Escape to the Movies: The Expendables

[JackRyan64]

Didn't plan on seeing this one anyone. I tend to not like mindless action movies. If I want to watch splosions and gunfights for a few hours I could be controlling the fights and splosions by playing any recent video game really. Action in movies needs to complement the story.

 

[irjerry3]

I'm happy to see the nerd rage on full display here but you should stop censoring your videos, its a combo breaker in the fullest and your on the same site as fucking yahtzee. just my little gripe.

 

[Shale_Dirk]

Can't we just watch a bad movie without going and tearing it apart for not being good?

Here's the problem people:

MB is a critic. The Expendables is just that: expendable. (And I really can't believe nobody has made that joke/statement yet) It is a mindless action flick built on cliche and cash-in, with bad cinematography, watered-down characters, and no real purpose other than "HEY LOOK WE HAVE LOTS OF FAMOUS MUSCLES IN THIS ONE. MONEY PLZ". Bob is completely in the right by saying that it is a terrible movie, for it is his job. If Movie Bob had said otherwise, I don't believe I would have been able to continue to watch his series.

The fact that this movie did so well is backed by a "low" in an already lackluster summer movie schedule, a worldwide release date (as opposed to Scott Pilgrim's staggered release dates), and this being one of the last weekends of the summer, and as a result a good chance for people to go out with friends and see something mindless. The fact is that at the end of the day, The Expendables is MINDLESS. YOU ARE KNOWINGLY AND WILLINGLY WATCHING A MOVIE THAT IS TERRIBLE. And then you're complaining about it when a critic calls you a sheep. Guess what...if you were offended by the comment, you're probably a sheep, and you are the reason that the rest of us have to put up with shit movies like this in the first place. TBH, I will likely eventually watch this, but not in theaters, and very not likely at any expense of my own. They don't deserve my money.

People getting butthurt about MB not making any comments as to why it was terrible, I defer to the comments he made in the Scott Pilgrim review:

The action is incomprehensible and mostly-bloodless. No one gets any character stuff that plays to their strengths, they're all interchangeable. In fact, that's probably how Action Movie History will remember this weekend: 8/13/2010 - the weekend where the Michael Cera movie had better hand-to-hand fighting scenes than the one with Jason Statham and Jet Li. It's NOT a "tribute" to bad 80s action movies, it's just a bad 2010 movie. If I could hire a sky-writer to warn whole hemispheres not to waste their money on it, I would.

What frustrates me about the people who are refusing to see Scott Pilgrim (and don't all "FANBOY" on me; I haven't seen it, nor have I read the comics, etc, so don't bother), is the Micheal Cera hate. I get it: he gets cast in alot of movies where he plays an awkward teen. However, if my research is correct, the role he is playing in SP is one of a bit of an asshole, a la his alternate personality in Youth in Revolt. That alternate personality was by far the funniest part about that movie, so I'm still at least willing to see the movie to see how it works out.

It's so hypocritical that the overall argument about The Expendables vs. SP is "How dare you call me a sheep for seeing a shit movie that has Terry Crews/Stallone/Jet Li/Statham etc.! No I don't want to see Scott Pilgrim. I heard it's pretty good, but I just hate that Michael Cera guy. If you see that movie you're nothing but a sheep."

ANY day of the week, I would rather see a good movie with a meh actor than a terrible movie with a great actor(s).

 

[Cherry Cola]

He said that anyone who likes the idea of a film going to the roots of 80s action films is the worst kind of person. That is what the Expendables is.

I seem to recall him saying that if you believe that movies were ruined by modernization and that we should've stuck with hyper-masculine bullet-fests forever, you're the worst kind of person. Y'know, like the kind of people that get indignant over the idea of a female protagonist in an action movie, and are literally perplexed by any added layers of depth or complexity. They sound kinda dickish to me, but I guess I'd be an elitist in saying so.

He did not say that if you thought movies were ruined by modernization you're the worst kinda person. He just said that if you prefer 80s action shlock before more modern action you're the worst kind of person. I believe that what you consider to be him insulting people who dislike modern action, I consider to be him being very patronizing to people who prefer 80s action shlock, generalizing them as people stuck in an inferior past.

