Cool News
Moriarty Asks If WANTED Was Needed And Why HANCOCK Is So Limp!
Hey, everyone. “Moriarty” here.
2008, for better or for worse, will be remembered as the year the superhero genre on film proved its longevity and its elasticity, and I think next year’s arrival of WATCHMEN has the potential to be perfectly timed.
If it works. No pressure, Zack.
This year’s seen more variations on the formula than any other in recent memory, all of them competing for this summer’s box-office dollars. IRON MAN. HULK. Both important building blocks for the new Marvel Studios. Both rigidly formal interpretations. Both very Marvel. And now, two attempts at pop deconstruction, one an adaptation, one a movie-star vehicle original. Both will have passionate and vocal defenders. Both of them missing, for my tastes, in the same way.
I’m not of the opinion that a movie has to be high art to have value. There’s plenty of low culture that hits my sweet spot. No such thing as a guilty pleasure, in my opinion; either a film works for you or it doesn’t. It’s a binary process. Although I’d recommend you see both films if you have any interest in the genre, I can’t honestly say I think either of them is built to last. Maybe that makes them true to form; when I was a kid in the ‘70s, my friends and I didn’t collect comics. That’s not to say we didn’t buy a lot of them... it’s just that we didn’t think of them as things to collect. They were meant to be read. And that’s what we did. We read them. We traded them. Sometimes they got lost under beds or in the backs of closets or older brothers would confiscate them, and that was fine. We’d already soaked them up, added them to our ever-expanding understanding of Spidey or Man-Thing or Batman or Superman or any of the two-dozen other titles I read. The sheer volume of comics I gathered made them hard to move, and we moved often, so I would shed the books I’d accumulate. Comics in my life were, by necessity, disposable. Maybe that’s why I feel no particular reverence to source material when it comes to comics. I think as long as you understand the conventions of what you’re doing, you can feel free to bend or even break them as you need to.
Ongoing series, in particular, tell their stories in a very particular codified way, and once you read enough of them, you get it. There’s an innate grasp of the conventions that should kick in. But just understanding those conventions isn’t enough. You need to have something to say if you’re going to be a deconstructionist. It’s not enough at this point, after enough great minds have been at it, to say, “Hey, what if a superhero is an asshole and a drunk?” That’s not a new idea. It doesn’t expand or illuminate in a new way. There is a reason why I’m a comic reader, not a comic writer. That’s a very particular skill set, and the guys who do it well... the Moores or the Gaimans or the Busieks or the Bendiseses... er, the Bendii... they speak comics like a language. They’re fluent in it. They soaked it up the way other people soaked up film or music or art or photography or sports or whatever. When they descontruct comics and the conventions of the genre, they do it with authority.
Now, after the last seven or eight years, after all the X-MEN and FANTASTIC FOUR and SPIDER-MAN and DAREDEVIL and HULK and SUPERMAN RETURNS and BLADE and GHOST RIDER and ELEKTRA and HELLBOY and BATMAN we’ve had onscreen, the audience is ready. The pump is primed. It’s time to get post-modern. When something like MYSTERY MEN tried it earlier, it was still too soon. Fanboys may complain about all the origin stories they’ve seen in the past decade, but there’s a reason for that. Every comic book has an issue one, and for film audiences, you have to do the same thing. And until a mass audience sees several of them, and sees the way each superhero is similar or the ways they’re different, you can’t get post-modern. You can’t play with expectations until you establish those expectations. That takes time, and a certain degree of saturation.
Mark Millar has certainly made an impression on the comic industry over the last few years, and it doesn’t surprise me to hear that he’s one of the many people pitching on a new SUPERMAN movie at Warner Bros. If WANTED has a big opening weekend, that may well raise his stock with Warner. Strange, since the film is really not the same sort of deconstructionist fare that Millar wrote. It’s more of a reaction to the past decade of action cinema, with a sort of perfunctory nod at some superhero tropes as window dressing.
I wish I could say I liked the film. I liked images in the film. I liked some of the energy of the movie. Timur Bekmambetov is absolutely capable of summoning visual thunder at times. And having said all of that, I’m still not convinced it’s much of a movie at all. I find the first third of the film almost grotesquely difficult to watch because of just how overt the theft from THE MATRIX and FIGHT CLUB is. Did you like those movies? Yeah? Well, so did Michael Brandt and Derek Haas, evidently. There are some nice moments in that first act, like the scene with Mr. X, played by the extra-freaky David O’Hara, but the crippling familiarity is pretty hard to sit through. Once James McAvoy is done with his training montages, then we have... well, mission montages. In fact, the whole film feels like a montage. Is that where we’ve gotten with action cinema at this point? Bekmambetov seems entirely unconcerned with the connective tissue that makes a film work. He loves the sensation, the noise, the blood spatter. This is the film that some people accused 300 of being, where style supplants substance completely.
Write to theme. That’s what I was taught. That’s what I believe. Even in the broadest of action films or the silliest of comedies, if you write to your basic theme, you’ll give your film some semblance of coherence. Both THE MATRIX and FIGHT CLUB worked because of how powerfully they dramatized their heavy thematic material. WANTED isn’t “about” a goddamn thing, and if that’s okay with you... if you really don’t care if there’s even a pretense of soul or heart or brains... if it’s all just empty surface and you’re fine with a 100 minute car commercial. With NIGHT WATCH, DAY WATCH, and now this film, we’ve seen that Bekmambetov can create a startling or beautiful image. He can even string them together. But I don’t believe the guy’s a fully-formed storyteller yet, because he has yet to tell me a story in a way that holds together in even the most fundamental of ways. Narrative just ain’t his bag. If anyone comes close to making this film feel like it’s got a pulse, it’s Jolie. She sells her wee bit of backstory, makes you feel like it’s credible and there’s some genuine sadness going on, and for me, it really clicks in a wry little smile she gives just before pulling the trigger for the last time in the film. I don’t think the film works, but I think a performance like hers is enough to convince you that it does. Morgan Freeman gets a big laugh with his Sam Jackson moment, but we’ve seen this sort of work from him a dozen times before.
