Current Releases

Awful Reviews

An Awful Week at the Movies: Expectations vs. Reality

Sunday, October 4, 2009 Update by The Crazy Eights

You remember that feeling, don't you? Watching that Godzilla trailer, you thought, "Well, if anyone can deliver a film about a giant fucking monstrosity ravaging the Big Apple, it's the director of Independence Day. He knows how to blow shit up real good!" So you went to the theater, spent $10 on a ticket, spent another $10 on snacks (you fatass), sat down in a darkened theater and...gradually, you felt goddamn angry that you spent $20 on such a piece of shit.

Eleven years later, Hollywood still hasn't learned its lesson. YouTube is saturated with exciting trailers for Hollywood fare, 99 percent of which doesn't live up to the hype. Regular Awful Week at the Movies readers should know that we've given only one -- count 'em, one! -- positive review to a featured film; the rest have been delineated lists of the reasons why these movies were so massively disappointing. Well, we're mad as hell and we're not gonna take it anymore! From now on, each review will consist of the critic's expectations (which are usually positive) and the reality of the film (which are, at least this week, generally negative). Cleverly, we've called it Expectations vs. Reality.

As Sam Jackson said, hold on to your butts. It's about to get awful...

Capitalism: Goddamnit, Michael Moore, grow up already!

by Matt "the" Gronke

As he did during Sicko and Bowling For Columbine, Michael Moore will employ extremely hyperbolic stunts and dishonest editing techniques to get his point across. Some liberals will get fired up, but most will roll their eyes at the ammunition he's given the political right to target what they call the "radical left." Is it more effective to get a sit-down interview with a Wall Street executive, or to film yourself being thrown out of his office building after you yell at him over a megaphone? These films are, in a sense, not documentaries about social issues, but character studies on Michael Moore.

There's a certain frustration to be found in watching Michael Moore film a lower middle-class family being evicted from their house due to foreclosure. The amount they owe is a tiny percentage of this film's $1 million budget...and an even tinier percentage of Michael Moore's total wealth. He could have easily, with the stroke of a pen, paid off their bills and changed their lives. But that wouldn't have made a good film, would it? Instead, we watch Moore as he films the family getting kicked out of its house, ready to make millions on the backs of the evicted.

This sad truth is consistent with Moore's hypocritical hatred of the rich: Paying for their houses would present the wealthy in a positive light as benevolent people. Of course, there's no mention of any capitalist benevolence in the film, such as the $30 billion that Warren Buffett gave to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation in 2006.

There's a certain sense of irony in watching a man campaign against the very system that made him wealthy in the first place, like a fat man telling everyone to eat healthy only after he's had a chance to clean out the all-you-can-eat buffet -- an apt comparison, considering Michael Moore has no doubt given Dunkin Donuts its own golden parachute.

As in his previous films, Moore makes incredibly transparent "attempts" to get interviews with CEOs and politicians. Twenty years after he did the same in Roger & Me, Moore films himself walking up to the headquarters of General Motors, being stopped by the security guard and claiming that he wants to interview the CEO. When the guard tells Moore he needs a prior appointment for an interview, Moore makes his best attempt to feign shock at being unable to simply barge into the headquarters of a company and speak with a CEO. It's obvious that all of these half-assed attempts were going to end in failure. Otherwise, he might actually have to interview these CEOs for his documentary, and if he did that...well, he couldn't portray himself as some Robin Hood crusader being shut out from speaking with the big bad CEO. What does this accomplish? Nothing but a chuckle out of the latte-drinking liberals in the audience. Nothing to help his claimed cause of defeating capitalism.

Moore's political slant as a Democrat is obvious to anyone, and I was expecting such as I went into his film. Thankfully, he delivered.

His coverage of the TARP proceedings in 2008 portrayed it as a conspiracy orchestrated by Henry Paulson and the Bush Administration, only glossing over the involvement of the Democratic members of Congress. Moore portrays the passage of the bill as the Republicans "strong-arming" the Democrats two months before a Congressional election with tactics of fear and manipulation. This not only portrays the Democrats as spineless, but it also ignores the fact that half of these Democrats are recipients of millions of dollars in campaign contributions from the banking and housing industries, and that they are just as culpable in this crisis as the Republicans. Consider Democrats such as Christopher Dodd (D-CT), head of the Senate Banking Committee, who was involved heavily in the oversight of both Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and who receives the highest amount of campaign contributions out of anyone in Congress from said banking institutions. Or Barney Frank (D-MA), Chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, who pushed for reduced restrictions on home loans in the early '90s, and who received contributions from both Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the executives of which, like Dodd, argued that both institutions were financially sound all the way up to the collapse of the housing industry.