I've taken both of our perspectives into consideration, and I must say that I find your point of view to be less plausible. If your point of view is correct, then all he's saying is that The Expendables only caters to people who hate modern action films and want everything to return to action movies of the 80s. That means Bob thinks there aren't any other people in the world who would want to see an 80s-esque action film, which is where I think this argument falls apart.

On the other hand, he could simply be generalizing people who want more of the 80s in terms of action, exactly like he generalizes anyone who went to see The Expendables over Scott Pilgrim by calling them sheep.

And even if you are right, his behavior is still not acceptable. Remember, this is the guy who claims that we all need to stop being elitist nerds looking down on others that don't share our interests, and now he's insulting people over not liking a film he liked?

Okay, this is clearly jumping out in front of a bullet that wasn't specifically meant for you. In previous reviews, MovieBob made his case that creative films are on the decline because the economy sucks, and they can't afford to take risks, so they go with what's safe: an incredibly generic formula that does next to nothing new. He's not mad because people have the gall to have differing tastes, he's mad because the skyrocketing sales of bland, "safe" movies (like this one) encourage investors to squelch creative offerings in favor of funding boring, stale movies that are guaranteed to bring in a profit because they appeal to the lowest common denominator. Meanwhile, the few creative movies that do get released are absolutely crushed in the box office by the "safe" movies, and that's a slap on the wrist of everyone who took a chance on something new and exciting; specifically, one that screams "HEY DUMBASS, NEXT TIME PUT YOUR MONEY WITH THE SURE WINNER AND NEVER DO THIS AGAIN." I doubt he has anything against people that watched, or even against people who enjoyed the movie.

That still shows him off as a hypocrite. He did after all say that we nerds need to stop looking down on people for not wanting to go see the films we consider more creative or better than the latest blockbuster.

And what did he expect? It doesn't matter how creative Scott Pilgrim is, the people that are actually interested in the premise is in an incredibly small demographic. And what part of Scott Pilgrim's marketing made it look creative and interesting? I've seen trailers, and all it looks like to me is a movie with flashing lights trying to be a more lighthearted Tron.

The last people that deserve hatred for this is the movie going public. Why should they be insulted because they:

1) Don't want to watch a movie that is not for them

2) Don't have interest in a film that hasn't done enough to catch their attention.

3) Rather go with their gut feeling than listen to reviewers.

None of these options deserve the hatred and insults Movie Bob dishes out in this review.

Rather, his frustration seems to stem from the fact that films like this have a virtual stranglehold on the market because success is determined by sales figures, and those sales have to come from somewhere. It's like calling gamers sheep if they all went and spent money on nothing but Halo, ensuring that it would have a million sequels and funding for all other games that don't focus on a floating gun of doom on a ring world would be effectively revoked entirely so that developers could dump their money on the Halo bonfire. The market would go stagnant, and the few gems that do pop up here and there would be relatively ignored. You wouldn't be mad at people because they don't happen to like the few gems that you do, you'd be mad at the fact that they're enabling such stagnation. I wouldn't advise taking that so personally.

Scott Pilgrim's failure won't mean that creative films will sell less. When did Scott Pilgrim market itself as "A creative movie"? It never did. It marketed itself as sort of an action movie for video game nerds with the obligatory teenage romance thrown in there, something that is VERY alienating for some people. The only thing that will happen now that it fails is that people will decide that making movies based on comic books that aren't incredibly well-known and that are targeted for demographics that aren't very large isn't a good move. And that's how it's supposed to work. If Movie Bob wants people to watch movies that aren't meant for them just so that Hollywood will make more films that aren't meant for them, he is asking people for a lot.

Besides, ranting about how the chances of creative movies being made are lowered feels kinda pointless when Inception did so well in box office and critically. And Inception wasn't alienating anyone, it was targeted to a very large audience. It proved that movies don't have to take so immense risks like Scott Pilgrim did just so they can be creative.

