If it's crap ... We'll tell you
Hello again, ladies and gentlemen. I am Chaos Jumper and I do stuff because I want to! Today, I will actually have the time out of my day to work on my best movies of 2011 as well as patching a little bit of my list of worst of films. I was able to watch a few more films in my local theater and renting a few on DVD so that I could just watch more films that are good, bad and in-between. And before you ask, yes I know how long these are for best/worst of. There is a reason; many of these films have been discussed with friends of mine and when discussing a film they like in my worst of, I was never clear as to why and would rightfully get an argument I'd never expect. So, to give a better understanding, I explained why in enough detail. So, here's the list of films Ive seen in 2011:
Hugo, A Separation, Pariah, Midnight in Paris, Rise of the Planet of the Apes, Harry Potter and the Deadly A'llows (as Korey says), Super, Warrior, Tree of Life, Melancholia, The Skin I Live in, Super 8, Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, Transformers 3; Dark of the Moon, Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy, Prom, I am Numbah 4, Limitless, The Human Centipede II, Bridesmaids, Columbiana, The Artist, Fast Five, Attack the Block, Cowboys vs. Aliens, Twilight Breaking Dawn Part 1, Drive, The Muppets, Cars 2, Drive Angry, Mission Impossible Ghost Protocol, The Adventures of Tin Tin, Thor, Captain America, Green Lantern, X-Men First Class, The Sitter, Mars Meets Moms, The Muppets, Hoodwinked 2; Hood Vs Evil, The Decedents, Rango, In Time, Apollo 18, Abduction, Killer Elite, Warrior, Crazy Stupid Love, Winnie the Pooh, Horrible Bosses, Pirates of the Caribbean Four on Stranger Tides, 13 Assassins, Hobo with a Shotgun, Trespass, The Darkest Hour, The Sitter, The Descendants
And now Lets begin!
Short Honorable Mentions to:
Abduction: I am going to say this is a bad film, but I didn't really hate it that much. In fact, I kind of felt sympathy for everyone involved, including Taylor Lautner who I believe has some acting ability but is stuck under the terrible director/writer/editor hole.
Bridesmaids: A typical comedy + women = profit? Me no think so my good sir. A lot of this film felt like it was trapped in almost every single comedy cliche and some moments that made me cringe. I did, although, have some laughs which makes this a better experience than I was expecting.
Warhorse: Liked it a little bit, but was still manipulative and had very little, if no, character development. Just Spielberg at his most melodramatic and that isn't a good thing.
10. The Darkest Hour
Wow, and I thought Twilight was hilarious. This film was so bad and so terribly made that I had to admire the director, the writer, the actors and other people involved. This is going to be the part of my worst of that is going to be the shortest because the film has been talked about to a point where I’d be redundant. The acting is horrible. The dialog is painful to your sides bad. The script itself just makes me scratch my head and laugh my ass off because it just has one of those “really movie?!” moments where the film does some implausible stuff. All I can actually say about the film is that, out of any other film on this list, I would SUGGEST this to people. I would say if you want to have some friends watch a film with you and are drunk because you’d have so much fun with the badness in this film. Sure, it is a T-E-R-R-I-B-L-E movie, but so bad that it is brilliant.
