Logo

Cool News

Massawyrm is disappointed by PUSH...

Published at:  Feb 06, 2009 9:14:07 AM CST



Hola all. Massawyrm here.



The problem with PUSH is not so much that which you will actually see on the screen. Rather, the problem is more about what you won’t see. PUSH is actually a fun little film, a pop song version of a Vertigo style storyline crammed full of cool ideas, a neat mythology and some great young talent. But if you’ve seen the movie JUMPER, then you know exactly what’s wrong with this film – because they both suffer from the same debilitating flaw.



They were made by people who wanted to make a series more than they wanted to tell a story.



A good film has a beginning, a middle, and an end. Everyone knows that. But having an ending doesn’t mean that the story just stops – or that many of the ideas introduced have a resolution. No. Having an ending means that you feel like you’ve heard the whole story; it means that when you walk out of the theater, while you may want to spend more time with those characters, THIS story is over with. A first film in a proposed series on the other hand, doesn’t. And every flaw that PUSH has stems from the fact that when you get to the end of the movie, many of the characters walk off into the sunset talking about a sequel.



The biggest problem with the film is that it is a setup story. It merely wants to introduce us to the characters. No one has anything resembling a real character arc and everyone’s backstory is boiled down into a short piece of dialog that they can drop on the audience in a matter of seconds. By the end of the film you know more about how the character’s powers work than you actually do the characters themselves. Who the hell is Dakota Fanning supposed to be anyway? She can see the future. Her mom could too. But she’s not good at it. They’ll tell you all that. What you’ll never understand is what effect seeing the future actually has on a 13-year old girl, or what she’s had to do to stay alive with people chasing her. Because that’s not important. She’s not a little girl who can see the future – she a plot point delivery device.



That’s not to say that making a character out of her isn’t their intent. But you won’t see any real character out of ANYONE in this movie. They are powers, not people. And that’s always the biggest sin of any comic book style movie. Every bit of information we’re given feels like they’re keeping three or four other secrets to go with it – secrets we’ll see in another movie. There are characters mentioned but never seen; story angles hinted at but never fleshed out; and an entire plot structure that revolves around a McGuffin that doesn’t even serve a real purpose in this film. At all.



By the time you get to the end of the film, you don’t feel like a single character has been used up, that a single person has accomplished anything or that this film served any purpose but to show you some cool special effects and introduce you to characters who you might give a shit about later. And the effect leaves you feeling rather hollow throughout the whole film. Not a bit of it really resonates because we’re never given a reason to care about these characters. Oh sure the government is EVIL…because the government is ALWAYS EVIL in these things. But that’s not reason enough to root for our good guys. Unfortunately, it will have to do. Because that’s all the motivation there is here.



Walking out of this, I felt like I’d just watched a mediocre TV pilot. Something cool, but lacking, that made me say “Yeah, I’ll watch a few more episodes and see if it gets any better before I make up my mind.” If the next movie kicks ass and weaves in a number of plot points that explains some of the weaker points of this film, GREAT! But that doesn’t make this a good movie now. As a film, PUSH fails because while it has several fun moments and ideas, it isn’t really a very good story. It’s just the beginning of what could be a very good story. THE MATRIX, STAR WARS, HIGHLANDER, ALIEN. These are great first stories that were able to spawn larger, more evolved mythos. But when you finish watching them, you never feel like they haven’t told you the whole story. This does.



I feel like I was cheated out of what could be a good movie because they wanted me to watch three movies instead. There’s nothing wrong with trying to design a series of films – but when you can’t write it solidly enough to make us feel like we saw the whole thing when we didn’t, you have failed. You want an audience to want to return to your story because the last one was so good, not begrudgingly because they want to find out how it ends to make the time they’ve already spent worthwhile. If they make a second film, that is exactly the reason I would see it. Not because I really liked this one – but because I would really like to like it.



And that’s no way to tell a story.



Until next time friends, smoke ‘em if ya got ‘em.

Massawyrm



Got something for the Wyrm? Mail it here.