And I have a final pointer I really should have brought up sooner: The Expendables has now helped prove that making R rated films isn't a risky business. That means that A LOT of films we might really want (like comic book films) don't have to pussy out on action or themes. Weren't it for films like The Expendables, Watchmen might not have been made with the same flair it had, if it would even be made at all. I think that's worth to be put into consideration.

Granted, he didn't make any of that terribly clear in this particular review, but I think he'd assumed that the talking points he'd made in his previous ones would carry over.

His attitude is still pretty inexcusable to me. He did say nerds shouldn't lose their cool over the masses going to see a blockbuster instead of a film that doesn't interest them, yet here we have him flaming about.

[sub]Sorry about the time it took to reply, you really forced me to think quite a bit there. I applaud your wit[/sub]

 

[Axolotl]

-snip-

Just for the record when complaining about a movie and insulting it and people who like it saying you didn't see it ruins all your credability.

 

[Shale_Dirk]

-snip-

Just for the record when complaining about a movie and insulting it and people who like it saying you didn't see it ruins all your credability.

A) If you can't respond with proper spelling or grammar, your opinion is likely not that important.

B) I've seen excerpts. I do generally try to inform myself before I go out and piss on everything. I didn't feel like I needed to expand on that, but here we are anyway.

EDIT- on another note, I'm interested whether SP will have bigger sales in the coming weeks as it releases worldwide.

 

[Cherry Cola]

I could barely finish watching this review. Took a lot of strength.

I can't believe Bob this week. We are obedient sheep because we go see one of the biggest collaboration films this decade instead of watching a film that was barely advertised in many places? We are the worst kind of people on earth because we like the premise that a movie will be an homage to 80s action films?

He dropped the ball on this review. Insulting a film is one thing, insulting someone for liking it is another, but insulting people for thinking the premise sounds like a fun idea?. That's a new low. I won't even go into how much I disagree with you on the quality of the film.

For someone who tries to hinder people from being elitist nerds, you are one of the biggest elitist nerds I've seen in quite a while.

That was his whole rant though - it was a movie that was marketed as an homage to what most of us grew up watching. Period. The actual movie was the worst kind of movie, but because of the marketing it topped the box office.

You even support that when you ask, "We are obedient sheep because we go see one of the biggest collaboration films this decade instead of watching a film that was barely advertised in many places?" It's just difficult not to bring that sentence up, because of how it undercuts your your own position. Implicitly stating that a movie isn't worth your time because it's not advertised doesn't bode well for the rest of your argument.

I for one would love to see a homage to cheesy 80's movies I grew up with. I watch Total Recall at least once a month. Actually come to think of it I did see a movie that hit every piece on my homage checklist - The A-Team.

I'm not saying it isn't worth my time, I'm saying it hasn't proved it is worth my time.

And the Expendables wasn't marketed as just an homage. It was marketed as, like I said, a collaboration with some of the biggest action stars ever. When I first heard the casting for the Expendables, I didn't know it was going to be an homage to 80s films, yet in that instance I knew I had to watch it, because it would be a once in a life time experience. The homage to the 80s was just the perfect icing on the cake.

On the other hand, Scott Pilgrim did barely anything to appeal to people. It didn't have a very interesting premise (teenage romance and video games? That ain't a seller) and it didn't have good marketing. The Expendables had an incredible premise and was marketed enough so that people knew that this was a film you needed to see, good or bad.

 

[Instinct Blues]

I think somebody is a just a little angry that Scott Pilgram Vs. The World got its little nerdy ass kicked at the box office. But I mean come on what did you really expect a movie about a comic book with tons of of nostalgic video game references and hipster douchebags running around saying how horrible their lives are when they get to be in a band and hang out all the time to do that well. I bet 10 years from now MovieBob will look back and fondly remember watching the Expendables. In my opinion he went in there mind already filled with rage because he already knew that it spanked Scott Pilgram Vs. The World at the box office. So he sat in his seat before the previews even came up actively hating the movie and every time something cool happened he had to tell himself it was lame. Its kind of like when a friend hypes up a band for you so much that its annoying and when you finally listen all you do the whole time is actively hate it until its over just so you can tell your friend hey your favortie band sucks and make them feel bad for annoying you.

