Saturday, August 21, 2010

The Expendables

Is there any point to even write a review of this one?  Spoony pretty much summed up everything that needs to be said in his review.  So let's just cut to the point:  "The Expendables" is not good.  It just isn't.  If you really must see a popcorn goofy 80s action movie, there's "Predator 3" from earlier this summer.  There's no tension, no real threat, no serious enemy that can threaten the heroes, and well you get right down to it:  no point.

At first, when I was watching this movie, I was just a bit unentertained.  I was going to simply let it off with a pass:  "not my kind of movie", "worth a rent", "if you have sexual fantasies involving Sylvester Stallone, here's your film".  But I've soured on this, and soured fast.  I wasn't expecting Shakespeare, I wasn't expecting a timeless classic, but I was expecting fun.  And this movie just isn't fun.  The action is messy:  hard and gritty but completely artless and unexciting.  There are tons of explosions, lots of deaths, lots of punches thrown, but no real soul to any of it.  The movie is just not well shot.  The story is just not convincing or interesting or worth anybody's time.  And the characters just aren't any good.

Plus, arguably worst of all, this movie is just too damn loud.  For some reason or another, this movie was just several decibels higher than even the loudest movies I've seen.  Every other shot has an explosion or gunshots or loud punches or engines roaring or some other loud noise.  As I'm writing this, I have a splitting headache, all thanks to this stupid movie.  I think my brain is trying to dig itself out of my skull.  There are movies that are mediocre and pointless, and then there are the mediocre and pointless movies that are physically painful to experience.

The whole movie just has this strange disconnected feeling.  Like certain lines of dialog don't work, certain scenes just sorta peter out, and characters are sourly misused.  Stallone's falls in love with a girl (who is played by a Latino girl who looks too much like Sophia Coppola for my tastes) just because she doesn't leave at some point.  Characters seem to learn things without any way of knowing, plot points disappear, and at one point a character magically comes back to life after a very overblown death scene.  The action is so sketchy that at one point I swear to Christ that Jet Li turns into a different person between cuts.  Its a mess.

I think what really soured me on this one was the lack of really great action movie stars.  If it had just been a dozen of the greatest cinematic asskickers coming together and busting faces in - as advertised - I might have been fine with it.  Yeah, there's Sylvester Stallone, yeah there's Jason Statham, yeah there's Jet Li, and even Dolph Lundgren has a major place.  But forget Schwarzenegger and Bruce Willis.  If you've seen any one of the trailers you've already seen their entire screen time.  Arnold and Bruce are in this for two minutes.  I kinda expected the Governator to have little more than a cameo (since he's pretending to be respectable these days), but why isn't Bruce anywhere to be found?  The brief seconds where Stallone, Willis, and Schwarzenegger are on the screen together is an electric moment of fanboy pleasure - which is what this movie was supposed to be!  Then it ends, and we're left with a stupid action movie, nothing more.  Forget about Micky Rorke either.  He's in three scenes total, every one of which he steals, but he doesn't do anything more.  Is it too much to ask for real action movie stars kicking ass?

So instead of Arnold, Bruce, and Mickey we instead have two minor substitute actors.  One of them is some guy with a cauliflower ear who was so obscure that I was left yelling "who the fuck is this?" out loud in the theatre.  I had to look him up later, he's some mixed-martial artist guy who I'm sure is an impressive athlete, but he has no place behind the camera.  He just isn't a good actor, and does not belong here.  The other substitute is the crazy screaming guy from weird Old Spice commercials.  Are these supposed to be our action movie icons here?  Stone Cold Steve Austin is in this movie!  That's all I need to say.  They were so desperate for bodies they dug up Stone Cold Steve Austin.  Pathetic.  Steven Austin isn't even half bad in this film, but he isn't an action movie star.  I simply cannot take him seriously here, despite how thick is neck is.

What I would personally like to know is this:  where is Jean-Claude Van Damme?  Where is Steven Seagal?  I could go on and on naming action movie stars who could have been here but aren't.  There are even actors you could have gotten that aren't exclusively action stars.  Harrison Ford, Mel Gibson, Danny Glover, Jackie Chan, the Rock, Bruce Campell, Hugh Jackman, Christian Bale, etc. etc. etc.  There was so much talent that could have gone into this that didn't.  And even the talent that was on display here just didn't perform all that well, with the notable exception of Lundgren.  But Lundgren is only in one fight scene!  Every real actor in this film has been in at least four better movies.

When you get right down to it, even beyond the stupidity of the casting, this movie just isn't good.  Even in the low low standards of an 80s-style action flick B movie, I have to say this is one of the least interesting ones I've ever seen.  The previous decade alone saw dozens of awesome action movies, several of which starring people in this very movie.  Give me any Jason Stathem film, any Jason Statham film, and you have a far better film.  Even "War"!  Yeah, I said it.  "War" is a better movie than this one.

If you want good fights scenes, see "Scott Pilgrim".  That right there negates any reason for you to ever see this movie.  It sucks.  Easily the biggest disappointment of the entire year.

(For those pondering my image, its from the band, The Expendables' self-named fourth Album.  The Expendables, by the way, are far too talented to have to suffer the insult of sharing their name with this movie.  I'd check them out.  They're Ska-Rock or something, and make for good background music for a summer barbecue.)