    + Expand All

    Readers Talkback

  • Feb 06, 2009 9:19:36 AM CST

    Pushed my first

    by garcicr

  • Feb 06, 2009 9:19:58 AM CST

    Foist!

    by big_daddy_nero

  • Feb 06, 2009 9:20:02 AM CST

    Im all alone

    by garcicr

    na na na na na na na hey hey good.....

    Reply to Talkback

  • Feb 06, 2009 9:20:19 AM CST

    Aww hell no!

    by big_daddy_nero

  • Feb 06, 2009 9:20:48 AM CST

    This is why I hate "franchise" filmmaking...

    by nasty in the pasty

    Remember the good old days, when a film was popular, THEN they decided to make a sequel? Imagine Magnum Force ending with Dirty Harry supposedly dead, and then Scorpio walks out of the shadows while eating an apple. Back To The Future and The Matrix worked because they were both totally self-contained. Yeah, both HINTED at potential future adventures, but you couls just stop there if you pleased and be totally satisfied (and considering the 2-for-1 sequels that were made, that was probably a good thing). Even the first X-Men and Spider-Man movies and Batman Begins were fairly satisfying stand-alone films.

    Reply to Talkback

  • Feb 06, 2009 9:20:57 AM CST

    Massawyrm is disappointed

    by el-guappo

    As will be everyone who sees it.

    Reply to Talkback

  • Feb 06, 2009 9:20:58 AM CST

    So jumper

    by garcicr

    is the same movie

    Reply to Talkback

  • Feb 06, 2009 9:23:54 AM CST

    Only 25% at RT

    by nasty in the pasty

  • Feb 06, 2009 9:31:13 AM CST

    Having an Ending

    by mr gorilla

    Hey Mass, I completely get what you said about JUMPER - it felt like a pilot of a TV show. But I also think it's possible to have things open ended when the titles roll, but still leave the audience happy. Take THE FAST AND THE FURIOUS. When we leave them, Vin Diesel and Paul What'sHisName 's characters are in a fix - they both have LOADS of unresolved business. But somehow, it works - without feeling like a set-up for a sequel. It's a satisfying ending.

    Reply to Talkback

  • Feb 06, 2009 9:42:24 AM CST

    Yeah, but he loved Taken, so what does that say?

    by coconutgroves

    Taken was complete crap - I saw it based on your review Massa and laughed in disgust at the end of the movie. I've since sold all the stock I had in you.

    Reply to Talkback

  • Feb 06, 2009 9:55:08 AM CST

    I liked it

    by freakemovie

    To me, the open-ending of Push was just indicative of how much fun the writer and director were having with the material...which extends to the audience. And it's surprising how terrific Chris Evans and Dakota Fanning are.

    Reply to Talkback

  • Feb 06, 2009 9:57:22 AM CST

    the problem with JUMPER was the main character

    by spandau belly

    We were supposed to feel like he was being persecuted for no reason by Sam Jackson who keeps saying "You all turn bad eventually." to let us know he's an irrational biggot against teleporters and Hayden keeps saying "I'm different, we're not all bad." except.... that he is bad. He's a bank robbing douchebag who uses his powers only for theft, playin' ladies, and tormenting people. The movie should've made Sam Jackson the hero and shown it from his point of view instead of the presenting the villain as the hero, which I don't think was the intention.

    Reply to Talkback

  • Feb 06, 2009 10:00:06 AM CST

    The problem with Jumper was that it was complete garbage

    by stengah

    A blonde samuel jackson? what the fuck.