Scott Pilgrim Vs The World's biggest downfall is that they cast Michael Cera as Scott Pilgram probably the world's most hated actor because he represents everything people hate about Gen Y. Not to mention its like he plays the same character in every role, so some people won't see the movie just because of him. Another thing is that the ads are very straight forward on what its about so people over 30 won't want to see it because they have no interest in seeing a movie filled with ancient video game references. Now that leaves Scott Pilgram Vs. The World with a very,very narrow age range of people who will actually want to see it from the ages of 18-25. Now thats just a rough estimate of ages but I can't see it appealing to someone much younger or older which is why Scott Pilgram Vs. The World made less money because it was aimed at a very specific audience. If you want to blame someone for people not seeing it MovieBob blame the studio.

 

[Nautical Honors Society]

Yea I new that movie was going for the whole "But dude there is sick action! Who cares if it's good blah blah blah zzzzzz" thing. Im glad it's crap.

OT: Hey Bob yea it is true that Keanu Reeves is good in some roles (A Scanner Darkly), but that doesn't mean he is a "very good actor in some roles". To be a very good actor in any use of the phrasing you need to be able to be good in anything, you must have range.

Hell, I am a very good marathon runner in some footraces...yea ya know the ones where is is just me running from my living room to my kitchen...

 

[almostgold]

Expendables was an awesome movie. Sorry, but it was.

 

[Squigie]

This is what the "It's a popcorn flick!" crowd are not getting. There are other reasons to dislike a mindless action movie besides it not being incomprehensible and French, like it being a bad mindless action movie. Another thing to remember is just because you enjoyed a movie does not make it good.

But the thing is this isn't a bad mindless action movie. It isn't a great action movie and it has its flaws. But it is good, the dialog is surprisingly good at times and never really drops to truly awful levels. And the action scenes are good mainly, Jet Li's big fight sucks but the finale is brilliant.

I think I should state that I wouldn't place you in the aforementioned group because you have actual reasons for liking the movie instead of giving it a complete pass on criticism because of its genre.

Comparing Bob's review with Spoony and the Cinema Snob's, it seems like the Expendables is a pretty poor action movie that only gets a pass if you're jonesing for some Stalone. It's not Smash Bros. or Tatsunoko vs. Capcom, it's not even Warriors Orochi, but you might have a good time anyway.

Spoony didn't know what the hell he was talking about in that review and while the Snob was probably blinded somewaht by nostalgia he did get the movie.

I thought Spoony got the movie quite clearly, he just thought it failed at what it was doing. He bitched quite a bit about the plot, but it seemed what he was getting at was that it was both bad and didn't know well enough to stay out of the way. Another major point was the overuse of shaky cam and quick cut-aways, which Bob also touched on, and that's a clear sign to me to file a movie under "forget about it". When I watch an action movie I want to see the action, not a bunch of motion blur and long close-ups of some guy grimacing.

 

[HotFezz8]

so he dislikes this movie, but htinks he will enjoy "pirahanas"??

and he liked "scott pilgrim etc etc"?

im beginning to think movie bob and i are beginning to differ in our tastes.

for fuck sake movie bob your reviewing films for the movie going public, it won't all be arthouse. try to find something nice to fucking say about it. even yahtzee managed that with "popular things are normally popular for a reason".

let down.

 

[Liquid Paradox]

Look, Bob. I've defended you more than I need have, you're probably one of my favourite movie critics but please, for the love of God, accept that not every movie has to be this artistic piece, with amazing acting, original set pieces and have an important message behind them. Some movies are just meant to be enjoyable to sit through. Salt was this and you appeared to like that even if there were two reasons attached to Jolie that probably helped your opinion along the way.

And please, stop stating that everyone who likes a movie you don't is worthless. Transformers, Book of Eli, and now Expendables - some people just like to sit through a movie that's brainless. Whilst they're not that good, stating that everyone who likes them is pretty much wrong is just arrogant and pretentious.

Not everyone who likes bad action movies is this douchebag frat boy, who can't tell the difference between an etch-a-sketch and a Da Vinci. Just accept that occasionally people don't see things the way you do, because you're starting to become insufferable.