9. Human Centipede II Full Sequence
I saw the first one, and I thought that it was fine but extremely flawed. It had some great suspense, but the people in the first one were terrible, with the exception of the doctor which was the best thing about the movie. Best written and very well performed and just an amazing villain. The second one was on DVD and I thought that "Hey, it is probably going to good" An actually welcoming surprise from the first one, especially when hearing about the plot. The film was not all that interesting to me because it is so meta. It takes its itself outside of the main setting of the first one and with the whole outside of the film, it felt too meta to the point where it became silly at points. The movie did some good things; like the character that loves this original film and says "I'll do it myself!" It actually does give the film some more psychological undertone. The performance is good because there isn't that much dialog from him so it is all expressions. There aren’t that many annoying characters because the villain just kidnaps people rather than actually having characters (with the exception of the mother, the psychiatrist and the villain). It does give more of an atmosphere and a more wow effect to the film. The direction is fine and is well done because of the Black and White look to it. Not to mention, when the centipede is sown, IT IS SOWN! It was more gruesome and felt real. This is gruesome, but it isn't insanely gruesome like A Serbian Film. The problem with this film was that the villain was very uninteresting, even though he was insane. Every minute I was just thinking to myself "What else could I be doing now?" It was just discussing, gory and dull. The whole thing with him kidnapping people just gets really repetitive really fast. It is just "Pop! I hit you in the head!" and sends them to the shed. It forces me to wait for this to end (12 ****ING TIMES) and, once again, gets old really fast. The gore is fine, but it just becomes so tongue and cheek, that it becomes laughable at times. South Park nailed this film PERFECTLY when they parody the fart scene in this film (Yep, it’s the same thing here). It is just so laughable that it doesn't make me cringe but makes me laugh my butt off. The characters themselves were as dumb as the ones in the first Human Centipede. They could easily leave the hide out within those three to four days or something to show they have intellect. Also, the ending, was just something that happened because the story is so simple; watch HC, shoot people in the head, go back to watch HC. That is the entire plot of the film, which makes no arc for this character at all. It is what it is and that’s all I can say. So, to sum up, this was just uninteresting, not so cringe worthy and is fun at times, which is why this is number 10 because it is the best worst movie I've seen this year.
8. Tree of Life
...Ok, before I talk about this film I will say this; I am sick and tired of discussing this film. I completely ****ing get it and if you like it that is fine with me. Believe me when I say that I do not hate this film. I don’t hate it and I in fact like a few things about it. I just hate the constant discussion of people I find at the bookstore come at me as though I am Hitler telling me “It is the movie made for me that I didn’t even know I was waiting for” I am sorry if you are that type of person because I have no hate for you at all I will just say this; leave me the **** alone when discussing the Tree of Life. Everything I say about this film is right here and if you want a discussion PLEASE don’t come to me. If there is something you don’t understand, I’ll clear it up for you here or put it in your inbox. Ok? Now, to begin this little part of my worst of, I will say this about the Tree of Life; it is the M-O-S-T overrated film I have ever come across. I'm not just talking about the critics that love the film, its fine if you do, but I am also talking about everyone else that is saying "THIS FILM WAS ****ING AWFUL! IT WAS SO PRETENTIOUS!" It baffles me that some people would argue with me about how beautiful it is when I am simply saying that "I didn't like it that much. Let it go." It just makes me so angry to discuss something so simply bad to me, for a lack of a better word. Although I am actually leaning towards the negative side of this movie, I still feel like I am in the middle, because there are something’s I do in fact like, even though one of them are contradictory to what it is trying to say. First, since this is the worst of, I will have to talk about what I didn't like about this movie. They were five problems that stuck with me like a really bad itch; the space sequences, the dinosaurs, the editing, the dialog and the monologue. The monologue itself was plain irritating, just showing how much of a "God where are you?" person Terrance Malick is. It was just laughable to me when he would bring up these questions and take them in a serious Avant-Garde type manner because I would just answer these questions like I was in elementary school. The dialog is worse because it is that typically terrible poetic dialog that could be found by the most immature wannabe philosopher at Barns and Noble. I don't mind if it is supposed to mean something, but it shouldn't be that kind of terrible crap of "It is in God's hands." I have heard that Terrance Malick couldn’t make good dialog, but that just astounds me more because a director that has been around for this long cannot make dialog that is either subtle or natural at times, not to mention he has been working on this film for this long. Second, the editing is terrible in this film. Although I do understand Avant-Garde, I also understand when there are cuts that are just disjointed and plain bad. There are many points where I have to hit my head and wanted to punch the editor and get an actual editor to do this job correctly. Finally, while the effects are pretty, it is ****ing pointless. I don't care how pretty it is or how memorizing it is, if has nothing to do with the film, then take off the fat and add more meat. A pretty picture is terrible when there is no substance behind it and these special effects are wasted on a film that has N-O-T-H-I-N-G to do with space. You can say that it means something, but that is the exact same thing as putting scribbles all over my wall and say that it represents a criticism of Sigmund Fraud. The dinosaurs were just cringe worth to me because the CGI rendering was so embarrassing