Fanwank Corner:  For those who want to relive the 80s stupid action flick period, here's an unofficial list of better films of that genre that you can rent and watch at home, thus giving yourself hours of more entertainment:  "First Blood" and its sequels, "Terminator", "Terminator 2", "Predator", "Predator 2", "Lethal Weapon", "Commando", "Die Hard", "Under Seige", "Universal Soldier", "I Come in Peace", and last but not least "Running Man".  There are easily hundreds of others.  Every one is technically better in every single way to "the Expendables".  Enjoy.

15 comments:

  1. I heard Van Damme turned down an offer to be in the movie because he felt that the characters offered to him were flat and one-dimensional. Coming from Van Damme that's saying something, but from what I've heard about this movie, it's true. Out of all the reviews I've read or seen, and all the people I talked to about it, only one gave it a positive review. And it was a guy who thinks Attack of the Clones is the best Star Wars movie.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I thought it was good, and I also think Attack of The Clones was the best out of the Prequel series. Of course, I went into this movie just to see some crazy martial artist fights, so I got what I deserved. Also, you're theater must have sucked, ours wasn't that loud.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Who thinks that Attack of the Clones is the best Star Wars movie? I need a link right now.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Attack of the clones was the best prequel movie.

    ReplyDelete
  5. It wasn't a professional reviewer, but a friend of mine. The dude also hates the new Batman movies and wishes they were more like the Adam West show.

    ReplyDelete
  6. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

    HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

    OHHH BOYY, HAHA....THAT FRIEND, IS A JOKER. What a man.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Maybe he's right. I prefer the Batman from the first movies.

    Anyway, I am probably going to watch this movie sometime in the future, but now I want to see Scott pilgrim.

    ReplyDelete
  8. @YKProductions: Your laugh scares me.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oH4TN9jvVTQ

    I do think that the next Batman film could benefit from a little Robin action, as raising a kid could help the character of Bruce Wayne. (As the wise and mighty L Lawliet says, "Violent vigilantes should all grow the hell up." In so many words, of course.) It would make sense in the new 'verse, too, what with the Batman imitators and all. And no, I'm not talking about Hot Pants-wearing, Christmas colour-coordinating, sleeping-in-the-same-bed-as-Bruce-Wayne...ing...Robin, but a more re-designed one. They got rid of the yellow eyesore in the middle of Batman's chest, who knows what they could do for Robin.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Did anyone here ever watch "Teen Titans" on Cartoon Network? That's what they could do for Robin.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Man, Teen Titans was CRAP. I can't stand that show.

    They could easily introduce Dick and have him act the same way he did in The Animated Series (which, I know, was more like Jason, but you would need him to be rebellious at first to establish a little drama between Robin and Batman).

    Also, does anyone else think that Nolan's third film won't be the last in the current franchise? I don't want to see the quality drop, because Nolan is the first guy to make a great Batman film, but I don't see WB dropping this series again anytime soon.

    ReplyDelete
  11. SideburnsPuppy...that laugh...was NOTHING like mine. Oh my Lord, that was insane :P

    ReplyDelete
  12. @YKProductions: He was laughing so hard because of that ridiculous L mask, visible at 0:10. And sorry for misrepresenting you. Is your laugh more like this?:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-5FTJxfV3pc

    @Nicholas: I remember Teen Titans...kind of. I think I was around ten when it aired, and I can't remember having a real opinion on it, except Slade was awesome. I was really disappointed that he never got a good origin story in-show. (I don't read comic books, as glossy paper causes prices to dramatically increase.)

    @Drake: I seem to recall Nolan saying that the new Batman movies would be a trilogy, and if he lets revenue tempt him into continuing a finished story just for cash and the fans being able to see Mr. Freeze or Killer Croc, then that cash will come with a big blow to his artistic integrity. Besides, if the fans want to be serviced, they have three options: Batman: The Brave and the Bold, Batman: Arkham Asylum, or a brothel.

    ReplyDelete
  13. @Sideburns Puppy: Oh, I think Nolan will stop making Batman flicks after the next one, I just think a new director will take his place. I'm sure there are many directors and writers who could continue making Batman just as good... but there are more who'd just do whatever to make some cash. That's what I'm worried about. Though I would love to see a movie with Clayface as the villain.

    I haven't gotten a chance to play Arkham Asylum yet, but it looks awesome. I read the graphic novel is was based on, and that was pretty awesome. The Brave and the Bold... well I've only seen a couple of episodes, but without Kevin Conroy... it's not Batman to me. Though Billy Baldwin did a pretty good job in Crisis on Two Earths.

    Also, there is a new Batman Beyond comic miniseries which is EPIC. Even if you're not a comic fan, if you liked Batman Beyond it is well worth the read. I should note that I hadn't read comicbooks in six years before I picked up the first three issues of (the six issue) Batman Beyond series. It's really good.

    ReplyDelete
  14. HAHAHAHAHAHAHA, yes SideburnsPuppy, that was EXACTLY my laugh :D

    ReplyDelete
  15. @YKProductions: Okay, that time it was the Kira laugh.

    ReplyDelete