Yes. yes. yes. I love movie bob, he seems like a smart guy with a pretty good taste in movies, but I am frankly sick and tired of being repeatedly insulted by him. Got news for you, movie bob: I very thoroughly enjoyed both the transformers movies. It was stupid, mindless fun, sure. But still fun. I also liked Scott Pilgrim. Uh oh, I don't fit into your perfect little view of good taste (aka your taste) and Knuckle draggers, do I? Stop insulting the audience like the insufferable prick you can be, and focus on tearing apart the movies themselves. Perhaps then I will stop doubting everything you say.

 

[Tdc2182]

Me and my friends almost got kicked out of the theatre we were laughing so hard.

 

[Instinct Blues]

For all those who say Bob became an elitist critic: The A-Team should probably be considered your typical dumb action movie, but it's good at it, and Bob acknowledged that. The main difference between Bob and most mainstream film critics, is that he gets our generation, he knows when a movie is supposed to be critized with "quality cinema" in mind, and when it's just for fun. So when he says a dumb action movie is bad, I f*cking take his word. So should you.

No surprisingly I like to form my own opinions on something and I won't let some internet critic tell me otherwise. But you can go right ahead follow MovieBob into the nerd war he wants to wage all because his precious Scott Pilgram Vs. The World got its ass kicked in the box office. This review was clearly done out of spite hes angry that more people want to see The Expendables when who wouldn't after seeing it has every action star known to man in it. I mean I bet you could put any group of guys in a room show them both trailers for The Expendables and Scott Pilgram Vs. The World. Even people who waned to see Scott Pilgram Vs. The World before they saw the trailers will at least be interested in The Expendables if not see The Expendables after they see Scott PIlgram Vs. The World.

 

[Alphakirby]

Wow,anything that makes Bob more pissed than Trasformers has to be bad ._.

 

[ZippyDSMlee]

Look, Bob. I've defended you more than I need have, you're probably one of my favourite movie critics but please, for the love of God, accept that not every movie has to be this artistic piece, with amazing acting, original set pieces and have an important message behind them. Some movies are just meant to be enjoyable to sit through. Salt was this and you appeared to like that even if there were two reasons attached to Jolie that probably helped your opinion along the way.

And please, stop stating that everyone who likes a movie you don't is worthless. Transformers, Book of Eli, and now Expendables - some people just like to sit through a movie that's brainless. Whilst they're not that good, stating that everyone who likes them is pretty much wrong is just arrogant and pretentious.

Not everyone who likes bad action movies is this douchebag frat boy, who can't tell the difference between an etch-a-sketch and a Da Vinci. Just accept that occasionally people don't see things the way you do, because you're starting to become insufferable.

Ummm no sadly if most people like crap it jsut means more crap will be gleefully made for the masses,it just has to end somewhere. A line must be drawn...perferlly before the flame throwers are taken out on the brainless shuffling masses but still....it has to be known the reason we can not have good,deep witty things is because of them.
======================
Rage on sir bob rage on!

 

[Shock and Awe]

*Sigh*.....just because a movie is incredibly mainstream does not mean it is automatically bad. Its stupid fun, sometimes thats great.

 

[Bruce Edwards]

This is Opposite Week. Generally I agree with MovieBob, but strangely I'm with the moviegoing public on this one.

Scott Pilgrim looks like a mashup of an Indie film, a self-conscious comic book conversion, a Bollywood epic, and it has Michael Cera. I.e. this film has everything I have ever hated ever in the history of hating. Therefore I will (probably) not be seeing it.

I can understand Moviebob not liking the Expendables. He is a critic, and this film is ... well ... even from the trailers, it kind of looked like it would get exactly the same reception that Stallones' Rambo II and III had. But I thought the level of vitriol against it was a bit OTT. Can any film with a cast that likeable (or at least watchable) be so bad? I will know for myself in a weeks time.

Also, Randy Couture is a surprisingly capable actor. At least, all the Mamet stuff he's done (Redbelt and his guest spot on The Unit) showed some acting talent.

Much like 'Piranha 3D' Expendables is a novelty-film. You go to see the ingredients, rather than the whole.