for a film made in 2011. Now we are done with the rage, I will say some things I do like; the performances. Although some of the writing isn't...all that good, some of the performances actually did pull it off for me and allowed me to say "I'll let that go because you said that line so well." Also, I liked the family dynamic in this film. It did feel like an actual family of people born during the Vietnam period and the atmosphere, along with the setting, allowed me to feel as though I was going back in time to watch this family. Also, say what you will, I do like a non linear story like this. It doesn’t have a plot, kind of like how Mean Streets and Taxi Driver has a plot; there is stuff going on, but it isn’t all that predictable and the movie is able to breathe instead of being forced to a plot with an antagonist, climax and so on. So when watching this, I felt as though I was watching a family grow and develop and, because of the lack of a plot, it felt as though I can actually stay with this family a bit longer until those space sequences came along. Finally, there was something that I did like, but it did have a personal issue that I have with this film; the representation of grace and nature, or as sociologists, psychologists and philosophers call Nature vs Nurture. This is a major theme of the film and one that I will explain a little bit for the audience that hates this and doesn't understand it in any sense of the word. I was able to see what Terrance Malick was trying to do with the parents, showing different sides of these two subjects that have been used since the beginning of philosophy; the father being the strong and hard part of human life, which is seen as nature and the mother is graceful and hippie~ish, represented as nurture. Both of these two are necessary to show influence to the child, in his perspective, as he grows up to evolve into Sean Penn and we see how this affects his life. This is where I got anger at the space sequences and dinosaur spectacles because it begs the question; how the **** does human nature vs human nurture compare to watching footage of The Universe? Once again, you can argue that you can compare space and dinosaurs to HUMAN nature and nurture; however, it would just go back to what I said earlier about drawing a bunch of scribbles. But, back to what I was saying. It is fine to have that idea presented in a film, it isn't fine when you have an extreme bias towards one of them unless you making this or three two movie series. The mother is always seen as the best thing in the world since sliced bread and I just didn't like her, even though she was hot. She is shown as the likable character and therefore we should see grace as the best thing of humanity. The Brad Pitt character, while I thought was the best written thing about this film, is presented as this unlikable dad towards these children and to the mother. When showing this type of bias towards one side rather than the other, it just shows how problematic this film is. Both nature and nurture are necessary to human life and the movie keeps saying that grace is the right path to go and every time it does, I do this...
That is my main problem with the thing I like about the most. The fact that this film is trying to say something so basic level philosophy and does it to such a bias and lazy degree, especially how it ended. For those of you, I understand why you hate Tree of Life so much because the substance that is there is very contradictory of itself and is so poorly done, on the writing standpoint, even with all of the pretty pointless patting that is going on in the entire film. Besides that, it’s just a bad movie to me. A bit disjointed with what it is presenting to the audience. I’ll go into my “If I were to make it” mode and say this; it would be better if the film made itself into a trilogy of one, the other and then both rather than forcing he two subjects together and having a big bias towards one side of human nature and nurture. But it’s not my film, its Terrance Malick’s. This is just an opinion, so don’t say “Then it won’t be perfect” because it isn’t even close. As I keep saying about any film; a pretty picture is not pretty when there is little or disjointed and contradictory substance in it. I don't care how pretty your film is unless that is the purpose or if you have great storytelling talent to back it up. Tree of Life didn't have that for me and for what was there was fine, although imperfect and disjointed. I do like these types of films that are a symbol to society or a philosophical/psychological idea that hasn’t been presented in the film media before or not that often; however, I just think that it did many of the representations and symbolism in the laziest and most indulgent fashion. Once again, I don't care how pretty it is, it is simply a terribly written and edited attempt at an Avant-Garde film with some terrible editing and pointless effects that have nothing. Absolutely NOTHING to do with the entire ****ing movie! And that’s probably my biggest fault with this movie and the biggest question I had when watching this; did this have to be an Avant-Garde film with pretty effects? Couldn’t it be just a story about a family growing up and going through their lives and throw away the contradictory pseudo-philosophy and space sequences? Again, I completely understand what is there but what is there is beginner level philosophical ideas, terrible dialog and pointless special effects. These are the things that I did like about this film and the stuff that I didn't. The only reason I made it this long is because people on the internet and in my local book store have been asking me day in and day out "Why don't you like Tree of Life? It's a masterpiece!”. The people defending this movie just make me madder than how I feel towards this film. So please, before you comment, I am done with this bad attempt towards an film. I will not comment or say anything to defend my opinion of this film because everything I said is right here. If you are going to compliment, that’s fine, but if you are going to do what I did and type a paper of why I should love this as much as you did, I will delete it. No hatred towards you, I've spent too much of my god damn time talking about this lazily written film. Thank you...now; the rest I don't think will be as long as this. I just wanted to say my full opinion of a devilishly overrated film and get it over with. Thank you for reading and on with the rest of the worst of films of 2011.