    Reply to Talkback

  • Feb 06, 2009 10:07:44 AM CST

    I'm not surprised...

    by lovecraftian

    I don't know why, but I kind of thought this flick was going to be a bit weak--partially because I've seen these kinds of ideas before but in a better delivery system. It's a little like a show that used to be produced by Thames in the 1970's..."The Tomorrow People." I loved the original version which aired on Nickelodeon in the 80's (not so much the reboot in the late 90's.) But the show had one of those unique qualities, as so many sci-fi shows for British kids do, of being simultaneously, ridiculously bad, and smart at the same time. If they had attempted to do a more serious version of that show, for say, HBO or Showtime (hell, even USA) using the David Bowie tune from which it hailed as an inspirational platform, they may have really had something: a built-in Gen X audience in Britain and the U.S., a regular cash cow, and story that didn't have to tie up a bunch of knots right away. That might be the overall issue with comic-style ideas being made into films. People love to read or watch a continuing story with characters for whom they have an investment (LOST, BUFFY, soaps.) It's why comics are so hard to translate to screen. Even with the advent of graphic novels, some of the best of THAT would still only work as a mini-series. Of course, while I'm a huge proponent of WATCHMEN, I also concur with the idea it would've been accomplished by a writer long ago if it had been a greenlit HBO project instead of a 2&1/2 hour flick. (sigh) We'll see... I feel bad for the screenwriters of this one though. It sounds like they were off to a good start. It just fell apart in the condensing.

    Reply to Talkback

  • Feb 06, 2009 10:08:35 AM CST

    coconutgroves, plenty of people loved Taken.

    by thelastcleric

    Myself included. I thought it was a great little flick with a lean but intense little story.

    Reply to Talkback

  • Feb 06, 2009 10:17:14 AM CST

    Taken was a complete joke

    by talkbacker with no name

    Who the fuck was driving the boat!?

    Reply to Talkback

  • Feb 06, 2009 10:27:05 AM CST

    Are you surprised that it sucks?

    by mistergreen

  • Feb 06, 2009 10:28:11 AM CST

    simultaneously, ridiculously bad, and smart at the same time

    by lovecraftian

    Blech... I should've reread that. Ewwww... the repetition of something I said twice. I--Awe shit.

    Reply to Talkback

  • Feb 06, 2009 10:32:20 AM CST

    Taken kicked ass, go fuck yourself

    by bullet3

    The boat was on autopilot

    Reply to Talkback

  • I don't want franchises PUSHED on me again!

    Reply to Talkback

  • Feb 06, 2009 10:56:51 AM CST

    Damn

    by zappary

    Well, that's disappointing to hear.

    Reply to Talkback

  • Feb 06, 2009 10:57:19 AM CST

    Push, Wanted, Jumper... I thought it was a trilogy

    by spacechampion

    These three are basically the same movie, right?

    Reply to Talkback

  • Feb 06, 2009 11:01:56 AM CST

    The Pirates sequels were different...

    by dreadpirateroberts

    They had their flaws, but I did not mind the lack of ending in the second one. Unlike Pushed, there had already been a hugely successful first film. They pretty much told everyone the next two films were coming out close together and were filmed at roughly the same time, so it was not THAT big a surprise that they were continuing the story across both. Pushed does not get that sort of benefit at this point.

    Reply to Talkback

  • Feb 06, 2009 11:05:14 AM CST

    Is anyone surprised?

    by drunken rage

  • Feb 06, 2009 11:08:43 AM CST

    Massawyrm is disappointed by PUSH...

    by drwynninblack

    Did he REALLY expect this piece of crap to be good? And if he did...sounds like it's more HIS problem than the film's problem.

    Reply to Talkback

  • Feb 06, 2009 11:26:23 AM CST

    I hope the sequel is called SHOVE

    by spandau belly

    Because we all know what happens when Push comes to Shove...

    Reply to Talkback

  • Feb 06, 2009 11:35:04 AM CST

    Taken was awesome!

    by themcflyfarm

    Who was driving the boat? Some guy! Who cares!

    Reply to Talkback

  • Feb 06, 2009 11:49:03 AM CST

    Massa, so what time will you be posting...

    by shepard wong

    your review for He's Just Not That Into You? Even if Push is flawed, it's got to be better than the crap you've been reviewing lately. Plus you saw Coraline. This has been a good week for you.