This isn’t a franchise. Please don’t try to make this a franchise. The worst thing that could happen would be for them to start cranking out WANTED films. I don’t buy the organization of the Weavers for a minute. Harry talks at length about “suspension of disbelief” in his review; no shit. But if there’s no internal logic or if something’s just haphazardly constructed, it loses me. If the writers and director couldn’t be bothered to really make this world feel complete, then why should I be required to take anything in it seriously? It’s all just breaking the rules of reality with no weight or consequence, and to no end. Nothing anyone does in this film has any bearing on the fate of the world. Nothing is accomplished. It’s not a terrible movie, and it’s not the most violent or mean-spirited film of all time. It’s not worthy of hyperbole to any degree. It’s just another case of Teflon Hollywood, nothing that sticks, nothing worth remembering afterwards. I need more than just the pretty pictures. I’ll take the genuine spark of storytelling on a nothing budget over this hollow “thrill ride” any day.
HANCOCK has some of the same problems that WANTED does. It’s not about anything. It’s a series of incidents, and then it’s over, and nothing is truly accomplished. The film’s “big villain,” such as it is, is a total wash-out, a threat for no reason other than to stage a preposterous “emotional” climax. This film’s “twists,” which some people are going crazy trying to preserve, are surprising only if you’ve never seen a motion picture in your entire life. Peter Berg telegraphs pretty much the entire film, tipping his hand repeatedly in the way he stages things. You’re not supposed to be surprised, I don’t think. There’s a character in the film harboring a secret, but from the moment that character shows up, they might as well be wearing it written on a t-shirt. It’s that transparently obvious. Overall, this is a great example of the sort of comic book writing that really started to emerge in the late ‘80s, when young punks were tearing down the industry by holding up a few brilliant mirrors to it. Miller’s work on THE DARK KNIGHT RETURNS was like a bomb going off. The idea of dirtying up an icon like that was so unheard of, so impossible to imagine. Warner Bros. protected those characters carefully, just like Marvel did. It is one of the great miracles of comics that DC let him tear down the Batman to his exposed id.
If HANCOCK had been a comic series in the late ‘80s, we’d be talking about it still. “Wow, did you see how they reconstructed the notion of the lonely god, a la SUPERMAN, by making him an alcoholic angry asshole who destroys more than he helps? So smart.” And there is something provocative in seeing some of Hancock’s worst instincts play out on film. A super-powered asshole is terrifying because it’s hard enough dealing with a regularly-powered asshole. If HANCOCK works for you, chances are Will Smith’s performance will be one of the things that does it. He continues to prove why he is one of our last reliable movie stars here, giving a grounded, watery-eyed performance that makes you believe in the absurdities of the film. Smith believes everything he’s doing, so the audience goes along with him. The film’s at its best early on, when Hancock’s origin is still a mystery and he’s basically just an anti-social force of nature, a property damage machine with a taste for whiskey. The script by Vince Gilligan and Vincent Ngo, loosely based on Ngo’s original spec TONIGHT HE COMES, is a shaggy dog story. It’s not quite sure what story it’s telling, so it tries to tell a half-dozen different ones at the same time. Like WANTED, HANCOCK stumbles when it comes to subtext, as in... there is none. Again, I’m not sure how you put together an entire film like this without anyone figuring out what it is that the film’s about, but HANCOCK manages to exist only as surface, resolutely refusing to go any deeper. There are opportunities here to comment on the way we are drawn to destructive relationships, or the ways we sabotage ourselves, or the ways expectation can cripple us, but none of that is dealt with in any significant way. Instead, we get Will Smith shoving people’s heads up their asses and a strange sort of lift from BACK TO THE FUTURE 2, with Hancock literally unable to walk away from someone calling him an “asshole.”
I think Peter Berg is somehow both overrated and underappreciated at the same time. He’s got some real muscle as a filmmaker, and when he focuses it the right way, I think he’s capable of some very good work, like FRIDAY NIGHT LIGHTS or parts of THE KINGDOM. But there’s also a slapdash quality to much of his work, like he can get a movie close, but sometimes they just get away from him. HANCOCK definitely suffers from that. I know how long this thing’s been in development, and how many versions they’ve written. But... this wasn’t the one to shoot. Not quite.
The basic problem is this: they try to create a larger mythology, one that we need to take seriously for the end of the film to carry any payoff at all. But the mythology they create is so poorly explained and so poorly explored by the writers that it feels like they’ve chickened out on any sort of deconstructionist urge and right at the end, they want us to see this as a real superhero film, one that plays by the same rules rather than shattering them. And if this is “just another origin story,” and that’s all there is to it in the end, then I have to call it a wash. There’s nothing inherently interesting about Hancock as a character, nothing that’s going to make me come back for another adventure later. “But it’s not that kind of film. This is a comment ON those films.” Nope. No, it’s not. I can tell that it wants to be, but there’s not a single comment that it makes that hasn’t been made before and better, and considering how many giants have already stepped up to take a shot at this sort of thing, you either have to do something new, do something better than anyone else, or just decide to tell a great story well. HANCOCK does none of those.
In the end, both of these films are worth at least a look. Neither one is devoid of charms or merit. But they are films that we’ll remember as second-tier at best, movies we’ll have a hard time remembering beyond one or two key images later this year. Maybe that’s all you want from your summer movies, in which case these might fit the bill perfectly. But if you think this genre deserves some smart post-modernism as we reach this particular saturation point, then these two movies will both disappoint and frustrate you to some extent.
Sometime next week, I’m going to have a report on two scripts for upcoming projects that aim for this same territory and that may be more successful in their attempts. Oddly, one even involves Millar. For now, though, let’s get cracking on that WALL-E review. I’ve been itching to write about it since the first time I saw it, and I’m eager to hear what you guys think now that you can see it for yourselves.
Drew McWeeny, Los Angeles
Drew McWeeny, Los Angeles
-
+ Expand All
-
2nd?
-
3rd.
-
You sound crabby.
-
It's not The Godfather. Looks just like a fun popcorn movie. I don't think anyone expects much in the story department. Having a thousand word dissertation about missing plot elements is overkill. Sit back and enjoy.
-
like in The Matrix. We didn't need Morpheus reminding us every time he was on screen. Wanted is a fun movie, which is what I've been missing. Think of it as an action comedy!
