Latest Reviews

Entries in Columbus Short (2)


The Losers

Hollywood ran out of ideas years ago. Movies, a medium heralded for originality and inventiveness, have lost those trademark qualities. The latest craze is to snatch up the rights to as many comic book series as they can and pump them out before the novelty of watching our favorite superheroes onscreen fades away. So what do you do when you run out of your Batmans and Supermans and Iron Mans? You reach way down and bring forth a property nobody has ever heard of or cares about. Such is the case with The Losers.

The Losers (played by Jeffrey Dean Morgan, Chris Evans, Idris Elba, Columbus Short and Oscar Jaenada) are a ragtag group of men, soldiers who fight for what’s right, and at the outset of the film they find themselves in Bolivia targeting a man who they think is up to no good. They order an air strike, but then they see a group of 25 children being escorted into the area. They have eight minutes until the bomb drops, so they do what they do best and head down quickly to save the kids. When their rescue helicopter arrives, there isn’t enough room for both them and the kids, so they decide to stay behind and let the children go to safety, but then a rocket comes out of nowhere and blows them all up. It was meant for them, so they fake their deaths and find themselves stuck overseas with no way home. That is until a sexy woman named Aisha (Zoe Saldana) makes a deal with them: she will get them home in exchange for their help in killing Max (Jason Patric). As it turns out, Max is responsible for the helicopter explosion intended for them, so they agree.

The story of The Losers isn’t a case where some issues needed to be resolved because its issue is that the story isn’t even really there. So much is left unexplained that you never truly get a grasp on the situation at hand. Who is Max, really? Is he CIA? Is he working for a corrupt government? Or is he merely an every day evildoer carrying out his own diabolical plan? The former is alluded to, but the latter seemed more applicable given the information shown.

Max wants a highly dangerous weapon that is capable of disintegrating anything in its wake, known only as the snuke, but why? Is the government trying to start a war and the film is trying to make some allegory to current times? I don’t give it that much credit. At its core, it’s another silly comic book adaptation that delivers sporadic thrills and thinks it is way cooler than it really is. For every amusing one liner, there were five terrible jokes carried by its too-cool-for-school hipster attitude.

The only person in the entire film that seems to be having any fun with his character is Jason Patric. He’s one of those seemingly non-threatening bad guys who get by not on their brute strength or keen intellect, but by their cold, soulless disregard for human life, as seen by his brutal (yet hilarious) killing of a woman shading him with an umbrella who, thanks to a sudden burst of wind, accidentally allows the sun to reach his skin.

As far as the actual filmmaking process outside of the performances and poor script development goes, it’s an uneven blend of awesome action and excruciatingly boring exposition. The film opens and ends with a bang, but everything in between fizzles due to a lack of cohesion.

It would be an easy joke to say that The Losers loses, but it’s just not that simple. The movie is neither excellent nor tedious. It’s merely tolerable. Maybe it’s the fact that my expectations going in were low, but it worked for me despite some significant problems and it’s just fun enough to recommend.

The Losers receives 2.5/5


Death at a Funeral

Rarely does a movie come along that is so funny you laugh until you can't breathe. The British 2007 comedy Death at a Funeral is one of those rarities. While a lot of British humor is hit and miss with American audiences, Death at a Funeral successfully bridged that gap and made itself accessible to everyone domestic and abroad. The remake can only wish to attain that status. It tries hard, but ultimately this Americanized Death at a Funeral feels like a shoddy rehash of the wonderful original.

The film stars Chris Rock as Aaron, the oldest son of his recently deceased father. Today is his burial day and the turnout is great. Everyone from his family, as well as many of his friends, have all shown up to give him a fond farewell. Among them are his brother Russell (Danny Glover), his author son Ryan (Martin Lawrence), his nephew (Columbus Short), his niece Elaine (Zoe Saldana) and her boyfriend Oscar (James Marsden). But thanks to some hallucinogenic drugs and a little person named Frank (Peter Dinklage), who claims to have had some, shall we say, uncouth rendezvous with him, his funeral is about to get a little more zany than the usual.

Death at a Funeral follows its British predecessor to the letter. The writer, Dean Craig, penned both scripts, though it really seems more like a copy and paste job than a whole new script in and of itself. This version follows the original, quite literally, scene by scene and rehashes the exact same jokes word for word. There are minor differences here and there, but by and large this is the same movie.

Which is to say the writing is brilliant. The absurd twists and turns both movies make are delightful and work despite their inherent goofiness. The writing takes a morbid subject and somehow wrings laughs out of a period normally set aside for grieving.

Or at least that's how the original worked. What this remake proves is how crucial comedic delivery is to a film. Despite using the same jokes that came from the same writer who more or less used the same script, this version of the film lacks laughs because the actors simply aren't up to the challenge. Rock is a poor replacement for Matthew Macfayden, who played his part in the original. Macfayden brought the character to life. He played him in a soft spoken kind of way. You could tell he was grieving over his father and in distress by the crazy events unfolding around him. All he wanted was to get the day over with and move on. Rock doesn't do that. You never sense that he, or any other attendee for that matter, is grieving in any way. He stands up there and does his usual schtick better suited for a stand-up routine, but never brings any depth to his character. Most actors fall into this category.

That is except for James Marsden. Playing the role Alan Tudyk knocked out of the park in the original, Marsden breaks from the monotony of the rest of the cast and switches his performance up. Rather than simply mimicking the cast of the original, he is allowed to roam free and be as goofy as he wants. Being the unfortunate victim of an accidental acid hit doesn't hurt of course, but nevertheless he plays his part wonderfully and produces the most laughs of anyone in the film.

But that doesn't change the fact that this is simply an inferior product to the original. Contrary to last week's Date Night, which had bad writing, but was saved by excellent performances from two hilarious leads, Death at a Funeral has terrific writing, but is hurt by poor performances from actors who don't know what to do with their characters. I wouldn't say I hated this Americanized remake, but why would I recommend it when I can simply point readers to the far superior original?

Death at a Funeral receives 2.5/5