    Reply to Talkback

  • Feb 06, 2009 11:49:27 AM CST

    What about Lord of the Rings?

    by pip1345

    The Fellowship of the Ring. You guys love that movie. In fact, I do too. But it does do the same damn thing you're talking about in this movie.

    Reply to Talkback

  • Feb 06, 2009 12:10:31 PM CST

    LOTR is a special circumstance too

    by bouncy x

    all 3 movies were already done before the 1st one even came out. sure there were eventual reshoots for each but it was all planned as 3 and everyone knew 3 were coming. thats why they filmed 95% of them in one shot.

    Reply to Talkback

  • Feb 06, 2009 12:12:43 PM CST

    pip1345

    by stickmangrit

    the difference being that LOTR was an adaptation of a well known and much beloved series of books, and that the book it was adapted from did the exact same thing. it was simply sticking to the source material, and we all knew from day one that parts two and three were the same number of years away. this is an interesting premise with no basis wandering out into the dump season, and unless it does great numbers, there likely will be no continuation, so even if we do look forward to seeing more, we may never get it, and that will mostly be the fault of the creators for releasing an over-long preview rather than an actual story. still planning on going to see it(probably tonight), but it's disappointing to see what could have been a good movie sacrificed for the sake of a franchise, which will likely never come because they were trying too hard to force it.

    Reply to Talkback

  • Feb 06, 2009 12:15:53 PM CST

    LOTR is ONE book!!!

    by lukasman

    Tolkien wrote ONE book, and the publisher told him they would need to divide it in 3 to make it easier to sell.

    Same happened with the movies. Too much stuff to put into ONE movie, so they divided it into 3.

    Not the same thing...

    Reply to Talkback

  • Feb 06, 2009 12:23:44 PM CST

    I iked this movie when it

    by skimn

    starred Drew Barrymore and was called Firestarter.

    Reply to Talkback

  • Feb 06, 2009 12:42:50 PM CST

    looked like Jumper part 2

    by bmacsmith

    but Wanted was pretty cool.

    Reply to Talkback

  • Feb 06, 2009 12:49:59 PM CST

    February

    by thewizardofoz

    All I think when I see this trailer is - February movie. I know you all know what I mean.

    Reply to Talkback

  • Feb 06, 2009 12:52:20 PM CST

    AAAAnd a good film review...

    by rogue4

    ...usually contains some information about the actual film. Not to be overly snarky,but my God Massa doesn't supply the vaguest ounce of context in this "review". Not the briefest synopsis of the story,characters,set-up...nothing. Pretty ironic considering his critiscims of the film, which I'm guessing are valid. But still, this is just damn sloppy.

    Reply to Talkback

  • Feb 06, 2009 12:55:49 PM CST

    Spandau Belly

    by lucky slevin

    ahaahahahaa,, fucking great man. just great

    Reply to Talkback

  • Feb 06, 2009 1:16:46 PM CST

    Who was driving the Boat in Taken?

    by thelastcleric

    I don't know, I was too busy watching Liam kick ungodly amounts of ass. Besides, wasn't the boat in a straightaway?

    Reply to Talkback

  • Feb 06, 2009 1:33:01 PM CST

    Just came from the theatre...

    by starblitzer

    ...and I loved it. Surprised at the response it's getting.

    Reply to Talkback

  • Feb 06, 2009 1:46:36 PM CST

    Dissapointed? Who would have guessed?

    by uberman

    I thought this was JUMPER II from the look of the commercials. I'm already forgetting this....

    Reply to Talkback

  • Feb 06, 2009 1:48:55 PM CST

    dakota fanning scares me

    by bacci40

    seriously...every time i see her on screen, i get totally wierded outand isnt push just proof that hollywood doesnt understand the super hero genre?

    Reply to Talkback

  • Feb 06, 2009 2:16:57 PM CST

    So who is this generations Jodie Foster?

    by skimn

    Young moppet who becomes Oscar winning actress, part time directing lesbian...Dakota Fanning or Abigail Breslin?