-
appeal to me in any way from what i've seen so far. IRON MAN was pretty good until the 3rd act, then saved it by a killer last 5 minutes, HULK was completely worthless and so far the only movie i felt really transported me anywhere or moved me was THE FALL. i went into it not expecting much and was surprised. that being said, the two movies that i (along with everyone else) has been looking forward to all year DK and WALL-E will save the summer. i predict multiple viewings for each. and i'm holding out for a DK/WALL-E double feature at my local drive in. that is all.
-
By the way, cheers. I always find your reviews to be the most considered, and often the most on the nose, of the lot. Does will Smith say "DAAAAMN!", by the way?
-
...but yet again he can't write a review without 19 other movie references. Give us a review of the two movies you saw, stop showing us parallel movies even if they're in same genre.
-
I'm kinda glad that from what I've read and heard so far that Hancock is not the train wreck we were expecting. I might even see it. One question however Mori.... Is the super jizz scene still in there?
-
Do they still have the shove the guy's head up the other guy's ass bit?
-
I live in Montreal, Canada and I've seen both of them (Wanted on wednesday then Hancock on thursday) and I approve everything that you've put in here. Can't wait for the Boy and the man sequels in july.
-
Enlightening as well as analytical. I'll heed these words well.
-
That's not what I remember. Unlike Wanted (from what I've heard, having not seen it) Hulk had actual characterization running through the action scenes. I dunno if you liked it, but it was far from "worthless."
-
... nope. No super-jizz scene.
-
... it's funny occasionally, but it's not a comedy. Part of its problem is that the film has no control over tone. Sometimes it's a weepy melodrama, sometimes it's a farce.
-
... that's not my fault. WANTED is literally just the sum of other movie's parts, and that is part of the problem with it.
-
this guy should be in charge.
and yes, the head-up-the-butt scene is there. -
That's not the issue he has, it's not a case of "lolz you expecting shakespeare/citizen kane etc or somethin? it's just a popcorn flick".
The central story ideas A) the whole shit about the weavers and that killing these people is saving thousands of others and B) we're meant to empathise with Wesley's desire to kill his father's killer are both very poorly written and explored. Which is terrible if the film really wants to have any impact. It's not that it has to be amazingly deep and complex, but it certainly has to convince me that the film's characters believe in what they're doing. The whole thing with the magical loom was so fucking ridiculous and poorly explained (so names turn up on the cotton, how do they even figure out that means they have to be killed?) that i don't believe that Fox would believe it, which makes her final action have little impact.
Same problem with Wesley's arc. Yes it's great that he takes control of his life etc, but i'm not convinced he wants to kill the killer of his father. He mentions how his father abandons him, but there's never really an explanation ofr that given to wesley, adn there's never a moment where i'm convinced wesley would feel a 'connection' with his father and want to avenge him. The whole thing becomes souless.
Yes it is a popcorn flick, a cliched action film. But look at "Commando", a classic in the cliched action popcorn flicks. The story of "arnie wants to get his daughter back" is incredibly simple and not explored much but it doesn't need to be. We get it, we symapthise with it, and we want Arnie to kick bad guy butt to save her, and to entertain us. There was lots of cool action scenes in Wanted, but no moment where i thought "fuck yeah wesley, kill those bad guys". -
...who liked Love Guru.
-
What was it anyway with all the tornadoes ? It felt like all of a sudden, both characters merged in a Rolland Emmerich film without reasons whatsoever.
-
...I think it was Beaks who hinted Drew was writing a piece on Carlin's passing, and I checked back repeatedly because I wanted to hear what Drew wanted to say more than anyone else on AICN. (Though Quint's euology was highly moving, I'll give him that.)
Drew? Has that ship already sailed, or is there a chance you wrote something up about Carlin on your blog? Or was Beaks guessing wrong? Not that you HAVE to write a Carlin tribute; I was just hoping to read what you were going to say, if anything.
And I can't wait to read your thoughts on Wall-E! -
gets out of a bath naked is still in the movie or not. Was in trailer. This movie looks cool.
-
lex romero nailed it. The movie serves as a visceral treat. Its visual junk food which you enjoy watching because some of it you've not seen in film before. But other than that, you have no emotional attachment to the story or to its players. You simply dont give a damn about any of them, and just want them to hurry up and stop taling and shoot some more.
I think that means its a rotten film. -
... and I can't put my finger on it. I’ve said for many years that I think Drew's the best writer on this site, because he actually takes the time to WRITE (as well as proof-read and provide a deep analysis of whatever it is he happens to be writing about) as opposed to others who merely paste a link to the Hollywood Reporter and throw up a YouTube link... However, these reviews rubbed me the wrong way. I haven't seen either of the films, and I respect that everyone's entitled to their own opinion (that old annoying chestnut) but after reading all of that, I can't help but wonder if Drew is being way too critical of two films that are the very definition of "mindless summer blockbuster entertainment". Again, I haven't seen the films – Drew could have hit the nail on the head – but from the trailers, I think both of these films look like an incredibly good time at the movies. I guess I'll see in due course. One thing I do agree with though… and that’s that WATCHMEN couldn’t be more perfectly timed.
-
I don't think you reviewed that one, and I was looking forward to your take on it after your edit bay visit.
-
Wait... well, whatever, I still need to see.
-
...it's like you and I were reading different reviews. It was pretty obvious to me Mori recognized both of these films as "mindless summer blockbuster entertainment." I think he seemed to say that it's that very quality that kept them from being complete losses. The impression I got from him were that they were completely serviceable for what they were (simple whiz-bang movies,) but could have been more substantial with just a little bit more effort. Especially if these two movies aimed at trying to be "twists" on the now-common superhero movie. If you want to re-work something, you have to know what makes it work in the first place. These movies seemingly failed to be sophisticated enough in their writing to do that, but they're still watchable as loud fluff. That's the impression I got from the review, anyway.
-
"If the writers and director couldn’t be bothered to really make this world feel complete, then why should I be required to take anything in it seriously? It’s all just breaking the rules of reality with no weight or consequence, and to no end."Those Indy 4 reviews are going to come back to haunt folks forever because that statement above is what Mori should have said in his Crystal Skull review.
