way that the powers that be feel that hiring some crooks to steal the photos is a better plan than to send in some secret agents to do the job.
But like any good Hitchockian thriller, the whys and wherefores are less important than the journey and the predicament our hero finds himself in.
The movie which takes place in the '70s feels quite a bit like a Guy Ritchie movie, or a low-rent version of Ocean's 11 (the remake (which is fabulous), not the original (which sucks)). The actors all acquit themselves well and the script keeps the action moving along with the requisite suspense and "will they get caught" moments.
Of course like any movie we sit down to watch together, The Bank Job is not without it's share of problems, most notably a few slow periods where the film drags a bit between the good parts. Overall I don't have a lot to complain about, but I'm happy I didn't pay full movie theatre fare.
Pain Score: 3 out of 10.
Redacted
Once again I am behind in my review posting, so please forgive me if my memory of the movie is cloudy.
Over the last couple of months I've slowly been making my way through the "Iraq war" movie glut of last year having seen In The Valley of Elah, The Kingdom, Lions for Lambs and now finally Redacted.
I was curious to know why Redacted lives on the "Restricted" shelf of the local video store, beside the soft core porn films and was disappointed that the rating was earned for a particularly gruesome rape sequence rather than for violent or profane content. But I'm getting ahead of myself. The movie, which stars no one, is directed by Brian DePalma and pretends to be assembled from video footage collected by several groups - an army grunt, a french news channel, and some security video footage.
If this sounds a lot like the recently reviewed here Vantage Point, it's because it is, though this time we are at least spared having to see the same sequence over and over again.
The story revolves around a group of army grunts whose tour has just been extended as they deal with the high stress environment of operating an army checkpoint. Looking to burn off some steam after an incident involving the shooting of a pregnant woman during a "routine" checkpoint stop, a couple of the boys decide to go and have some "fun" - raping a young Iraqi woman and killing her family while two of their comrades look on in horror - unable to do anything to stop them.
Unfortunately the movie is far more interested in scoring points against war in general and the "war on terror" in particular to delve into the true motivations and emotions of the characters involved. The villains are cookie-cutter and the speech given by the "hero" who presented evidence against his former friends at the end of the movie is forced and contrived.
Pain scale: 6 out of 10.
Over the last couple of months I've slowly been making my way through the "Iraq war" movie glut of last year having seen In The Valley of Elah, The Kingdom, Lions for Lambs and now finally Redacted.
I was curious to know why Redacted lives on the "Restricted" shelf of the local video store, beside the soft core porn films and was disappointed that the rating was earned for a particularly gruesome rape sequence rather than for violent or profane content. But I'm getting ahead of myself. The movie, which stars no one, is directed by Brian DePalma and pretends to be assembled from video footage collected by several groups - an army grunt, a french news channel, and some security video footage.
If this sounds a lot like the recently reviewed here Vantage Point, it's because it is, though this time we are at least spared having to see the same sequence over and over again.
The story revolves around a group of army grunts whose tour has just been extended as they deal with the high stress environment of operating an army checkpoint. Looking to burn off some steam after an incident involving the shooting of a pregnant woman during a "routine" checkpoint stop, a couple of the boys decide to go and have some "fun" - raping a young Iraqi woman and killing her family while two of their comrades look on in horror - unable to do anything to stop them.
Unfortunately the movie is far more interested in scoring points against war in general and the "war on terror" in particular to delve into the true motivations and emotions of the characters involved. The villains are cookie-cutter and the speech given by the "hero" who presented evidence against his former friends at the end of the movie is forced and contrived.
Pain scale: 6 out of 10.
Thursday, July 10, 2008
Pointless
Raph insisted on seeing the Dennis Quaid/Forrest Whittaker epic Vantage Point this time out and I have to admit that I was somewhat curious. Was this going to be a movie that would rise above it's gimic (viewing the same story from the "vantage point" of several different characters (get it?)) or was the gimic all the movie had going for it?
The answer was clear within the first five minutes. Vantage Point is a thriller decidely lacking in thrills. Instead of using the fact that the audience knows what is going to happen (from both the trailer of the film and the opening sequence) to build suspense, the filmmakers thought it would be more interesting to use each character's vantage point to hammer us over the head with the details any reasonable person would have noticed previously.
The conceit completely falls apart in the last third or so of the movie when the film begins cutting between multiple vantage points to tell the meat of the story. The climax, which brings everyone together was laughably implausible, like an M. Night Shyamalan movie without a twist ending.
Pain score: 6 out of 10.
We had "cheese" to eat, but we made the mistake of buying Roasted Red Pepper and Lime flavored tortilla chips which were awful. We had Ice Blue Kool-Aid instead of our usual carbonated beverage selection which was a refreshing change and surprisingly delicious. It was surprised that it wasn't sweeter tasting than it was given the cup of sugar required to make it.
The answer was clear within the first five minutes. Vantage Point is a thriller decidely lacking in thrills. Instead of using the fact that the audience knows what is going to happen (from both the trailer of the film and the opening sequence) to build suspense, the filmmakers thought it would be more interesting to use each character's vantage point to hammer us over the head with the details any reasonable person would have noticed previously.
The conceit completely falls apart in the last third or so of the movie when the film begins cutting between multiple vantage points to tell the meat of the story. The climax, which brings everyone together was laughably implausible, like an M. Night Shyamalan movie without a twist ending.
Pain score: 6 out of 10.
We had "cheese" to eat, but we made the mistake of buying Roasted Red Pepper and Lime flavored tortilla chips which were awful. We had Ice Blue Kool-Aid instead of our usual carbonated beverage selection which was a refreshing change and surprisingly delicious. It was surprised that it wasn't sweeter tasting than it was given the cup of sugar required to make it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)