When Moore introduces Obama, it is accompanied by an angelic chorus, as someone who would save the day from the evil Bush administration. Moore even mentioned that Obama received his highest private donations from the banking industry, but, as Moore put it, the banking institutions were just throwing money at him to try to pay him off. He had no proof that Obama was not going to be influenced by the banking industry, only his unsound assumptions, two of which even James Hetfield could announce: "DEMOCRATS GOOD! REPUBLICANS BAD!" To his credit, Moore does cover the fact, early in the film, that Obama's Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, like former secretaries, was heavily involved with major banking institutions before being appointed to his post.

Moore's most frustrating miss, however, is ending the film without mentioning that nearly all of these people are still in power. Christopher Dodd, still in charge of the Senate Banking Committee. Barney Frank, still in charge of the House Financial Services Committee. The Democrats and Republicans who voted for the TARP funds and the bailouts, still in session. The recipients of the millions in campaign contributions, still in Washington. Most notably the President, the man who received the largest sum of private donations from banking institutions, still in office.

Moore ignores this as he wraps up his film. Perhaps it would anger his mostly liberal audience. Perhaps he ignores the truth of what is in front of him, that many of our politicians have been corrupted by campaign donations, by special treatment and by influence of the powerful institutions in this country. Does Moore wrap his film by arguing for increased regulation of the banking and housing industries? No. Does he argue for campaign finance reform? No. In a moment that would make any rebellious hippie teenager proud, Moore calls on you, the audience, to rise up against the capitalist evil. Instead of using his filmmaking to educate the audience, he proves once again that he is the master of making films that indict the right as masterminds of all that is evil in America, delivering another 100-minute slab of fat, greasy liberal pornography.

No thanks.

MINORITY REPORT: As a die-hard liberal, I imagine my experience watching Michael Moore films is akin to any rational, thinking conservative's experience watching The O'Reilly Factor. True to Matt's expectations, throughout Capitalism: A Love Story, I shrank further and further into my seat, wishing not to be seen in attendance of this train-wreck of a "documentary" by any future political opponents who might use said attendance to smear me. Moore's style, which was a precision tool of bombast and hilarity 20 years ago when he actually had something to say, has now become a parody of itself. Hell, Michael Moore could make a halfway decent documentary if he'd just stand outside his own house with the Megaphone of the Common Man. This isn't journalism, Mike; this is a cheap and divisive way to to inflame your legion of unthinking fans while inflating your own bank account (and Dunkin Donuts' coffers). -David "Data Core Devil" del Vacoté III

Zombieland: Perfect for horror fans who thought Shaun was too cerebral

by Sean "bad movie knight" Hanson

2009 has been a good year for Hollywood horror. While the studios have formerly been content to turn out awful genre fare that could not compete with their more adventurous indie brethren, there have three previous pleasant surprises -- Drag Me to Hell, Orphan and Sorority Row. Now there's Zombieland, which, like most Americans, wallows in gross-out humor rather than adopting the refined wit of its European counterpart, Shaun of the Dead. Fortunately, it works.

After a zombie apocalypse that would make Max Brooks piss in his footies, two adventurers named after their respective destinations, Columbus (Jesse Eisenberg) and Tallahassee (Woody Harrelson), fight for survival while entertaining a three-pronged goal: Fight their way to the East Coast, which is allegedly zombie-free; outwit two young con artists (Emma Stone and Abigail Breslin) who are capitalizing on the dire situation and find the world's last remaining Twinkie stash. But as Confuscius, Nietzsche or Cobain say, "It's not the journey, but the destination." And somehow, their destination doubles back on itself when all four decide to journey to the Disneyland-inspired Pacific Fun Palace...or something like that; the details don't matter.

Zombieland breaks no new ground as far as horror flicks are concerned, but the morbid sadism of Tallahassee is consistently entertaining...so much so that Zombieland becomes a bit of a drag when the camera wanders away from him. Watching Harrelson channel Mickey Knox as he bashes, slashes and shoots his way through the staggering hordes is a thing of beauty, an element that far surpasses character interplay, clever dialogue and everything else any intelligent filmgoer should expect from a movie.

Well, fuck it. Who needs wit when untold gallons of gore and miles of intestines fly across the screen like it's Peter Jackson's wet-dream interpretation of Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs? Zombieland is funny -- nay, it's a goddamned riot -- and it serves as proof that maybe some of the smarter studio executives have decided to, you know, actually earn box-office receipts in these troubled times.

The Invention of Lying: Gervais reinvents his own career...as a sell-out

by Ian "ProfessorClumsy" Maddison

Ricky Gervais spearheaded the popularisation of a new wave of British television comedy with The Office, becoming a huge success in the States in the process. It was the release of Ghost Town that suggested for the first time that Gervais' Stateside success had dulled his edge. So you can understand that my anticipation for The Invention of Lying is tepid at best. I'm really hoping for Gervais to pull this one out of the bag, but this looks like the kind of lacklustre comedy that would have been popular amongst the pre-teen crowd in the mid-'90s.

