Explore
 Lists  Reviews  Images  Update feed
Categories
MoviesTV ShowsMusicBooksGamesDVDs/Blu-RayPeopleArt & DesignPlacesWeb TV & PodcastsToys & CollectiblesComic Book SeriesBeautyAnimals   View more categories »
Listal logo

An average movie

Posted : 11 years, 3 months ago on 17 January 2013 09:34

I wasn’t sure what to expect from this flick but, at least, I thought it would be a decent action flick. Back then, there was some tough competition at the box-office with similar movies like ‘The Expendables’ and ‘The A-team’ and this flick was eventually a flop making its title even more relevant. Honestly, I’m afraid it actually deserved this faith. Indeed, after 10 minutes, I was already seriously bored by the whole thing and it never got better, I'm afraid. I mean, the first (action) scene was just terrible (They are on top of a hill and they have 8 minutes to go down, kill a whole bunch of henchmen, put 25 kids on a bus but their leader still has even the time to make some small talk with the evil drug leader/terrorist before the whole thing was blown to pieces). Not only was it really ridiculous but, above all, it was just plain tedious. And the rest of the movie was not much better as it was basically a succession of generic preposterous action scenes. Furthermore, some of the actors were not bad (Chris Evans, Idris Elba and, above all, Jason Patric who was pretty good as the bad guy) but some others were really not convincing (Jeffrey Dean Morgan, Zoe Saldana, Columbus Short). On the other hand, maybe they shouldn’t be blamed since the dialogues were laughable and the characters were not interesting whatsoever. To conclude, even though it was watchable, it remains a really average action flick and I don’t think it is really worth a look.


0 comments, Reply to this entry

The Losers

Posted : 13 years, 8 months ago on 11 September 2010 02:58

Hollywood's current craze with comic book films made it inevitable that something this bland and uninspiring would eventually weasel its way into multiplexes. While I respect filmmakers who want to jump-start a franchise to create a story that will hopefully gather a fanbase that will look forward to subsequent sequels, it's hard to respect an attempt to start an original franchise by making a film that has nothing original in it - seems a bit contradictory, doesn't it? What I respect even LESS is the film's "incomplete" ending which is so blatantly obvious in begging for a sequel. This is one instance in which I can say I'm thoroughly glad that the box office returns for a film were bad.

"You liking the angle of the dangle?" Yes, absolutely, but I'm not liking THE LOSERS in the least bit. In fact, getting at least a glimpse of "the dangle" would have made my personal experience of watching THE LOSERS much better (not so for the 14-year-old boys that the film is aimed at, but ah well). The quote I included at the start of this paragraph is one of the few instances of wit that actually works in this film (as opposed to a bunch of other lines that fall horribly flat), and the quote is uttered by Jensen, who is played here by the steaming hot Chris Evans. If you had told me that the ONLY good thing about THE LOSERS would be Evans' performance and line delivery as a computer geek who has trouble talking to girls, I would've never believed it, but that's exactly the case. The sequence in which his character enters a building dressed up as a messenger, then goes up an elevator, and finally delivers a speech about certain "experiments" that the government performed on him is easily the only worthwhile material to be found in the movie, and that's too bad. Fortunately for Evans, as most people know, he's got what will hopefully be MUCH better things coming in the future. Aside from being my personal celebrity crush, I feel that he's been underrated as an actor for years, and I can't wait to see him as Steve Rogers.

The problem with the rest of the cast isn't so much that their performances are bad as it is that the script gives them no room to achieve even a second dimension. This isn't the type of film in which character development matters that much, but you really have a serious problem when two characters could easily be interchanged because you can't really tell their personalities apart. In order to please its target audience, the film features an awkward sex sequence (all PG-13 material) in which we essentially get to see several butt shots of Zoe Saldana. My suggestion for those looking for, um, stimulation is to search for pictures of her online, and for those who actually want to see her talent, look no further than the two amazing films she did last year (AVATAR and STAR TREK), both of which are way too many notches above THE LOSERS. She really has no room here to display any acting prowess.

But the bigger problem with THE LOSERS is that there's really not a single exciting, different or even slightly cool action sequence. All stuff we've seen before, usually done much better. There's a lot of poor editing here, and it'll be obvious even to people who don't know much about editing. The plot takes some ridiculous (yet never surprising) turns, the worst of which features one character committing betrayal, followed by another character who commits betrayal, and then the one who FIRST committed betrayal suddenly shows up on-screen as if everything was easily resolved. But without a doubt, the biggest sticking point is the horribly obvious, sequel-begging conclusion, which is what makes me so glad that there likely won't be one. I watch any movie that Chris Evans is in, but when a movie is this lame, it's easy to wonder whether the money was well spent on the ticket.