OK, so I better explain myself with this film since even I am saying to myself “Why is a Martian Scorsese film in my worst of?” Well, I’ll tell you why; I do not like stories that drag and feel as though they have no purpose throughout most of the film and then decide to make a forced 180 to become nostalgic. When the film tries to use this whole love letter thing, it feels so tacked on that I am even wondering if this is an actual Martian Scorsese film that usually has well developed stories, themes and subplots. The first two thirds of this film were just slow and felt as though nothing was important, even though it was a mystery. I just didn’t feel like there was enough tension and intrigue to make me say “I’ll stick with this film.” But a more “Could you please hurry it up Scorsese?” At about the point where it made that one eighty, I was honestly about to leave because it felt like it was going absolutely nowhere with its story and there was no point in actually watching it any more. I was furious at the first fifteen minutes because of how useless it was to the story and how much it dragged on without much substance behind it. When it changed its story, it just felt indulgent and forced to me. This is because the film had such a jumbling and very disjointed narrative that it just felt really forced when we came to this whole love letter to silent cinema that I watch on a constant basis.. If I were to say the real problem with the story is that it is two hours long where this should have had some trimming of the fat that this film had. Sure, I did like Ben Kinsley’s performance in this movie a lot not to mention Sacha Baron-Cohen actually did a surprisingly great job in his role and I give him kudos for that. The kids themselves…oh yeah, Martian cannot act children. It isn’t the problem that they are bad, with the exception of Mortez’s performance which was hit my forehead bad, but they just had no emotion behind their lines, especially the main character’s performance. When the scene begged for him to emote, he’d just have a blank. Also, I can care less about how pretty a film is if there is nothing really behind it. It is just a heavy indulgence of style over substance that usually doesn’t work and In Hugo, it defiantly didn’t work for me. Hugo had some pretty scenery, but it wasn’t able to mask the film’s lack of substance and storytelling ability to where it became unwatchable and uninteresting. Not to mention, what it is making homage to just make me want to watch again instead of sitting through this film again. This was just a Martin Scorsese film on wrong while trying to feel extremely personal, which brings me to this question; does a personal film instantly make it any good?
