I won't lie to you. From the off I was dubious of this film due to Letterman's previous film history. Being most notable for his direction of Shark Tale (2004) and Monsters vs Aliens (2009), this film didn't strike me as a potential Oscar Nominee. In fact, the only thing I remember from either of the previous films was that the Fresh Prince made a terrible fish. But I'm not reviewing that catastrophe, so I'll continue reviewing this one instead.
Firstly, the cast. Being the Hollywood giant he is (no pun intended), this film was off to a great start with regards to casting Jack Black as the intrepid adventurer Lemuel Gulliver. Who could resist the bubbly wit of such charismatic man, in a family film, (supposedly) ramped up with comedy? The main issue however was that the production team and scriptwriters clearly forgot one thing. Jack Black is Jack Black. There is no getting away from this fact. He will do whatever he wants to create the exact same character in every film he has ever been in. At least this made sense in School of Rock. Here however it just clashed with various other famous comedians, all imposing their egos on the poor audience. I'll list a few:
 |
| I don't blame you for scowling at them. |
1) Billy Connolly - The King of Liliput. I can only imagine the monetary woes Billy must be going through to have agreed to do this film. I know it seems unlikely, especially regarding the fact he has such riches from a long and glorious career, but I can't think of any other reason why he'd agree to play this role. He gets peed on by Jack Black for Christ's sake! He's such a good actor in other things such as Muppets Treasure Island, The Man who Sued God and The X Files film where he played a paedophile priest, so it's not as though this was a brief cameo by a famous face. He's done serious work in the past so it seriously disappointed me that he has had to lower himself to do this. Poor man.
2) Catherine Tate - Queen of Blah Blah. Who really gives a damn about her? Honestly? She's a terrible actress, she isn't funny and there is nothing in this film that involves her without her overacting in such a ridiculous way. She is just awful. Doesn't stop her trying to steal the limelight though.
3) James Cordon - Someone inconsequential. Good. Frankly, I was quite pleased that he wasn't involved too much as I don't particularly like him either. Lesbian Vampire Killers was dire and I didn't want him anywhere near the camera at any point of this, just in case he opened his mouth and said something.
I'll stop. There really is only so much crap you can take from the cast. On paper it sounds amazing, but putting lots of comedians together onscreen and expecting them to play nice is never going to work. It's like putting a bucket of scraps in the middle of a pigsty and expecting the porkers to cue up for their share. It won't happen, they'll fight for every drop they can get at the detriment of everyone and everything (in this case, the credibility of the film).
 |
| No really. She did. |
Right, the heroine to the hero, Amanda Peet (yes that woman who exposed herself to Chandler in The Whole Nine Yards and never lived it down in her career). The now not-so-young Amanda plays Darcy Silverman, editor to Gulliver and love-interest. That's about it. Her character goes nowhere, doesn't develop, does essentially nothing and then does some more nothing. There's not much I can really say except that once again, Miss Peet was terrible. You can't base an entire career on looking good (at least not in the film world). I honestly can't describe how one-dimensional and predictably wooden she is in the film so I guess I'll just move on.
 |
| Even he looks disappointed at the casting team's choice. |
The villain: General Edward. Casting team, I ask you this: why when casting the villain, would you choose a lovely Irish comedian, known for his soft nature? It's like casting Roger Rabbit in the role of Al Capone. Why the hell would you do it? Chris O'Dowd made his name in comedy as the surly but lovable scamp, Roy from Channel 4's hit series The IT Crowd. I'm sorry, but giving him evil-looking facial hair doesn't change this fact. He is, and always will be a nice guy. Occasionally frustrated enough to have a bit of an impotent rant, but nothing more. Give him a coffee and a hug and I expect he'll sing you his favourite song from Guitar Hero. Production teams of the future, do us all a favour and cast this man forever more as the lovable protagonist who likes to have little digs at people when no-one can hear him. He would not only excel at this, but chances are that would also make a good movie. Who needs plot lines when you have good characters?
On that topic, apparently this one (though of course no-one told anyone that this film had no good characters either). At no point in this film did I sit there and think that the scriptwriters did a good job. For the first 10 or so minutes I had to sit through painfully obvious suggestions that Jack Black's character would never be a "big man" and other such drivel. Here is a message just for you people who wrote this crap: WE GET IT. WE KNOW HE'S GOING TO BE A GIANT. STOP DROPPING HINTS THAT ARE AS SUBTLE AS A BRICK TO THE BACK OF THE HEAD. And another thing whilst I'm on this topic, when you're trying to be poignant, try to write something that makes a modicum of sense. Ending on the supposedly wisdom-filled line of 'There's no small jobs - just small people.' defied belief. What does that even mean?! I can't make any sense of this whatsoever. It's like you looked at what you wrote, took one or two choice themes ("Um, he's writing a big report to get a promotion and win the heart of a girl in the office, and it's filled with tiny people. How can we link them?"), failed to find any connection whatsoever, so decided to stick them together anyway in some useless pseudo-wordplay. Let me re-write this in context of the actual film: "There's no such thing as difficult office jobs, just lots of small people in a mystical island somewhere." Congratulations. You're all idiots.
 |
| He liked what he saw in there. |
The only redeeming feature of this entire fiasco are the effects. I'm assuming after paying for Mr Black, most of the remaining budget went on the SFX department because there is more CGI rendering in this than the last Shrek film. There isn't more I can really say about this besides the use of green-screen. It's pretty seamless and I won't lie, the weather effects during the storm are pretty impressive to say the least. Oh, and the best bit about the film was this guy. Joe Lo Truglio. He's a venerable actor, having been in many comedies such as the recently released Paul, Superbad, Hitch, Rolemodels, Pineapple Express... The list goes on. However, his character title and credit was "Butt-Crack Man" for being sat on by Jack Black. That was his entire 5 minute role in this bad, bad movie, and you know what? He did a good job. Five stars to you, sir.
Now comes the worst part. The last few minutes of this film are cringe-worthy. I'll avoid spoilers but it was quite clear Jack Black ensured in his contract that this would happen. A big musical number with him singing in characteristic style, War by Edwin Starr with everyone dancing and joining in with the singing. I can only explain how I feel about this film truly, by borrowing a lyric from said song. "What is it good for? Absolutely nothing..."
No comments:
Post a Comment