-
good thing somebody at aicn uses their heads and not only their guts to asses a film. anyway its good to have those different perspectives.
-
Thanks for always cutting through the hyperbole and getting to the guts of it.
-
Jun 27, 2008 2:58:45 PM CDT
Well done, Mori-- almost makes up for the Indy 4 review
by the octagoner
But you should know, about Mark Millar, that his comics writing is utterly vapid and without any soul, just empty flash, same as this film. And Bendis isn't a good comics writer; he's a bad television writer who writes comics.
-
Night and Day watch were just big budget Russian garbage trying to look like big budget American garbage. Jokes on them cause its all trash.
-
That's fair enough; if that's what Drew was getting at then I can completely respect that. I think the way the reviews were written just got under my skin a bit, made it seem like it was a case of "I'm too clever for these films". I will take his thoughts into account when I see them (and I'll DEFINITELY still be seeing both of them, like Agent Johnson said), and I don't want to come across as bashing his writing. It just felt to me like he was maybe being too critical. But what do I know? I haven't even seen the films. I was really rooting for WANTED to be something special, because I want it to be James McAvoy's star-making role.
-
... seeing it in a few hours. Verrrrrrry curious.
-
Maybe he's reliable at making money, but I hardly think he deserves all the credit for that. Will Smith is everything that's wrong with todays big budget stars. Whatever made guys like Arnie, WIllis, and Sly work in the 80's even while being near parodies of themselves Smith lacks entirely. He has neither Arnie's bad assery, WIllis' everyman quality, or Sly's vulnerability. Those guys knew their image and they worked with some kick ass directors to make some kick ass genre efforts, never taking themselves seriously enough to look stupid, but also committing completely enough that we felt safe being in on the proverbial joke. Smith has all those guys weaknesses and none of their strengths. I Am Legend, I Robot, Wild Wild West, Hitch, Bad Boys 2, Men in Black 2 are all horrible films and Hancock, in all it's lowbrow looking bullshit, certainly doesn't seem to end that streak. The worst part is he seems to choose projects exclusively for how slick and/or powerful they make him at any given time. I mean look at I Am Legend. He's the handsome, impeccably shaped, vampire killer who also happens to be the one brilliant scientist on Earth who can stop the disease, Give me a fucking break. Smith, with all his clout, couldn't have steered the film closer to it's roots? You could argue that his films have moments of fragility, but anytime hes playing the vulnerable it doesn't have even half the impact or skill as when he's his good ole narcissistic self. Like a bad love story in a superhero movie, vulnerability or real emotion in a Smith action tentpole is just frosting thrown in to fool an idiot audience. It's fine for actors to play the same guy over and over, when that guy actually has something going for him besides an ego. And moreover, a decent movie to back it up that doesn't always play the lowest common denominator.
-
... I don't believe in "mindless" entertainment. There's a lot of epic trash I love, movies that are all about shaking you in a visceral way, but the great ones are great because there is some degree of thought to it. They don't have to be Shakespeare to entertain me... but some sort of internal logic certainly helps.
-
are there screenings happening now that one can sneak into who do you have to be all official and shit?
-
You know what movie did a good job following its theme of creating your own family and learning to trust one another? Batman and Robin. Nuff said.
-
I haven't seen the movie, read the comic, was okay... The trailer leaves me cold, so I am surprised so much love is being heaped. Also, damn, i was hoping Hancock would be good. Oh well. Hellboy Lives! If Hellboy doesn't then my summer is crushed, I have had that Comic-Con poster on my imac for months.
-
or wait until closer to the release? Either way, I'm seeing Wanted later today, but will for sure pass on Hancock. All I'm expecting from Wanted is guys getting shot in the head. OVER AND OVER. this "weaver" business sounds dumb as fuck, though.
-
All you need to do is cut the scene with Shia swinging with monkeys, and his sword fight for that matter, then just cut out the last few seconds with Cate and the Alien, keep it sorta mysterious like her scream is heard not seen and cut the spaceship. I don't mind the Aliens just the execution. Other than that the film is an 8.5 in my book and I am old, old by interent standards and Indy 1-2-3 are my StarWars more than Starwars, if that makes sense. I have edited the 3 Prequels down to a 2 hour clip show and it actually works pretty good.
-
I hear what you're saying. I know that there should be some semblance of a working formula, a call to action. But even as small as the premise might be, I can look past it if the action is worthwhile. Plus, let's not forget that staring at Angelina Jolie for a hour and some change isn't a bad day.
-
I know, you're asking what the fuck does he have to do with thread? Well, keep reading.
On this site, almost whenever his (Ratner) name is in the trades, this site and it's ilk, trash him. If you want an overrated hack, that would be Peter Berg. He should be receiving the same amount of shit Ratner gets, if not more.
The half-ass hypocrisy that goes on this site amazes me at times, so I was pleased that someone (Mori) finally called it out (sort of). -
Because I haven't seen it, but if we're going to nitpick about internal logic, at what point does it ruin a movie? The first instance or the tenth?Here's the dead horse and here's me beating it with a 2x4, but let's count the lack of internal logic in the first 20 minutes of Crystal Skull.1. Magnetic gunpowder.2. Hyper magnetic object that is very selective in the metal it attracts.3. A single base that contains the greatest (and most destructive) artifacts known to man guarded by only 5-6 soldiers.4. Atomic fridge.5. "Mary Williams"I don't want to turn this into an Indy 4 talkback, but giving a pass to gaping holes in logic in one movie but holding them against another is a pet peeve.
-
I still love the film, even though Jeff Goldblum manages to hack into an alien operating system using an Apple Mac, because the central idea and image of giant alien ships destroying our planet is so great (in theory I mean, in reality it would suck balls). So I hear you, is what I'm saying.
-
something about bats? i'm sure it's full of thematic heft and emotional resonance.