The Invention of Lying is a bizarre high-concept romantic comedy, except without the romance or the comedy. And the concept, that everybody in the world tells the truth and one day Gervais discovers that he can lie, doesn't really hold water in a dramatic sense.

Gervais uses his newfound ability for good. A bit. Then he just uses it to get wealth and power. In the film's biggest attempt to be edgy, Gervais actually invents religion and become a prophet to the all-powerful "Man in the Sky." This never really goes anywhere, though, and it just serves to slow down an already sluggishly paced film. At 100 minutes, you wouldn't expect this to feel overly long, but it really does. Especially when you're essentially just watching the same joke being repeated over and over again, and it's not even a funny one.

Atheistic agendas and unrelatable characters aside, the biggest crime this film commits is quite simply that it isn't funny. There are some barely smirk-inducing moments at times, but they are too few and far between and aren't nearly funny enough to redeem any of the film's failings. Even the slew of surprise cameos, including Edward Norton, fall way short of the mark. On the whole, it's just boring, and the concept crumbles under any kind of scrutiny.

Haven't we come to expect better from Gervais? In fact, for a while we pretty much expected the best from him. Now he seems content with making his high concept fluff; I wonder just how long his mass of showbiz friends will stick around and watch him make a fool of himself.

RATING (OUT OF 5):

---

Toy Story 3-D Double Feature: Through the filter of adult malaise

by Joseph "Jay Dub" Wade

I've got a feeling that watching Toy Story in 3D is going to make me intensely depressed. As a kid, these were two of my favorite movies, and I'd watch them compulsively (the first more so than the second). Seeing them on the big screen for the first time in 10-15 years might be a none-too-subtle reminder that I've grown up and become a horrible person who does nothing but crack stupid jokes on the Internet. Or it could be just a delightful afternoon at the movies...IN 3-D!!!!!

Imagine you're 8 years old again. I know this might be hard for some of you. The average teenager can only remember back to his 14th birthday, but just bear with me. You're 8 years old. Mom and Dad take you to this new Disney movie about toys coming to life.

"Remember that movie about the Indian toy in the cabinet?" asks Dad. "Have we got a treat for you!"

That movie turns out to be Toy Story, the most mind-blowing experience your 8-year-old eyes have ever seen. Being an impressionable kid in a hopeless consumer culture, what's your first instinct? "I MUST HAVE ALL OF ANDY'S TOYS!"

This, I'm ashamed to admit, was me. I had Buzz Lightyear. I had Sheriff Woody. Hell, I even had Slinky Dog. And because I've become a horrible packrat, chances are all of my old Toy Story tie-ins are gathering dust in a closet in my parents' house. The first film of the double-feature was a fun experience, as this sense of guilt had not yet washed over me. I became that little kid all over again, wearing those goofy Risky Business 3-D glasses over my already goofy prescription glasses. I was having fun; the 3-D was more like Super-Duper-Depth-of-Field-D," but at least it wasn't gimmicky.

...And then Toy Story 2 started.

I immediately knew something was wrong, because I stopped viewing Woody and Buzz as toys. These weren't the invincible plastic figures of the last movie. These were like a fragile, neurotic endangered species. I suddenly cared about the plight of a little denim cowboy. When Woody gazes into the ventilation shaft, I too was forced to stare into that abyss and holy shit, Nietzsche was right.! Not only had I succumbed to Disney's marketing ploy all those years ago, but I'd become the very person of which the movie seemed terrified. I'd moved on with my life, while Woody, Buzz,and the Slinky Dog were literally choking on dust in a box back home. That abyss stared back and now I can never unsee Toy Story 2.

I think I need a drink...

RATING (OUT OF 5):

---

Trick 'r Treat: Finally, a direct-to-DVD horror flick that doesn't suck

by Sean "bad movie knight" Hanson

With the advance buzz and a chilling trailer, Trick 'r Treat promises to be one of the scariest movies in a long, long time...and an unfortunate oversight by Warner, which, afraid to compete with Saw VXIIIXVL for multiplex dollaz, pulled this from theatrical release last year and resigned it to direct-to-DVD hell.

OK, so it's not really scary -- at best, it's occasionally creepy. Instead, it's a throwback to the kind of premium-cable horror anthologies of yore, with three delightfully twisted morality tales loosely tied to a fourth that stitches the narrative together, and it's a joy to watch.

