Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post

oliver9184 · 07-11-2010, 06:57 AM

Bride Wars (2009) 4/10. In January of last year film critic Mark Kermode, upon reviewing this film, declared that he would quit his job if Bride Wars was not in his top ten worst films of 2009. He didn't want to be doing a job that obliged him to watch ten films worse than this in a year. (It came in at number 8 so he didn't have to quit.) I can sympathise. Bride Wars isn't textbook bad like some films are: it's not a complete mess and it's not unwatchable. It's just one of those shit films that will probably pass you by unless you're unlucky enough to see it by accident - in which case you'll instantly and completely forget it. The story is: Anne Hathaway and Kate Hudson were childhood friends who, when theye were growing uptogether, were both really into weddings. For some reason I don't understand each had their little heart set on getting married at the same place, in the same month of the year. Cynical and transparent plot machinations see them being double booked for their weddings on the same day at the same place! Fucking hell. For reasons that are implicitly obvious for a film called "Bride Wars", featuring brides-to-be warring, this situation is unacceptable. War takes place: proper, awful, real-life war, the likes of which planet earth hasn't seen since Rommel packed away his Africa tunic. Hathaway scatters cluster bombs all over Hudson's blue hair and in response Hudson delegates launch authority of tactical nuclear weapons to field commanders outside Hathaway's house. Mutually assured destruction - sadly - does not occur. Both central characters are deeply, deeply horrible. Those who like them or find their behaviour acceptable are also horrible. If this film has a message - I'm not sure if it really does - it's wholly insidious and destructive. I immediately wanted to go out and do damage to things after seeing it. It's one of those films where, if you ponder - who is this for? Who likes this? Who's laughing at these lame non-jokes? - the answer has got to be: the worst and stupidest people in the world.

Midnight Run (1988) 8/10. Weren't the eighties brilliant? Everyone was rich and constantly smoked cigarettes because it didn't matter, pithy action comedies got their just deserts at the box office, and Robert De Niro wasn't a washed-up old fool. In Midnight Run he's an ex-cop bounty hunter who has to capture and transport Charles Grodin across America in a chase/road movie. There's a lot to enjoy here: De Niro is boorish and belligerant, Grodin is sympathetic and wily and there's plenty of sound comedy relief in the form of bungling gangsters, an inept rival bounty hunter and a brilliant deadpan turn by Yaphet Kotto as a bullish FBI man.

School of Rock (2003) 7/10. I didn't used to like Jack Black at all. He always came across as smarmy, self-aware, hyperactive, and always unpleasant to watch - a dislikeable and unfunny fool. In spite of these sentiments I thought I'd give School of Rock a try and was pleasantly surprised. He's funny and likeable! The children at the school he pretends to teach at bring out the best of him: clearly, he likes children and they like him. The children were obviously picked for musical ability rather than acting ability but children of this age (ten to twelve) are rarely good at acting and it's probably for the best that none of them out-act Black. As well as being fairly natural and fun around kids, re acting, they make him look GOOD.

Saw IV (2007) 5/10, Saw V (2008) 5/10, Saw VI (2009) 5/10. Thank heavens this is over. (post script: although perhaps not, as I've heard Saw VII is imminent - in 3D). The last three Saw films have merged together in my mind now. Rarely have films so preposterous been so boring! The first two or three Saw movies were ridiculous but had neat tricks and twists hidden up their sleeves which were well played in the final act. The last three try to continue the tradition but with no success at all. Surely nobody watches Saw films to see badly-acted police officers bicker with each other about who the killer might or might not be. No, people want to see the insane killing machines go to work on helpless, soft, delicate human bodies - without this kind of spectacle Saw is just a really poor iteration of CSI or whatever. Numbers IV and V don't realise this and spend far too much time amongst the stiflingly boring cops and FBI agents as they try to use their dull wits to figure out who's doing all the mental killing now that original madman Jigsaw is definately dead. Saw VI does better by spending more time on the mashing, crunching and (at last) sawing of bodies by dreadful implements and machines, but there's still a lot of boring shit to sit through.

