Cool News
Massawyrm is disappointed by PUSH...
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
-
ha ha
-
Foist?
-
na na na na na na na hey hey good.....
-
Dang it
-
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.
-
As will be everyone who sees it.
-
is the same movie
-
Ouch.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
A blonde samuel jackson? what the fuck.
-
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.
-
Myself included. I thought it was a great little flick with a lean but intense little story.
-
Who the fuck was driving the boat!?
-
come on.
-
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.
-
The boat was on autopilot
-
Feb 06, 2009 10:43:06 AM CST
This is a huge part of why I didn't like the Pirates sequels.
by archive
I don't want franchises PUSHED on me again!
-
Well, that's disappointing to hear.
-
These three are basically the same movie, right?
-
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.
-
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.
-
Because we all know what happens when Push comes to Shove...
-
Who was driving the boat? Some guy! Who cares!
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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... -
starred Drew Barrymore and was called Firestarter.
-
but Wanted was pretty cool.
-
All I think when I see this trailer is - February movie. I know you all know what I mean.
-
...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.
-
ahaahahahaa,, fucking great man. just great
-
I don't know, I was too busy watching Liam kick ungodly amounts of ass. Besides, wasn't the boat in a straightaway?
-
...and I loved it. Surprised at the response it's getting.
-
I thought this was JUMPER II from the look of the commercials. I'm already forgetting this....
-
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?
-
Young moppet who becomes Oscar winning actress, part time directing lesbian...Dakota Fanning or Abigail Breslin?
-
Pushy?
-
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) -
I'd only have a problem with that if the nuckle-dragging dipshits on here have their way and a sequel is never made!
-
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.
-
DING DING DING DING We have a winner..lol.
-
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.
-
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. -
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.
-
Just saying. Hinting at other characters. No real resolution. Characters walking off into the sunset talking about the sequel.
-
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.
-
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? -
This was the review I was looking for. Pay Massawyrm more money.
-
a sequel. Perhaps a prequel, but the extraneous entries ruined the concept.
-
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. -
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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)
Readers Talkback
User Login
Top Talkbacks
- Whitney Houston 1963 - 2012 -- 325 total posts 322 posts
- New JUDGE DREDD post production footage pops up -- 106 total posts 106 posts
- HANNA's Saoirse Ronan to boss around seven little people -- 63 total posts 60 posts
- Does ‘SNL’ Rhyme With ‘Deschanel’?? Learn Which SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE Vet Hosts After Sexy Zooey!! -- 74 total posts 58 posts
- There's a STAR TREK video game that is going to lead into JJ's STAR TREK 2 apparently... -- 159 total posts 51 posts
- If the Behind the Scenes Pics of the Day drops her pen, pick it up, but don’t look at her legs or else it will be on your record. -- 47 total posts 41 posts
- AVENGERS enemy revealed as pink boardgame pieces... You might suffer some form of elation... SPOILERS!!! -- 161 total posts 34 posts
- To Commemorate The 3D Release Of STAR WARS EPISODE I: THE PHANTOM MENACE, George Lucas Wants You To Know...Greedo Shoots First!! -- 488 total posts 33 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!! -- 121 total posts 23 posts
- Here's The Red Band Trailer For Drafthouse Films' THE FP! -- 70 total posts 20 posts