-
what a fucking horrible review of wanted. I saw it last Thursday and it kicked all kinds of ass. Mori just didnt get the point of it. Me, my friend and basically the whole theater either had a huge grin or had positive buzz about it in the lobby. Now I dont trust his review of Hancock either.
http://tinyurl.com/pv8do -
However I loved watching Bekmambetov with a larger budget and a manageable script. I dont really know what you were expecting Mori. I actually walked into the theater expecting less of a coherent story than we got. Maybe thats why I was happy to see the film shift towards the end from the typical "lets go get the bad guy" track it was running on. I am sure I will revisit the film. Some of the scenes with Gibson taking charge of his situation (eg the keyboard smash on the guy's face) played well for me. hmm... What would Freud say?
-
I enjoyed it in much the same way I loved SHOOT 'EM UP. I enjoyed them for what they were. To say that the Matrixesque scenes were a rip-off is a bit much, don't you think? I say the same thing here I say about Tarantino's work whenever called into question; it's not theft if the perceived thief actually manages to improve upon the scene or trick he or she is lifting. This movie features stunts and action scenes that are so far ahead of the average action film that I think it's ridiculous to criticize it for being too similar to the one or two films that are actually on its level in this regard. The plot was thin, sure, but those action scenes are as beautiful, as sexy, as intense as anything in recent memory. They are what John Woo should be giving us by this point, but is not. Since I once got banned from here for saying something derogatory to Moriarty, I shall just say this: I respectfully disagree with your review.
-
...what was the point of it, exactly?
-
The point of it was to be enterfuckingtaining, which it succeeded in being with flying colors.
-
It's called Bat Out of Hell and it's probably fun as hell. With a premise like that, it's a guaranteed good time.But we've been suspending logic multiple times every summer since Star Wars came out. If Wanted is bad because the dialogue is junk, the acting is terrible, the direction is weak and overall the film is just a giant mess with unsympathetic characters, then by all means rip it a new one. But don't complain about lazy internal logic or haphazard construction because that describes 90% of our popcorn flicks, from midichlorians to microwave weapons to magnetic gunpowder, we let a lot of stuff slide in the name of entertainment.I've dumped on Indy 4 a lot, but I was willing to overlook the flaws in logic had they dropped some bad unnecessary characters, utilized more practical effects and cleaned up the dialogue, just like I do for every other popcorn flick.
-
judging Babe Ruth solely on the merits of his fielding. They both did one thing really, really well--better than anyone else--and that alone should be enough to silence the haters.
-
...but I'm sort of glad I've given up the obligatory see-every-single-big-summer-release-at-the-theater impulse I once had.
-
... like I said, it's a binary process. I'm sincerely glad you were entertained by WANTED; I was bored by most of it. So you for, success; for me, failure. That's how it works.
-
mori is the only one who actually writes with a smidgeon of journalistic capacity... massa, merrick, harry et al are all just raving fan boys, which is fine don't get me wrong, i like reading wacked out reviews full of profanity and silly quotes like 'i just want to see him ice the fuck out'... its funny stuff. but in terms of actually coming across as a professional writer, mori does a decent enough job. he never usually just says a movie is soooo shit, or sooo good and then just keeps repeating it over and over without actually saying WHY its good or bad. mori can be quite articulate at times. capone can be pretty good too. and beaks as well. and vern is good too, funny and well written, when he's not showing his contempt for the talkbackers and fanboys
-
mindless or not, needed or not, WANTED looks cool man.
HANCOCK looks really lame. -
it does kinda get annoying when he always mentions toshi... *cut to the scene in family guy where that guy pulls out his wallet with photos of his kids in it and says 'hahaha i love kids' and starts slamming peter in the face with it...
-
I concur. Heh, and you're right on about the "profanity and silly quotes" stuff! :D For me, that's actually gotten a little old now.
-
If it is what I believe it is, it's rather dissapointing. I'm not one of these people that goes through the trailers frame-by-frame, but I did notice a very revealing shot, and put two and two together with the whole "you should go to jail" setup. Pretty lame, of course I could just be completely wrong.
-
I hate it when people make great writing look easy. Glad I didn't do any reviews on Wednesday. Great commentary, on both of them, meatiest thing I've read this week. Thanks.
-
I told you this fucking thing would suck! I've been yelling about it for months. FUCK HANCOCK!
-
And if you go see it, you'll be BEGGING it to release your sore flabby nips, but it won't. Ooooh, no. Because a Will Smith COmedy just don't do that. Oh, hell nah! (as Smith might mug in to the camera and say.) This movie is trying SO hard to be funny, it's pathetic. Oh, a slacker asshole has superpowers, but he doesn't want to be bothered using them to help people. FUck him. It's lame and not funny just because WIll SMith accentuates his lines in the same way he does in every movie. I hope this movie goes DOA after it's opening week. I'd rather re-elect the Bush administration to another 4 years in office than see HanCOCK get a sequel.
-
Hi, I heard there's a crossover between these two movies like with Iron Man and Hulk. After the Hancock credits role there is a brief clip of Jolie working Han's 'Super' Cock? Any truth to it?
-
DO IT!!!!
-
its obviously a ripoff of Matrix and Fight Club, but at least its ripping off good movies. I dont expect it to change the way i look at movies. I may just sneak into it after I watch Wall-E.
-
Damn You MCMLXXVI
-
Were the movies good or not?
-
Does that make it any less of a classic?
-
this quote "it feels like they’ve chickened out on any sort of deconstructionist urge and right at the end, they want us to see this as a real superhero film, one that plays by the same rules rather than shattering them" could have been written about Last Action Hero. That movies tone is now the norm and not a bizarre disfigured misfire.
-
"Break yo self Nigga, Break yo self!"
-
Jun 27, 2008 6:18:06 PM CDT
Is it just me, or did Moriarty turn into a pretentious douche...
by kataklysmic
...and start taking himself way to seriously a few years ago when he started getting paid for scriptwriting?
-
Don't boil Mori's entire review down to his last post. Yeah he says in the post he was bored by the film, in the review he explains WHY he was bored by the film.
-
Is this really where we our now in our criticisms of the editors of this site? Because they ask for MORE from a film than mindless overly stylized by ultimately poorly directed action he's a douiche? No motherfucker, YOU are a douche. the kind of mouth breather without even the slightest semblence of taste, justifying every brainless film that comes down the pipe because you're either too stupid or complacent to give it more than a half seconds thought. Moriarty and Beaks are maintaining the integrity of this site, you want something else? Go read Massawyrm or Harry's reviews.
