Last year, when I wrote my “Rejects of 2010” post, it was because I felt it was a year where several pretty decent (not great) films were ignored by general audiences. I thought they deserved a second chance, so I wrote about it. In 2011, this wasn’t too frequent an occurrence. By and large, if there was a good movie out there people decided to go out and see it. (It also helps that movies were pretty darn good in general this year.) There were some exceptions, of course, but when I was searching through the year for movies to defend there weren’t a whole lot that were screaming for my endorsement. And I wasn’t going to just write about how y’all should have seen Warrior for several hundred words. So, I have decided to collect a handful of this year’s box office disappointments both good and bad and judge whether or not their fates were deserved. My definition of “reject” is undoubtedly loose, and even then I’m sure I’ve missed some obvious ones, but here is a look back at some of 2011’s films that simply fell by the wayside.
Anonymous (Dir: Roland Emmerich)
While Anonymous is a rather modest production by Roland Emmerich’s standards, few could have imagined the collective thud that would hit once it was released into theaters. The humorless $30 million period drama about how William Shakespeare was a fraud raked in only $4.5 million in the United States, and critics met it with a casual shrug of the shoulders. Many were (justifiably) turned off by the film’s laughable and borderline-insulting premise, and as a result no one decided to fork over the ticket money. However, Anonymous is actually a bit of a bold departure for Emmerich. A failure, but a departure nonetheless. Instead of focusing the film on action and scale, the focus falls quite squarely on the characters. I have long defended Emmerich’s blockbuster work, such as Independence Day, The Day After Tomorrow, and even—to a point—freaking 2012. I’m genuinely impressed he decided to take a stab at something a bit heavier on the substance. The problem? The substance is crap. Moviegoers agreed.
Does it deserve a second chance? Probably not. This is a project best forgotten.
The Beaver (Dir: Jodie Foster)
In the wake of his recent off-screen behavior, it’s understandable that audiences probably didn’t react with enthusiasm when faced with the option of seeing a movie where Mel Gibson plays a disturbed man with a beaver puppet on his hand. In fact, they were so unenthusiastic that The Beaver didn’t even crack $1 million domestically. Those who did see the film were mostly baffled; it’s a borderline-schizophrenic affair that tries to juggle so many ambitions and emotions at once that it eventually collapses. The film is so strange that I wish more people could have seen it just so they could try and comprehend what Jodie Foster and screenwriter Kyle Killen were going for. It’s Foster’s down-the-middle direction that makes the emotional whiplash all the more jarring, though I’m not sure if there’s a director in existence who could have pulled this one off. The combination of the challenging screenplay and the man in the starring role is undoubtedly what did The Beaver in when it came to public perception.
Does it deserve a second chance? Perhaps. It’s not good, but like I said, its craziness deserves to be seen.
Cowboys and Aliens (Dir: Jon Favreau)
The first time I saw the trailer for Cowboys & Aliens, it was before a midnight screening I was attending of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 1 last fall. The audience seemed intrigued for much of the trailer, and then the title came up. The laughter was deafening. That was the biggest obstacle faced by the film from the outset: the premise is kinda ridiculous. I was never one of the haters, however. I had great respect for everyone involved, and I was convinced that they would be able to make it into a fun popcorn movie. Boy, was I ever unprepared for the humorless slog through the desert that it turned out to be. Combining the respective scowls of Harrison Ford and Daniel Craig, the film wastes everyone on a story that provides them nothing interesting to do. Worse yet is the relationship between Craig and Olivia Wilde, which isn’t even developed to the level of movie logic.
Does it deserve a second chance? No thanks.
