#5 Worst = Monsters Vs. Aliens:
Generally speaking, animated films are safe bets. Such films take a lot of time, effort, and expertise to craft, and the end result can typically be immensely entertaining to kids, with enough subversive humour to keep adults occupied. Considering the above, I have an easy appreciation for animated films. They're light, fluffy, joyful to take in, and a harmless way to spend a couple of hours. The fact that Monsters Vs. Aliens somehow managed to betray all the levity not only with squandered voice talent but with garish 3D and creative emptiness is simply offensive.
I suppose the root problem lies in the title. A film called "Monsters Vs. Aliens" causes one to believe that there will be an abundance of fantastic creatures of all shapes, sizes, colours, dimensions, textures, etc. In reality, all Monsters Vs. Aliens has to offer is a 50 foot tall woman, a sentient maverick cockroach, a blue gelatinous blob, the missing evolutionary link between man and monkey, a massive hairy bug, and one boring alien with a fondness for cloning. Is that really the best they could come up with? Sensing the bland design, all the voice actors must have felt compelled to evoke the same empty energy, and every vocal talent is either trying far too hard or completely disinterested. And with folks like Hugh Laurie, Will Arnett, Stephen Colbert, Seth Rogan, Rainn Wilson, and Reese Witherspoon involved, Monsters Vs. Aliens initially sounds, at least on paper, like a sure-fire success for Dreamworks. In reality, however, what you have is just one boring and unattractive disaster.
#4 Worst = Fanboys:
Sense of humour is subjective, loathe as I am to entertain that thought. As a philosophical aside, I'm the sort of person that believes that accepting individual taste in aesthetic discussion is precisely what keeps artists from achieving the highest quality in their craft. Yet when it comes to humour, I'm not entirely certain whether such a thing is an art form, let alone a subjective one. Surely there's such a thing as a comedic craft, yet can it be quantified? But enough of that; I gave up philosophising when Berkeley's plodding dialogues bored me to tears over a year ago.
The point I'm trying to make is that my fourth, third, and second worst films are all comedies, which at first glance seems to say something about my tastes: I don't like comedies very much. Let me assure you that this is not the case. I've seen over a dozen films that most would label as comedies this year, and thoroughly enjoyed quite a few of them. With Fanboys I'm willing to admit that it's just not my cup of tea. With #3 and #2, however, I'll try and make the case that those films are fundamentally broken.
Now, Fanboys isn't an inherently bad movie, nor is it the type of movie I would chastise a friend for enjoying. It's cohesive, generally well produced, has a cameo by William Shatner, and features Kristin Bell in Princess Leia's "metal bikini" outfit from Return of the Jedi. These are all things I can get behind. The problem is that virtually every joke fell flat for me, and thus made the experience quite arduous. ("A comedy that features no humour? How dreadful!") Perhaps it's simply because satirizing nerd culture strikes me as incredibly redundant, or perhaps it's because I've been enjoying the same sort of humour from LoadingReadyRun for years now. Whatever the case may be, Fanboys was less of a movie and more of an endurance test, and for this reason it can't go unmentioned.
#3 Worst = Year One:
Much like Monsters Vs. Aliens, Year One seems to have a lot of potential on paper: Harold Ramis (Ghostbusters) directs Jack Black and Michael Cera through ancient world shenanigans as they do what they do best. What could possibly go wrong? Well, as it would turn out, Year One is also plagued by Monsters Vs. Aliens' crippling bugbear of terrible execution. Yet not only does Year One suffer from a severe lack of enthusiasm, disconnect between production and cast, and a creative absence, but also truly abysmal production. Many bad movies at least have a semblance of polish and mastering to them; Year One looks more like a product of an under-funded high school A/V club than a product of Hollywood glamour.
It's quite strange, really, how the $8 million Fanboys has more polish and craftsmanship than the $60 million Year One. Do Jack Black and Michael Cera really cost that much? Or maybe Olivia Wilde and Paul Rudd demanded outrageous compensation for appearing in such a travesty. Furthermore, what convinced Judd Apatow to chip in for the production budget? How does David Cross keep getting work? Year One at least gives the audience ample time to ponder these questions since the most laugh inducing bits - the ones from the somewhat appealing trailer - are disposed of in the early moments, thus leaving an hour and a half with nothing to do but mentally chastise yourself for spending money on such dross. You certainly won't be laughing, that's for sure.