-
A) To Mori, can you drop the obvious spoiler in this thread? I have no interest in seeing this but your review made me curious. B) anyone think it's NOT going to make over $100 million over the July 4th weekend?
-
Thanks for cirumventing the cheeseballs (I wuv Eli Roth) and fanboy prose. WANTED looks like its best images will be accessible on trading cards.
-
Drew must have had a bubble bath.
-
Both sound limp. Mori, it's appreciated that you keep your head in the game even though you're producing material for studios. I know I can trust this man's opinion. Doesn't mean I'll always agree with it... but I trust it. That's rare.
-
And that's why I'm surprised that the critics (who I never trust and only read for reading's sake) are eating this movie up.
-
Cheers Mori.
-
You're seeing it tonight, right? Too much to ask to see a review tonight? It's my most anticipated movie and I think I look forward to your review on this site the most.
-
...is given away in the fucking trailer. Watch close and all will be revealed.
-
NOT GREAT BUT ENTERTAINING. SOME PEOPLE CLAPPED AT THE END. WAY OVER THE TOP,AND YEAH I SEE THE MATRIX/FIGHT CLUB COMPARISONS. NOT A CLONE OF EITHER ONE THOUGH. IT'S A HYBRID OF BOTH. A UNIQUE FILM. GO SEE IT. WORTH WATCHING IMO.
-
I had my suspicions about "Wanted" and it seems they might have been right. The comic book was about super villains and killing people for fun. It's not about finding out your dad's an assassin, but rather finding out your dad kills superheroes. That would've been a really interesting, twisted movie. However, at a very early meeting, the execs cut its balls off. It's still violent, but now there's some bullshit philosophy behind it. Which is supposed to make it better but really makes it worse. Here are these really violent characters and all this gore and blood and slow motion bullets, but they're actually the "good guys." However, if you know from the start they're all pieces of shit, that at least creates a bit of cognitive dissonance. Hollywood seems to have completely forgotten that protagonists don't have to be good guys in order to be sympathetic. Look at "A Clockwork Orange" or "Natural Born Killers." Or "Richard III" or "Macbeth" if you really want to go back.
-
No, if you read the comic, it sucks. Plus the whole weaver thing is fucking retarded. Also all this hoopla about Morgan Freeman cussing.... I kept waiting for it, and he does it twice and its good and all, but I was hoping for a foul mouth throughout. My biggest problem with Wanted is that up until the seen were we are introduced to the Weavers, its a pretty good comic book adaptation, but then its just turns to crap. Also the big problem is that it SO easily could've gone like the comic, they could've been assassins who were just bad guys. I can understand changing the whole super hero super villain thing but turning them from bad guys to good. I am all for doing your own thing with a comic, but changing the whole point of the comic?
-
... so now if I say, "Glad you enjoyed it more than I did," I'm also an asshole?
Literally nothing satisfies you people. You just want to make it about me, and it doesn't matter what I say. I said I'm glad someone else enjoyed it more than I did. When you can explain to me why that warrants ANOTHER personal attack, I'd love to hear it. -
I like reading Drew's reviews as well, but The Happening is now the third Syamalan film in a row that I'd like to forget.
-
forget jews...that fracken cult runs hollywood...how else does the fresh prince keep getting movies?? xemu controls all
-
problem lies in the fact that no one can take a purely negative review anymore. All reviews must be qualified: "I didn't like it, but you might like it if..." The thrust of your Wanted review isn't only an indictment of the film, but of the fans who might get enjoyment out of it.
-
I like how Moriarity thinks the films both suck, but he is intelligent enough to realize they may not suck for everyone and explains why without backpeddling really. I am going to avoid these at the theater though...they just sound frustrating to watch
-
relax my man. rest assured that for every dart that gets tossed your way, there are exponentially more silently satisified aicn heads who appreciate your insight.
-
... how many times and in how many talkbacks do I need to answer your point? I haven't seen it. I probably won't until video. I haven't had time to catch up with it since release, and Fox didn't make any effort to invite me to any press screenings, so I guess THE HAPPENING will happen eventually. But don't hold your breath. I'm not in a hurry.
-
Hardly. In fact, I have a real problem with those types of reviews. Go read David Poland's pieces about any superhero film this summer except HANCOCK (which was directed by his crush Peter Berg) and you'll see someone who really hates an audience.
If someone enjoys something I don't, I don't hate them. I don't care. That's what I mean about it being a binary process; someone else may have a totally different set of criteria for what they want out of a movie. I found the empty thrills of WANTED to be too empty for my tastes. That is not remotely an indictment of anyone else's reaction... just an explanation of mine. -
Great Review! Seriously, that wasn't obnoxious or 'holier than thou' like Beaks' review. Anyways, quick question... I know that Harry is also seeing TDK, are you guys seeing it together? When should we expect a review? Or better yet, I think it'd be cool if you guys just gave a brief, one paragraph review (i.e. good, bad, skip, must see, etc.) before your bigger and fuller ones (seeing as how TDK is now the most anticipated movie of the summer).
-
what did you call me biff?
Chicken, McFly!
Nobody, calls me....chicken -
Bubble bath. Stressing over these motherfucks is like being in a round room and trying to piss in the corner.
-
And you know it.
-
Watched it last night and really found it entertaining! It's not going to make you go Hmmmm as much as the Matrix did, but it has the same kind of feel as the Matrix. The action scenes alone are worth the price of admission.
-
does it sound something like, " creeeeBoOOOShh"?
-
Jun 28, 2008 8:54:32 AM CDT
All in favor of banning PTSDPete for blasphemy
by grammaton cleric binks
say "Aye."
-
Jun 28, 2008 8:56:38 AM CDT
I think I've got it. The fraternity of assassins
by grammaton cleric binks
from Wanted are the ones left after WWIII who survive and evolve to create the gun-kata and founding the order of the Grammaton Clerics.
-
I think you've spelled out exactly what to expect from these two films and now the readers can determine based on that if they still want to see them.