Trick 'r Treat alternates between an oddball take on the holiday-slasher flick in the opening and closing segments, a black comedy about a murderous principal whose young son arrives home unexpectedly in the middle of a kill, a reimagining (that word's so popular these days!) of Little Red Riding Hood and a ghost story about a schoolkid prank gone terribly, terribly wrong.

Each of those plots would feel right at home in Tales from the Crypt, and Trick 'r Treat's only real shortcoming is the lack of the Cryptkeeper. Still, Trick 'r Treat manages to nail the feel of Halloween, the cartoon grotesqueries, the flickering pumpkins and the local legends retold with a supernatural bent.

If only it could have been scary too...

RATING (OUT OF 5):

---

Surrogates: A surrogate for a thrice-born story

by Joseph "Jay Dub" Wade

Taken on their own, Bruce Willis, director Jonathan Mostow, Walt Disney Pictures, and a decent graphic novel are at the very least mildly tolerable. Together, I expect that they'll make for a decent afternoon at the movies...

...but instead, all of these things come together to form the perfect storm of boring. Surrogates presents a future in which 99 percent of the world's population (think on THAT one for a few minutes) operate robotic avatars from the safety of their own homes. The robots look like flawless humans -- bad-ass supermodel versions of our own boring, ugly selves. Sounds pretty cool, eh? Well, when the son of the surrogates' inventor is murdered by his own robot, detective Tom Greer (Bruce Willis) is called on to track down the murderer.

Have I killed your interest yet? Because this is precisely where I started tuning out. Such an excellent concept is hit over the back of the head with a shovel and stuffed into the trunk like a dead body to make way for a standard, run-of-the-mill murder mystery. What's worse, if you're one of the twelve people who actually remembers I, Robot, you'll instantly recognize about half of the plot elements on display. Hell, James Cromwell plays the exact same character.

If there's anything positive I can say for Surrogates, it's that Bruce Willis' surrogate rocks a pretty wicked hairpiece. Dude's hair hasn't looked this good since his days on Moonlighting. However, reminders of great '80s sitcoms do not make a great sci-fi film. Neither, as it turns out, do bland rip-offs of Blade Runner. Looks like I'd better rethink my upcoming action-thriller, Cops vs. Robots.

RATING (OUT OF 5):

---

Awful DVDs

	Do you love classic Hollywood monster movies but wish they included 25% more Seth Rogen? Then Monsters vs. Aliens is probably for you.
	Away We Go stars John Krasinski and Maya Rudolph traveling the country looking for a place to raise their baby, only to find that all of their friends are horrible people. It's the date movie of the year!
	If Wes Anderson remade Ocean's 11 and based it on his recurring fever dreams, the result might resemble The Brothers Bloom. And it's too clever by half.
	According to IMDb user JenLuvr69, Management is "a touching comedy." Well, OK, now we know what it's not. Thanks, IMDb!
	The Girlfriend Experience debuted on cable because theaters feared porn star Sasha Grey might attract the kind of people that usually watch her movies. Heaven forbid Grey star in a movie that doesn't require anal.
	A better title for Year One would be The Teenager's Guide to The Bible, but Mel Brooks already made that movie and even that ended up sucking...still, it didn't suck nearly as hard as this.
	Eddie Murphy's career is tanking, so he goes to his daughter and her imaginary friends for career advice. Wait...what? That's actually a movie? Imagine That!
	In My Life in Ruins, Nia Vardolas is back to offend the Greeks deeper than before, but it's totally hilarious, see, because she's Greek! Richard Dreyfuss co-stars, wishes Spielberg would hit him up for a Jaws reboot.
	Anvil!: The Story of Anvil is a documentary about the greatest metal band you've never heard of, featuring interviews with a bunch of famous musicians who have heard of Anvil because...well, it's trendy.
	Kevin Spacey really flexes his acting muscles in Shrink; see, instead of playing an intellectual with a superiority complex, he plays an intellectual with a superiority complex and a raging pot habit!
	Lies & Illusions -- wait, who the fuck watches this shit?

---

About the Contributors

Matt "the" Gronke, arguably the most qualified film critic on the entire Internet, received his Bachelor's Degree in Film Criticism in 2006. When he's not busy being unemployed due to his degree in Film Criticism, he spends his time posting on Internet forums, scoffing with smug pretentiousness at every film mentioned. He's seen better -- much better -- and you are just too small-minded to "get it."

Sean "bad movie knight" Hanson thinks Under Siege rules while Raging Bull drools. Seriously.

Ian "ProfessorClumsy" Maddison is taller than most cats -- almost noticeably so. In fact, he is so tall that he can reach door-handles without any help and in spite of being from the north of England, he can successfully operate a computer without electrocuting himself.

Joseph "Jay Dub" Wade once gave a lecture on the social merits of John Carpenter's They Live. The university still won't return his calls.

- The Crazy Eights