07-11-2010, 06:57 AM	#3866 (permalink)
oliver9184 Psycho	Bride Wars (2009) 4/10. In January of last year film critic Mark Kermode, upon reviewing this film, declared that he would quit his job if Bride Wars was not in his top ten worst films of 2009. He didn't want to be doing a job that obliged him to watch ten films worse than this in a year. (It came in at number 8 so he didn't have to quit.) I can sympathise. Bride Wars isn't textbook bad like some films are: it's not a complete mess and it's not unwatchable. It's just one of those shit films that will probably pass you by unless you're unlucky enough to see it by accident - in which case you'll instantly and completely forget it. The story is: Anne Hathaway and Kate Hudson were childhood friends who, when theye were growing uptogether, were both really into weddings. For some reason I don't understand each had their little heart set on getting married at the same place, in the same month of the year. Cynical and transparent plot machinations see them being double booked for their weddings on the same day at the same place! Fucking hell. For reasons that are implicitly obvious for a film called "Bride Wars", featuring brides-to-be warring, this situation is unacceptable. War takes place: proper, awful, real-life war, the likes of which planet earth hasn't seen since Rommel packed away his Africa tunic. Hathaway scatters cluster bombs all over Hudson's blue hair and in response Hudson delegates launch authority of tactical nuclear weapons to field commanders outside Hathaway's house. Mutually assured destruction - sadly - does not occur. Both central characters are deeply, deeply horrible. Those who like them or find their behaviour acceptable are also horrible. If this film has a message - I'm not sure if it really does - it's wholly insidious and destructive. I immediately wanted to go out and do damage to things after seeing it. It's one of those films where, if you ponder - who is this for? Who likes this? Who's laughing at these lame non-jokes? - the answer has got to be: the worst and stupidest people in the world. Midnight Run (1988) 8/10. Weren't the eighties brilliant? Everyone was rich and constantly smoked cigarettes because it didn't matter, pithy action comedies got their just deserts at the box office, and Robert De Niro wasn't a washed-up old fool. In Midnight Run he's an ex-cop bounty hunter who has to capture and transport Charles Grodin across America in a chase/road movie. There's a lot to enjoy here: De Niro is boorish and belligerant, Grodin is sympathetic and wily and there's plenty of sound comedy relief in the form of bungling gangsters, an inept rival bounty hunter and a brilliant deadpan turn by Yaphet Kotto as a bullish FBI man. School of Rock (2003) 7/10. I didn't used to like Jack Black at all. He always came across as smarmy, self-aware, hyperactive, and always unpleasant to watch - a dislikeable and unfunny fool. In spite of these sentiments I thought I'd give School of Rock a try and was pleasantly surprised. He's funny and likeable! The children at the school he pretends to teach at bring out the best of him: clearly, he likes children and they like him. The children were obviously picked for musical ability rather than acting ability but children of this age (ten to twelve) are rarely good at acting and it's probably for the best that none of them out-act Black. As well as being fairly natural and fun around kids, re acting, they make him look GOOD. Saw IV (2007) 5/10, Saw V (2008) 5/10, Saw VI (2009) 5/10. Thank heavens this is over. (post script: although perhaps not, as I've heard Saw VII is imminent - in 3D). The last three Saw films have merged together in my mind now. Rarely have films so preposterous been so boring! The first two or three Saw movies were ridiculous but had neat tricks and twists hidden up their sleeves which were well played in the final act. The last three try to continue the tradition but with no success at all. Surely nobody watches Saw films to see badly-acted police officers bicker with each other about who the killer might or might not be. No, people want to see the insane killing machines go to work on helpless, soft, delicate human bodies - without this kind of spectacle Saw is just a really poor iteration of CSI or whatever. Numbers IV and V don't realise this and spend far too much time amongst the stiflingly boring cops and FBI agents as they try to use their dull wits to figure out who's doing all the mental killing now that original madman Jigsaw is definately dead. Saw VI does better by spending more time on the mashing, crunching and (at last) sawing of bodies by dreadful implements and machines, but there's still a lot of boring shit to sit through.