6. MelancholiaSay what you will about the special effects and the cinematography and the direction; I do not care. Melancholia is my first Lars Von Trier experience and I said to myself "I'd like to see a brutally dark film where the characters are unlikable while the story is very interesting and well done." I did not get that here. I got a film with many unlikable characters, a Seven Pounds effect of showing the ending before the movie even got started, whining, bitching and me just sitting in my seat ready to leave. I don't mind a story that has characters that are just unlikable or a brutally dark setting. All I care about is if the story and characters are interesting enough for me to stay in my seat until the end of the flick. This did not do that for me; rather, it gave me the exact opposite. I don't care for a pretty light show because it is simply like a painting in that you can just go to the museum and look at it over there rather than waste money to look at it and wait for over an hour for the rest of the film to finish. The orchestra irritated me to no end because it just felt as though Lars was waving his hand like a four year old begging for attention. Although, to come back town to earth for a second, I will say that I liked the party sequences in the film. It felt as though I was in a real wedding with characters with issues that I could just feel their emotions. After the party, I was back into that sequence with me becoming restless in my seat, waiting to leave because I know what is going to happen and when it did, I felt free as a bird to leave the theater. It did feel as though the film restarted and kept me from feeling any kind of emotion. If I would say something I liked in the film, it was Kiefer Sutherland's character and how he nails it perfectly to the end. He was the logical character and the guy that was crazy about how much he had to spend on setting up this honeymoon. Besides that...this defiantly wasn't a good start for watching a Lars Von Trier film and an unbearable film in general, and not just because it was trying to be dark and brutal. Currently, I have Riget, Lars's tv movie as well as Dogville, Breaking the Waves and Dancer in the Dark on my waiting list. If you have more suggestions of films I should watch from the guy, I am happy to take your requests.
5 Super 8
...I hate homage films, especially when they homage something that isn't that good in this fashion. Super 8 tries to take homage to Spielberg films such as Jaws, E.T and Gremlins; however, there are two problems I have with the way J.J Abrams presents this. 1, I have a problem with the way there are two stories that barely no relation to. We spend most of the time with the kid characters while we are smashed into the creature's story which leads to an extremely clumsy and confusing conclusion. Second, JJ Abrams takes a certain part of Spielberg that manipulates the audience, as I said with War Horse earlier; it is dragging you to where you should be on an emotional level and being manipulative in how it is presented as a result. Most stuff in here felt a bit forced in the way that is showing an homage to 80's movies (Speilburg most importantly). The problem with all of this is that it is simply trying to force us into feel an emotion rather than naturally allowing us to feel sympathy, happiness sadness and so on. Sure, it’s well performed, has some good effects; however, the whole presentation of this story simply felt too manipulative and trying to homage something to a point where originality and creativity fall to the ground and I am left feeling a bit irritated and rolling my eyes towards the end of the film.
4. Tinker Tailor Soldier SpySure, there are some good direction and some good performances. Oldman defiantly barriers himself as the role and is very well done, along with Tom Hardy. There is a good story in this film and allows me to think, but it doesn't feel satisfying. The plot points became extremely murky and extremely hard to define the jarring nonlinear narrative. The film basically, for me, falls flat with the fact that it wants to be something to be observed rather than enjoyed. It wouldn’t be that much of a problem for me if the mystery was well presented. Sure, it is well detailed, but I didn’t give two ****s about any of these characters. It doesn’t matter if they’re spies and they themselves aren’t supposed to have any emotion to show they won’t crack and say “I’M THE GUY!” It is a problem when I am not given a single bit of character development, with the exception of Gary Oldman’s think-man character but even then not all that much, the story being jumbled and incomprehensible as is. Without any characters that have enough development for me to care, a story that is so short that it doesn’t have time to develop the characters, a nonlinear plot that is so jumbled that the plot points camouflage themselves to a point where anyone could become confused and an overall sense of feeling like a scanning robot rather than a human being...how am I supposed to care for the film...at all? Without any of these requirements, the film lacks any form of atmosphere and tension that wants to be there for me and becomes a boring, droll and jumbled ride on a flat styrophoam roller coaster ride. Sure, there is some homosexual context that could have been interesting, if it stuck itself throughout the film. It was at the point where they discussed this subject where I just shrugged it off and said out loud “Too late...” It is fine to have a film that has to be observed and studied; however, it is a problem to not be entertaining and still wanting to be considered as a film. I don’t care if it isn’t any action because I love drama and stories of mysteries; I just want to have a film that makes me feel like I am a human being.