    Reply to Talkback

  • Feb 06, 2009 2:55:10 PM CST

    Sequel..

    by harold-sherbort

  • Feb 06, 2009 2:57:39 PM CST

    PUSH 2 :PUSH HARDER

    by bmacsmith

  • Feb 06, 2009 3:01:37 PM CST

    Push 2: PUSH IT TO THE LIMIT (Starring Rick Ross)

    by turketron

    I PUSH AND I PUSH (push)
    I RIDE AND I RIDE (ride)
    TRYIN' TO SURVIVE ON 95...
    (push it to the limit!)

    RAWWWSSSSSSS (the biggest boss that you seen thus far)

    Reply to Talkback

  • Feb 06, 2009 3:18:37 PM CST

    I LOVED that JUMPER was like a pilot

    by drath

    I'd only have a problem with that if the nuckle-dragging dipshits on here have their way and a sequel is never made!

    Reply to Talkback

  • Feb 06, 2009 3:46:03 PM CST

    Skimn: The answer is Dakota Fanning

    by theghostwholurks

    Because Dakota would feel that becoming an Oscar winner and part-time directing lesbian would add gravitas to her résumé and reputation as a performance artist. She would then adopt a child from some third-world country for various photo ops, before locking it away in a storage facility.

    Reply to Talkback

  • Feb 06, 2009 4:30:48 PM CST

    Ghost

    by skimn

    DING DING DING DING We have a winner..lol.

    Reply to Talkback

  • Feb 06, 2009 6:04:00 PM CST

    Rogue4

    by massawyrm 1

    It's a stylistic choice, you'll get used to it and either dig it or hate it. AICN readers are some of the most cinema literate fans in the world - and they know how to find a trailer for a movie they haven't seen yet. Unlike many critics, who write for audiences that may not be familiar with their content, I aim to write completely spoiler free reviews for folks who like to read something BEFORE they see a movie and not have any moment of that experience ruined for them. Even the best intentioned synopsis can blow something for someone, so I generally avoid them unless I know there's just not enough info out there on the film or what is out there is deliberately misleading.

    Reply to Talkback

  • Feb 06, 2009 6:28:03 PM CST

    Massawyrm 1 & Rogue4

    by mace13

    I like how Massawyrm writes his reviews. I have a bad habit of spoiling movies for myself before seeing them by reading the reviews on here. Sometimes I manage to resist the urge and not read anything but I do like seeing what other people think about a movie that i'm interested in seeing before hand.

    Massawyrm doesn't spoil anything. He just gives his thoughts on the movie and there ya go. I'm perfectly fine with his review style.

    Reply to Talkback

  • Feb 06, 2009 7:32:54 PM CST

    spot on review

    by antonphd

    i really liked this film, but i do agree that the film was just a beginning to a 3 movie story. i am hooked on the story though. i hope that there are 2 more films so i can see what happens. i like what i've seen enough to sit thru 6 hours of this story.

    Reply to Talkback

  • Feb 06, 2009 7:33:26 PM CST

    I felt the same way about Lord of the Rings

    by domi'sinnerchild

    Just saying. Hinting at other characters. No real resolution. Characters walking off into the sunset talking about the sequel.

    Reply to Talkback

  • Feb 06, 2009 7:40:06 PM CST

    Push is disappointed by MASSAWYRM...

    by leafar the lost

    The problem with Massawyrm is not so much that which you will actually see on the screen. Rather, the problem is more about what you won’t see. Massawyrm is actually a fun little film, a pop song version of a Vertigo style storyline crammed full of cool ideas, a neat mythology and some great young talent. But if you’ve seen the movie JUMPER, then you know exactly what’s wrong with this film – because they both suffer from the same debilitating flaw.

    Reply to Talkback

  • Feb 06, 2009 7:51:32 PM CST

    How's the trademark McGUIGAN WALLPAPER?

    by charles grady

    Does Paul McGuigan (Gangster No 1, Wicker Park, Lucky Number Slevin) go nuts as usual with the garish, crazy-ass wallpaper and painted backdrops in every interior?