The Dilemma (Dir: Ron Howard)
Though it doesn’t quite reach The Beaver-levels of messiness, Ron Howard’s The Dilemma is also an uneasy blend of comedy and drama. It doesn’t help that this one was advertised purely as a wacky Vince Vaughn/Kevin James comedy, even when the film itself winds up not being very funny at all. In reality, there are several scenes when it becomes an incredibly sad story about fidelity and friendship, only to immediately resort back to bad physical comedy seconds later. Audiences have a tendency to reject movies that get this strange and uncomfortable, and that is what happened with The Dilemma. It’s certainly on the trainwreck-y side of things, but there’s some surprisingly strong stuff to be found here, including a shockingly good performance from Kevin James.
Does it deserve a second chance? There are more productive ways to spend your time, but it’s worth a look if you want to see what Kevin James can do if he actually goes for something substantive.
Drive Angry (Dir: Patrick Lussier)
Let’s face it: Nicolas Cage could have made this list four times over. He starred in such illustrious movies this year as Season of the Witch, Trespass and Seeking Justice. None of you have seen any of these, and that likely also goes for his biggest flop of the year: Drive Angry. This big-budget attempt at making an ultraviolent 3-D grindhouse film made just over $10 million domestically, and most critics dismissed it as incredibly dumb. Well, it is. But it has enough cool moments to make me wonder why it didn’t catch on with a more substantial audience. In an alternate universe, Drive Angry is a cult classic. In this one, it’s a movie that was forgotten as soon as it was released. It’s not a great movie, but I can’t shake the feeling it deserved slightly better.
Does it deserve a second chance? Yeah, why not? At its best, it’s a lot of bloody fun.
Everything Must Go (Dir: Dan Rush)
People like Will Ferrell movies, and in insanely silly comedies he’s normally a box office force to be reckoned with. However, people are much less interested when he goes for the more dramatic angle. Such is the case with Everything Must Go, an incredibly slight indie movie that I’ve pretty much forgotten ever since I saw it last spring. It’s harmless, mostly, and I remember it’s about Ferrell living on his front lawn after his wife leaves him. Other than that, I got nothing. However, Ferrell did give a pretty terrific performance as an alcoholic, disturbed man in need of some guidance, and for that reason alone I wish it was more successful. Anchorman and The Other Guys are great and all, but Ferrell is capable of more if you give him the chance.
Does it deserve a second chance? Sure, go check it out. As you can tell, it leaves quite an impression.
Fright Night (Dir: Craig Gillespie)
As much as I disliked this year’s remake of Fright Night—and, oh lord, did I dislike it—I must admit I’m quite surprised it bombed at the box office. Perhaps it’s because the film revolves around two things that people are burned out on: vampires and 3-D. I can’t blame them, either. Apart from a couple performances, there isn’t all that much about Fright Night that seems to merit much praise. Yet much to my surprise, critics in general seemed to like it quite a bit. I found it tiring, and the unenthusiastic audience response seems to back me up on this one. It occasionally makes fun of the fact that it’s just another vampire movie, but it still just ends up being another vampire movie. Also: the 3-D was horrific.
Does it deserve a second chance? No. People rejected it for a reason.
Green Lantern (Dir: Martin Campbell)
In a year full of comic book movies, there were bound to be a couple that wound up as victims of the public’s superhero fatigue. Luckily, the film audiences chose to ignore was one of the worst of the bunch: Green Lantern. Yeah, the film has all that ugly, green, weightless CGI. But that is a problem easily ignored with a good script. Unfortunately, director Martin Campbell and star Ryan Reynolds were given some pretty horrific material to work with. The Green Lantern is a pretty silly and uninteresting superhero to begin with, and this film does absolutely nothing to fix that. It plays entirely by the rules of the origin story without taking any measures to make it interesting. Despite the failure of Green Lantern, the studio seems dead set on making a sequel that they claim will be “darker and grittier.” Because, yeah, that was the problem. Excuse me while I roll my eyes.
Does it deserve a second chance? A million times no.