As to the whole "mindless popcorn movie" there's still a difference between a well done summer movie and a poorly done summer movie. Predator is a great example of well done. I don't mind tons of action sequences, just try to hang them on a decent story. -
Don't listen to the fucksticks in TalkBack. I honestly think it's time you and a few other of this site's truly talented critics jumped ship and went somewhere that caters to thinking adults who truly appreciate film. The average intellectual age of AICN TalkBackers drops a year every summer. I think we're down to about the equivalent of seven-year-olds at this point. It's shameful, it's appalling, and the work you guys do deserves a better class of fans. Fuck AICN TalkBackers.
-
lengthy posts every time, some are just quick blurbs, I am amazed at the juvenilality (real word?) of many comments. How much of your opinion sucks, no yours does, can we take. Okay, I was goofing on PTSDPete, but all kidding aside everyone has an opinion. Too many haters, too little debate is what we are seeing. That's why I'm spending most of my time in The Zone.
-
For saving me some money and not going to see either of these crapfets. My wife wanted to see WANTED, and I'd said "We'll see", well sir, I have seen the light and will not be seeing this stuff
Seriously though, people don't give you enough credit. BTW, how is Mortal Kombat coming along? -
Thanks man. You rox.
-
Works for premise. Doesn't work for plot. The absurd stuff in Wanted? Mostly plot. It is an incredibly stupid movie, treated by all involved as though they were making a Scorsese film. Most of the time. They get their orders from string, people. STRING!
-
Jun 28, 2008 11:01:35 AM CDT
Mori, did you just tell us that Jolie's character bites it in th
by darthbakpao
Thanks for the spoiler!
-
Nailed it! Your right its allll about he movies....no you or me or anyone's opinion.
-
I was thinking about the critical themes in your review, and wondering if you think Speed Racer manages to at least partially accomplish what you find these films failed to do. (Obviously SR isn't deconstruction... exactly... but if there's a difference in result, is that a significant part of why?)
-
Jun 28, 2008 11:50:31 AM CDT
Moriarty is, without question, the best film critic here
by jimmyjoe redsky
great reviews - no bs - to the point - clear and concise - bravo - i have no interest in seeing "wanted" - even before reading his review - the trailers are the movie - i want to see "hancock" even though i agree with moriarty and everything he said is basically spelled out in its trailers - but it looks like tasty junk food - will smith as a drunk superhero that redeems himself in the end, and great fx - sounds like a good time - i might hit macdonalds right after the show to top off the experience
-
if Mr. Beaks doesn't give him an erudite run for his money.
-
"latitude zero" (1969) - check it out - the sets, the costumes, the submarines, the monsters, oh my
-
His calling Berg, "one of the great genre directors..." is baseless and his love of Hancock as this great film that the spastics who liked Iron Man won't appreciate is, well, something. I take back everything I said and beg for your forgiveness. Never say that moral equivalency doesn't work.
-
That's actually the only redeeming quality of this absurd movie. It's "about" taking charge of your own life - whether you're a meek corporate drone or a super-assassin who takes his orders from string. Ask questions and forge your own path. Not exactly highbrow stuff, but at least they try to give it something resembling substance and McAvoy's Gibson something resembling a character arc.
-
don't intend to any time soon. So far everything I've seen about this flick gives me the impression that it's completely sophomoric, derivative, mindless shit for the mindless masses. And Angelina Jolie is the world's best dressed and made-up SKANK, with Madonna being a close second. In other words, they're both WORLD-CLASS skanks!
-
i dont buy her in this role - judging from what ive seen - shes beautiful but doesnt look like the assassin type stature wise - i mean, she looks like a frail vegetarian, not some highly athletic super assassin that can outrun cars and take a lot of physical punishment - cast a woman with some muscle, some upper body strength - jennifer garner looked her part on alias - very athletic, she had the delts and quads of a covert op - make it believable at least in that sense - in the poster angelina's stick like arm looks barely capable of hefting that pistol
-
thats got me very curious
-
Does anyone wear any practical squibs, or is there only CGI blood splatter?
-
has more style, more verve is more creative than any other film out there. currently. it is very funny in places. The movie has the most intense violence I have seen in a movie in years. You keep watching all the way through. yet I think the story is very weak. Timor Berbekmatbetov has a kinetic style and this movie is frentic. He is a very inventive filmmaker and some of the scenes in this movie are outstanding. I like Mori dont want a sequel to this movie. The story is the main weakness in this movie. I am not sure what the hell to make of McAvoy's character. Brad pitt will get to see the bath scene up close and personal for the rest of his life. lucky bastard. Samuel L jackson would have made a better stab at Freemans character.
-
... yet somehow I will find a way to sleep at night. Tell you what... when the talkbacks decide to treat people with respect, maybe you'll get some back. There are plenty of articles on this site where I've been able to enjoy a back and forth with the talkbackers, but increasingly, it's just people spoiling for a fight and lobbing personal insults over my opinion on fucking movies. Pardon me if I'm not all weepy at the concept of someone getting their feeeeeewings hurt by me at this point.
-
They're only distracting you from your true purpose: finally getting out your Wall-E review. I've been F5ing the site ever since you said it was coming. Even though I'm fairly certain that I will enjoy Wall-E I want to hear your thoughts on the movie too.
-
Come on, let's hear something about it fer chrissakes!
-
Wanted should have got a 15/16 cert. Maybe it did and i cant remember.
-
16 cert.
-
If you could help yourself from comparing to other movies would you enjoy it?
I enjoyed the movie but I have never read the original source material. I was just hoping the movie had visual translations from the graphic novel. As far as the slowdowns I can see how you can make the comparisons to the matrix (kinda) but could those scenes have been done any other way?
And I am still surprised at how many mixed reviews hancock is getting. The tone of the film sounds like the main issue. -
I think the problem is not that you might hate someone who enjoyed a movie you didn't...the problem is some people hate you for not enjoying something they did enjoy--in effect not validating their taste or opinions by supporting them with your own endorsement. That's my armchair psych on the matter anyway, I'm sure you've considered that and more by now. I hope McAvoy's star keeps rising, but I'm probably not going to make the effort to see WANTED before DVD now. Who the heck has time? I can maybe catch one movie a week now, and I'm like 3 movies behind. Once Hellboy and TDK come out I'll be toast.