    Guy's stuff has an awesome, distinctive look. HOW'S THE WALLPAPER?

    Reply to Talkback

  • Feb 06, 2009 10:21:37 PM CST

    Thank you, AICN - MASSA

    by birdmcmonster

    This was the review I was looking for. Pay Massawyrm more money.

    Reply to Talkback

  • Feb 07, 2009 1:51:39 AM CST

    Highlander would been better off without

    by dingbatty

    a sequel. Perhaps a prequel, but the extraneous entries ruined the concept.

    Reply to Talkback

  • Feb 07, 2009 4:53:52 AM CST

    Highlander

    by mr writer

    The first movie is an underrated classic and although the concept leant itself to sequels they shouldn't have made any. Highlander was the end of the story. Connor won the Prize. The end. All the sequels were awful and just diluted what was a brilliant central concept.

    It's a shame if Push goes the way of Jumper. I liked Jumper a lot, but it was definitely made with sequels in mind. Even if the concept is perfect for a franchise you need to make the first movie a standalone story.

    Reply to Talkback

  • Feb 07, 2009 4:38:50 PM CST

    Cancel Heroes; Make Push: The Series

    by mrfloppy

  • Feb 07, 2009 5:21:50 PM CST

    MrFloppy is correct

    by noodleshahn

    There's more character development in Push than in the last two seasons of Heroes.I like Push. I would definitely look forward to seeing where they go with the characters but I agree that ending a movie mid-story is a bad habit. Star Wars, The Matrix and Batman Begins, et al. completed a full story but revealed a larger universe with which to play in. That's the best way to generate interest in a sequel.I like Massawyrm's reviews. You can read them without seeing the movie. The ending is his biggest sticking point and he can dissect it without spoilers. If he did reveal any details people would criticize that more.

    Reply to Talkback

  • Feb 07, 2009 8:56:24 PM CST

    Liking Push

    by tallsy

    I don't understand Push's complete failure at the box office and the critical scorn that's being heaped on it. I found it to be an entertaining 2 hours. Except for Camilla Belle, she was awful.

    Reply to Talkback

  • The silly "if we don't know the plan no one can predict it" bullshit was what ruined this movie. Not only could their plan ONLY work with premonition to anticipate the coincidences (how else was Evans to get out of the trunk or know what picture to send at the end), but it seemed to change the rules of the oracles' powers. The heroes didn't know they'd be walking around the fish market when the bad guys found them using an oracle. And holy shit, were those shrieking assholes the most obnoxious fuckers EVER. The audience yelled thank you when they were finally silenced. The main saving grace of this movie was the cast. Evans and Fanning deserve to be stars in better movies (they at least had chemistry if not complex characters). I liked the supporting characters. This was the only thing the movie did better than Jumper--which only really had Jamie Bell in a role that was either great or annoying depending on your mood. Otherwise, I thought Jumper created a better set up for a franchise (not to say anything worthwhile will be done with that) and as far as I could see it stuck to the rules it created (breaking only one rule that seemed to only exist to be broken). I'd still like to see Push get a sequel because I liked the cast and wanted to like their characters, but I doubt this will sell well enough for that. Also, I thought they were shamelessly fishing for a controversy with the way they dressed Fanning. And crap, they get her drunk and frame a camera shot up her leg like a showgirl! If that wasn't deliberately controversial, it was just sick. Oh hell, it was both. Fanning is trying way too hard to be seen as an adult actress.

    Reply to Talkback

  • Feb 14, 2009 1:37:48 AM CST

    saw it today with a friend

    by the amazing g

    was expecting to be as bad as Jumper, but I was pleasantly surprised, it's a pretty cool little movie, I actually liked that we basically only see a glimpse of a bigger story and world (whereas in Jumper it failed, but here I thought it worked)

    Reply to Talkback

User Login

Forgot password? Retrieve it here

or register as new user

Quick Talkback Form

Please login to post talkback