#2 Worst = Miss March:
Miss March was released on Friday, March 13th, 2009. I'm not superstitious, but surely it can't be a coincidence that the second worst movie of the year was released on a generally ominous day? Cursed or otherwise, Miss March was an early contender for worst movie of the year. In fact, I still debate with myself whether or not it deserves to be named as the worst of 2009. While it could go either way, Miss March at least drifted in and out of public consciousness within a weekend, assuming you call opening at #10 with $2.5 million and climaxing at barely $4.5 million being in the general film-going awareness at all. The same can't be said for #1. While both movies are awful and thoroughly reprehensible, #1 is far more aggressive.
Winter movies are generally disposable, meaning that very rarely will anything significant arise and that standards are universally low. Having said that, I guess you could call Miss March remarkable for failing to meet such abysmal, rock bottom expectations. Here is a movie whose premise revolves around a chaste high school couple that separate when the male goes into a four year coma and the female runs off to pose for Playboy magazine. The pornography obsessed best buddy of the freshly awakened heartbroken notices his friend's former lover in an issue of Playboy, and the two embark on a road trip bound for the legendary Playboy Mansion.
So it's a sex comedy, with both sex and comedy missing in action. There are no gratuitous bare breasts to distract from the dearth of merriment, and there's no uproarious humour to distract from the lack of gratuitous bare breasts. It's a genre comedy that betrays its roots, offers absolutely nothing in compensation, and makes all those who witness it pray for cardiac arrest.
Even bad movies have some redeeming quality, be it a tolerable actor, a memorable line, or a nice pair of tits. Miss March has nothing. Try as I might, I cannot think of a single inspired, noteworthy, or even base quality to commend. Please, do not watch this movie. This isn't the Uwe Boll/Bruno Mattei bad where it's "so bad it's awesome!" This doesn't have any sort of novelty or scandalous quality that makes persevering through the train wreck a personal achievement. This is the type of film that could very well be considered as a crime against humanity, and should be wiped from memory.
Please, do not watch this movie.
#1 Worst = Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen:
A lot of people hate Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen for a lot of reasons. Some people are deeply offended by the inflammatory racial caricatures; some loathe the incomprehensible action and abysmal designs. Some are old enough to believe that these adaptations of a much beloved cartoon and toy line raped their childhoods; some are young enough to feel ashamed that their generation is fully committed to supporting such a cinematic atrocity. These are all valid reasons to hate Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen, but my personal reason for calling it the worst film of 2009 is a bit more, how shall I say this... "aloof."
I suppose you could say that most of my hatred towards Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen stems from aesthetics. I hate that the character models, and the renderings are absolutely terrible and indiscernible from one another. I can't tell Starscreams from Megatrons, and when they all look alike and become entangled during incomprehensible shaky cam action sequences, it's impossible for me to be drawn in. There's no context for any of the action, such as when Optimus Prime is being slapped around in an industrial milieu one moment before being magically transported to the middle of a dense forest the next. We're also meant to believe that it can be broad daylight in Virginia and Egypt at the exact same time. Just what the hell is going on?
But really, my biggest quarrel with this film is what it represents. I'd be more than willing to accept Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen as a bad movie, throw it away, and move on with my life, but it's so much worse than that. Insidious, even. So many things are wrong with Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen, between the disastrous narrative, the cardboard caricatures, the disgusting models and designs, the wrecking ball testicles of the adversary, and Michael Bay's own monstrous ego that compels him to advertise his other god-awful movies within the one we're currently watching. It's not just awful, it's aggressively awful. It's the sort of movie that garners enough attention that there will certainly be future instalments of this garbage, considering how the next Transformers movie has already received the green light.
Transformers: Revenge of the fallen is a $200 million catastrophe. It's a calamity for which the thousands of people involved in its creation should be ashamed, especially considering how not one of them had the foresight to look ahead at the final product and say, "Gee, maybe we should, you know, make it better?" It not only caters to the lowest common denominator, it feeds off their inexperience and uses the funds to perpetuate a cycle of atrocious blockbuster cinema. I felt like I should have been fined by the culture police for buying a ticket, and when the entire audience gives a standing ovation to the film by the time the end credits roll, it evokes a wicked current of misanthropy in my being.
Monsters Vs. Aliens, Year One, and Miss March are awful films for what they are, but Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen is the worst film for what it represents, which is a far greater crime as far as I'm concerned.
0 comments:
Post a Comment