-
Mori is right on the money. "Wanted" is like the Velveeta of movies. It's a movie product instead of a movie if you catch my drift. Waste of time.
-
...but I believe that the term is 'suspension of belief', since you have to suspend your belief to believe what's on screen. But, I digress.
I agree with you on what you have written here. Mostly about the lack of theme and writing to reinforce that theme. It seems like a waste of money and celluloid.
And WallE kicks BUTT!!!! -
Jun 29, 2008 2:13:43 AM CDT
Jolie dies in Wanted, and Charlize is the villain in Hancock
by jimcurry
Boohoo
-
which was so utterly horrible... so what does he know?
-
because it is about how you're watching something that in normal circumstances you would never believe. So to engage in the world presented to you, you'll have to suspend your disbelieve. Or something.
-
... so go. Who's stopping you?
-
... is sometime tonight or tomorrow morning. It's being written right now, and I'll have that review up ASAP.
-
The pattern was set in the first moments, when the assassin chose to crash through a window rather than shoot it out first? Why choose to impede your speed by needlessly going through a window you could easily shoot out first? Because it was a cool visual. Then we have an exchange between the assassin and his killer in which both act like they are totally different people than they really are -- just so we can mislead the audience. We see McAvoy accidentally kill one of the assassins and it's totally clear the assassin was a sympathetic character, so McAvoy and we feel real bad. 'course if the guy had lived, he would have been mowed down by mcAvoy who later discovers one person in the fraternity misled him, so therefore everybody in the group deserves to die, even though we discover they too have been misled. Oh, and why did nobody, like say, Angeline's character, simply conclude that their names are showing up on the loom of fate (goofy device that it was) just because it IDs people who cause the deaths of others. Duh! These are assassins. They kill. So, if the magical loom simply IDs killers, maybe it's doing so without making a moral judgment. 'cause otherwise, it makes no sense the thing would ID the assassins themselves, when the loom supposedly exists specifically so it can tell the assassins what to do. Makes no sense the way it's written because the story was written backwards; the visuals and the twists were concocted first and the story was molded and mangled to accomodate them.
-
... no. I was not trying to "shit talk" you. I just asked why anyone's comments about HANCOCK would stop you from seeing something you want to. Jim Curry's "spoiler" is wrong anyway.
Just tune him out and see it if you want to. That was my point. Relax, man. -
...please cool it with the review ETAs. I don't know if you consciously write them into your pieces as a sort of personal deadline, but it just teases folk like me who share your particular taste in film. Pound out your Wall-E thoughts then get to TDK.
-
But I really could have done without a lot of the plot. I would have enjoyed a much shorter movie. It just drags at certain points. I felt cheated, since the whole idea of his father being dead drove him to become this assassin. But then to just say he killed his actual father later on, it was basically like being tricked. The narration in the beginning literally says "his father" and then it cuts to the suit getting out of his car. It immediately fools you in a bad way. Oh, totally loved the train over the bridge. Very exciting!
-
Gotta say, considering the rather strong cast, "wanted" was average at best. In fact it was disappointment. The writing was rather weak and I really didn't like where the movie was going, if it was going anywhere. I truly hope that there is no sequel. Is "Hancock" really that bad? The trailers look more than a little amusing.
-
I saw this on Saturday and really wanted to like it. The action, Angelina, Morgan Freeman - all elements that should have added up to succes. But, the main character was such a pain in the ass - I didn't want him to succeed. He probably deserved the life he had before and didn't seem worthy of the new freedom his life as an assasin seemed to bring. Two thirds of the way through the movie I couldn't take it any more - I left. Guess, I'll wait to rent it and find out what happens and to see Angelina in slow - mo! ;)
-
Finally got around to seeing HANCOCK today and your review was absolutely spot-on. When I first responded to your piece, I felt you were being way too critical of two films that were supposed to be nothing more than mindless, visceral entertainment. But now I realize that, while I enjoyed HANCOCK, it should and could have been so much better if they'd just taken the material to a deeper place. You were totally right in your analysis. I'll be seeing WANTED this weekend, so let's see if you're two for two after all.
-
... and I thought it fucking ROCKED! In fact, it's one of the best films I've seen so far this year. Crazy, huh? I think it comes down to this: some films are great works of art that you can appreciate, admire and love (like WALL-E, for instance), while others might not be as sophisticated or intelligent, but entertain the SHIT out of you. WANTED was one of those films for me, I literally had adrenaline pumping through my body when I walked out of the cinema. Maybe I’m just a sucker for the loser becoming a legend archetype, who knows? I think it's just one of those films that will divide audiences completely – you're either willing to just suspend all disbelief and go with it... or you're not.
Readers Talkback
User Login
Top Talkbacks
- Whitney Houston 1963 - 2012 -- 209 total posts 207 posts
- AVENGERS enemy revealed as pink boardgame pieces... You might suffer some form of elation... SPOILERS!!! -- 160 total posts 97 posts
- There's a STAR TREK video game that is going to lead into JJ's STAR TREK 2 apparently... -- 144 total posts 77 posts
- Here's The Red Band Trailer For Drafthouse Films' THE FP! -- 68 total posts 68 posts
- New JUDGE DREDD post production footage pops up -- 67 total posts 67 posts
- Does ‘SNL’ Rhyme With ‘Deschanel’?? Learn Which SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE Vet Hosts After Sexy Zooey!! -- 64 total posts 60 posts
- To Commemorate The 3D Release Of STAR WARS EPISODE I: THE PHANTOM MENACE, George Lucas Wants You To Know...Greedo Shoots First!! -- 480 total posts 55 posts
- HANNA's Saoirse Ronan to boss around seven little people -- 53 total posts 50 posts
- Friday Brings SWEEPS DAY NINE!! Gab Here About Tonight’s FRINGE!! Plus Einstein on TIM, Wiig On PORTLANDIA, MAHER, CLONE, GIFTED, GRIMM, SPARTACUS, SUPERNATURAL, GOLD RUSH And More!! -- 118 total posts 32 posts
- SPACE 2099!! -- 182 total posts 27 posts