3. Transformers 3; Dark SIDE of the Moon AKA Transformers 2; Rise of the Fallen
This is the exact same film with the exact same problem; it is a film, for young immature children, that thinks it is a film for mature adults. I didn't really like my experience watching this film and felt insulted with the terrible images, stereotype bots and so on. Shia Labeouf's character being as irritating as ever, almost compared to Anakin Skywalker, thinking that he is the best thing since Jesus Christ thinking that "Oh, I saved the world!" when he didn't do a goddamn thing but cry to Optimus Prime. I haven’t felt so angry about an action film since Boondocks Saints 2. The plot is extremely incomprehensible, showing once again that either the screenwriter can't write or Michael Bay cannot tell a coherent and engaging story. Speaking of Michael Bay and getting an emotional rise, using the Challenger explosion does not make me feel said...it makes me anger....very very angry....Lets not forget Dee Wang acting like a repetitive moron.From the opening scene I cringed seeing him because I could just feel Michael Bay telling him to do something stupid. All the characters, good or bad, are the comic relief, making the seriousness out the window. Many of the characters, like the gay ninja, are just stereotypes and caricatures. When people are dying in the city, you hear every cheesy one liner that is extremely unnecessary and the jive talking black man that almost made me want to leave the theater. The only good character in this film, ironically, is Patrick Depsy's character. Once again, all the CGI in this film are extremely unrecognizable; jumble mess of robots that have no real rhyme how they transform from robots to humans. The robots, ONCE AGAIN, are the side characters to their own film; all we get is this annoying character played by an actor I want to see do well acting like a prick and getting a job. All of the true emotion of the film is from the robots because they have actual emotions and complexity that is much more than the kid getting a job. Why should I care about this kid getting a job when he is complaining that he quote-unquote "save the world."? And then the Kim Jeon....ohhhh god Kim Giong calling himself Deep Wang while trying to have some deep expository dialog. Then, it is the formula of Transformers 2: No story, little story and a lot of pointless and emotion action sequences in the exact same place as the first movie. The action sequence just felt as though I was watching Revenge of the Sith where the sequence was too damn long and extremely emotionless. The only thing that was actually good about this film was Optimus Prime because his balls dropped a few times in this movie and when they did, I was like "Yes sir! This is getting good again" but then we have to go back to the quote-unquote plot.
2. Bucky Larson
Yes, I did see Jack and Jill this year. I didn't think that it was absolutely terrible because I was expecting it to hate it. I didn't honestly because of Al Puchino's performance and some pretty good make up work. Don't give me wrong, it is bad; however, it doesn't even come CLOSE to Bucky Larson. Bucky Larson goes to new lows on how unfunny and offensive this film is. I should have left when the man got that random blowjob from the goat in the very beginning of the film, but I was brave, so I had to force myself to watch this movie. I should have left when I saw those fake teeth and bowled hair cut, but I had integrity so I kept watching. I almost threw up when Buck Larson literally sprayed out sperm throughout the room, but I kept watching. This film made me sick to my stomach and just insulted to be a human being and kept on watching. Even when the best part of the movie, Don Johnson, made it slightly decent for me didn't save this film for making me sick to my stomach. I just had an expression of discuss and anger throughout watching this movie that I felt like it was trying to suck my balls for a **** you rating. And you know what Bucky Larson? You deserve that **** you rating without the need for a blowjob. This is my LEAST favorite Adam Sandler movie of 2011 and probably one of the least funny films I have ever seen since Disaster Movie
1. Apollo 18
Wow, I never thought I would be forced to sit through these found footage horror films. I never watched Paranormal Activity to be honest; however, it was a Saturday night. I was itching for something to give me some horror and suspense, so I went to see this piece of garbage. I didn't care if it was fiction or not because if the film is that good on its own merits, I can actually go along with it and become entertained by space suspense; something that hasn't been done before, if not very often. Came in, sat down and was pumping myself up for a new experience and...**** this movie. This thing was so extremely lazy with how it handled with not only its premise but how it handled with the found footage thing. First it would be shaky cam, then have professional cameras the back and forth and back and forth. The story itself was extremely boring and just plain stupid; having something that was seen in the trailer becomes the monster of this stupid stupid STUPID STUPID FILM! Now, I haven’t seen poorly established atmosphere and tone to where it just felt boring and unnecessary. Sure, this would have actually went onto my number...6 worst of the year, if that ****ING ENDING DIDN'T MAKE ME SO DAMN ANGRY! I just stood up let my middle finger point at the screen and said "F**K YOUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU!" And stormed out the theater, feeling insulted for watching such garbage as this. The only good thing about it was that it was a prequel to Cloverfield...wait? It wasn't?