The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo (Dir: David Fincher)
Released at any other time, David Fincher’s American adaptation of The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo might have earned more money at the box office. Instead, the studio decided to release it in the same week as both new Spielberg movies, Mission: Impossible – Ghost Protocol, Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows and just about everything else. As this is an R-rated thriller with some explicit sex and violence, it was doomed to fall by the wayside. (It doesn’t help that there was already a Swedish version that made a crap ton of money overseas, so the international market was mostly uninterested.) Yes, the book series is popular, but I was never convinced it was popular enough to merit the rather huge budget that Fincher and company got to spend. Plus, some readers probably just decided they didn’t need to see some of the more violent moments played out onscreen.
Does it deserve a second chance? If you’re unfamiliar with the material, you’ll be pleased with this efficient and effortlessly watchable adaptation. The real question is whether it will make any noise at the Oscars, which may give it the audience it never got theatrically. Heck, there's a chance that in a few years time I'll be wondering why it made this list.
Sucker Punch (Dir: Zack Snyder)
Sucker Punch is perhaps this year’s most talked-about flop, and deservedly so. It’s a unique film from front to back, though at almost no point is this a good thing. When I first saw the movie in theaters, I was overcome with rage. Did I really just pay money to see an upsetting look inside the psyche of Snyder’s inner 12-year-old boy? At the time, it just seemed like a pointless assault on my eyes and ears, and based on the reviews and box office receipts most of America felt the same way. (Though it has its defenders.) It doesn’t help that the version that made it to theaters was missing many of the scenes that actually gave you a look inside the method to Snyder’s uncontrollable madness. When it reached the screen, all that was left were the most infuriating parts. The saga of Sucker Punch remains one of the most fascinating failures of the year.
Does it deserve a second chance? I don’t like either version very much, but if you’re going to check it out I encourage you to see the Director’s cut. Only after watching that scene did I begin to understand it, if not like it.
Take Me Home Tonight (Dir: Michael Dowse)
If your movie was filmed all the way back in 2007, shelved for four years, and then dumped into theaters in early March 2011, chances for success is not very high. Such is the case of Take Me Home Tonight, an ’80s nostalgia comedy that seems out of place in just about every way. It’s no surprise: the film is less interested in being funny than it is in reminiscing about how awesome everything was 30 years ago, and believe it or not those kinds of movies don’t have much of an audience among the younger crowd. Most kids don’t want to watch films about the era when their parents were in their prime. Take Me Home Tonight has a few funny moments, and Topher Grace would be charming as a serial killer, but that audiences passed up so minor a project is no surprise at all.
Does it deserve a second chance? If given the choice between this and, say, an episode of Work It, I’d go with this ten times out of ten. A ringing endorsement, I know.
Warrior (Dir: Gavin O’Connor)
Every once in a while a film will flop that makes me realize that sometimes, I don’t understand you people. Yes, I sympathize with your tiring of the underdog sports film. But why must you take it out on so perfect an example of what the genre can do well? Warrior is formulaic, sure, but few movies this year have pulled formula off so well. Everything about this movie would suggest a huge box office hit, but you all decided to blow your money on other things. Like food? And shelter? For shame, America. For shame.
Does it deserve a second chance? Yes. This baby’s as close to a sure thing as you’re ever going to see.
Your Highness (Dir: David Gordon Green)
Believe it or not, there isn’t normally a huge audience for R-rated stoner comedies. Pineapple Express, the first film of David Gordon Green’s artistic transition, was the exception and not the rule. Your Highness proves that in order to attract a sizable audience, you’re going to have to do this kind of thing well. This one is just dumb and shapeless, and as a result there isn’t a whole lot for audiences to connect to. Sometimes for a film to be great, the cast and crew has to go through a great ordeal to get it made. Everyone involved with Your Highness seems like they spent a vast majority of their time on set just giggling and goofing around, and the audience—not in on the joke—is left out in the cold. That does not normally make for box office success.
Does it deserve a second chance? I think we’re all just better off forgetting this one.
Thanks for reading! My choices for the best and worst movies of 2011 will be posted in the next several days.
No comments:
Post a Comment