0 . Sucker Punch
You guys are wondering why this has the number 0 rather than 1 2 or 3. For me, Sucker Punch is not only my least favorite "film" of the year, but it is one of the most insulting things I have seen in years. Here is why I feel insulted to call Sucker Punch a piece of entertainment; what it represents and how it executes what it represents. Do you guys think this is a love and adoration for women? NO, the women in this story are extremely one dimensional and have no real personality whatsoever. Is it something that pokes fun at men? No, not really because the men in Sucker Punch have the exact same problem and if you are poking fun at men, you will look like a child with no true storytelling creativity. Sucker Punch does not represent either of these and it is quoted when Zack Snyder says "It is Alice in Wonderland with Guns." Sucker Punch is a representation of Monarch Mind Control also known as Beta Kitchen (Here is a link for a better understanding of how it is was done at the time http://secretarcana.com/hiddenknowledge/monarch-programming-mind-co... ). The main reason why you guys didn't see this is because you were looking at the boobies and hearing how it is supposed to "glorify" woman and seeing the bull**** hypocrisy that is. Sucker Punch's main goal is to say this; everything is basically not real and you are under control by someone else and not by yourself. DOES! THAT! SOUND! FAMILIAR?! I did not mind a movie that says something cliché, mind you. It is all about the execution of something to make you watch it or read it over and over again. The problem with Sucker Punch is that it plays this idea to the ground with so many references to Monarch control to the point that it has an antagonistic approach to the viewer. When it is saying this stuff over and over and over again, Sucker Punch adds a little sprinkle of ego to say "HEY! This is a SMART movie about monarch control/beta kitchen! I THINK THIS IS A MASTERPIECE AND I CAN DO WHATEVER THE **** I WANT WITH IT!" in kind of a childish manner; giving it that unlikable viewing that I said a second ago. It is fine to have something to represent mind control with some weird visual experiences, having an engaging story and keeping with the times to allow a type of authenticity to it. When you have robots and a science fiction visual experience to something that was made in the 1960's, there is something that is off with what you are making. Second, the visuals in Sucker Punch were not creative or weird, but they feel really cliche and extremely irritating while the director thinks it is so cool. Finally, the story. Is the story is not interesting because all it is this; a girl's failed attempt to get out of a prison. Just like Melancholia, it straight up tells you the ending and forces you to wait for the end while seeing irritating visual effects, blank characters and constant references to an extremely childish manner while thinking it is so smart while doing this. Sure it represented something, good for you Zack Snyder but did I ever care about this thing? Did I ever think that I would care about these girls? Did I ever give a crap about how pretty you thought these special effects for?...
Every moment on the screen, I felt as though I was watching a four your old thinking that they knew the uncertainty principle and kept showing off that he thought he knew what it possibly meant. That was watching this terrible piece of garbage; a child acting smart to look smart when he is just a dumb little boy. This is the exact reason why I hate Sucker Punch; it is so much smarter than it thinks it is without ever caring for the audience member but how many references to its source material to make it look smarter. The amount of ego that Zack Snyder has when making this just gave me a terrible feeling in my stomach, much worse than how the Human Centipede made me cringe. This just made me snarled at the screen, feeling as though cinema has another one that insults its name. Sucker Punch; a waste of time to make, a waste of time to write, a waste of time to direct and a waste of time to pay a single penny to watch. **** this insult to entertainment, **** Zack Snyder and **** me for watching this thinking that I would be the middle guy that I usually am with these types of things.
Thank you for reading my WORST of 2011. Please Comment for opinions and corrections in my typing. Go (Here>>) for my BEST of 2011.
@All films and videos are owned by their respective companies and therefore, I have no ownership nor do I take ownership.