As a final note, I also have to point out that even though the majority of the cast is non-white and one of the main actors is Hispanic, the movie has a few subtle (yet easy to spot) lines that convey a clearly derogatory tone towards Hispanic culture complemented with a tone of white American superiority (notice the use of the word "rotting" while the characters are in Bolivia, followed later by the line "Welcome to the land of the living," and the context in which all of this is said). Any doubts I had about giving this a 4 instead of a 3 were quickly dispelled once I remembered that. It's hard to find it shocking, though, considering how brain-dead the film as a whole is. It's the worst I've seen in 2010 so far.


0 comments, Reply to this entry

The Losers review

Posted : 13 years, 9 months ago on 27 July 2010 04:18

I actually liked this movie. Ive never read the comic, but the movie was pretty good.


0 comments, Reply to this entry

The Losers review

Posted : 13 years, 9 months ago on 19 July 2010 08:53

Please don't watch this movie. Its soo skiddish


0 comments, Reply to this entry

The Losers review

Posted : 13 years, 10 months ago on 11 July 2010 03:33

Bad Ass aCtion I sHud Say

The EffecTs are Not tHa t Good But Its InterestIng To Watch..



0 comments, Reply to this entry

The filmmakers are the Losers!

Posted : 13 years, 11 months ago on 2 June 2010 08:34

"You know that if we do this, we are waging a war against the Central Intelligence Agency."


One must admit, it takes serious guts to entitle a film The Losers, since lame jokes are just begging to be cracked. Already, the critics who panned this appalling motion picture have utilised the obvious "The losers are in fact the audience" in addition to the also obvious "What were you expecting? It's called The Losers". Added to this, another thing you can count on is the film's screenwriters referencing the title on several occasions. In the very first scene, the line "Hey, you losers!" is used, and from there the references keep on coming. Alas, these one-liners lack the zing you'd anticipate, while the action is unbelievably pedestrian and the film rapidly degenerates into the same type of PG-13 junk you'd expect Michael Bay or Brett Ratner to deliver (though the filmmakers did not even aim that high). The Losers (based on a series of comics) should have delivered over-the-top action and large explosions. Instead, The Losers is all about limits: limited budget, limited scope, limited effort and limited imagination. Even the movie's best moments are still abjectly disposable.



The movie kicks off in Bolivia, where the audience is introduced to the titular team of Special Ops warriors: sniper expert Cougar (Óscar Jaenada), tech expert Jensen (Chris Evans), escape driver Pooch (Columbus Short), second-in-command Roque (Idris Elba), and the leader, Colonel Clay (Jeffrey Dean Morgan). When the operation goes south, The Losers attempt to rescue a number of children by sacrificing their place on their extraction aircraft. Unfortunately, the team is betrayed and their aircraft is destroyed, leading to the government believing that The Losers are dead. Subsequently, The Losers head underground while harbouring a thirst for vengeance against the man responsible for their predicament: evil government mole Max (Jason Patric). Eventually, the team are drawn out of hiding by Aisha (Zoe Saldana), a slick operator who offers them unlimited funding to exact their revenge on Max.


In other words, the generic plot is not unlike the television series The A-Team. This familiarity may have been easier to digest if only there wasn't an A-Team movie being released a few months after this film. Clearly, no-one thought the release slot through very well.



Once the plot balls start to roll, the movie perks up a bit with a few moderately entertaining action beats, but the entire enterprise is hampered by countless factors. The film's primary problem rears its ugly head at the beginning: the PG-13 rating. Director Sylvain White actually insisted upon the PG-13 rating (whereas the studio was prepared to fund an R-rated picture), and this decision affects The Losers in a major way. The action scenes feel as if they're perpetually pulling punches, with the camera awkwardly shying away from capturing gunshot wounds, and the occasionally choppy editing accentuating the problem. A lack of blood and profanity detracts from the reality of the movie, as it merely feels like a bland product tailor-made for maximum box office profits. The irony, of course, is that the film flopped anyway; it was a slow crawl to merely make back its $25 million budget! (Hey, the film was a loser at the box office!) Additionally, the majority of the CGI used in the film (mostly reserved for explosions) is woeful. The cartoonish incompetency ruins the atmosphere, and mars the movie's only mildly entertaining moments.


While the titular Losers have an arsenal of weapons at their disposal, the team are no-where near as fun as the '80s action heroes which they visibly strived to emulate. Director White, true to his origins as a director of music videos and commercials, was clearly keen to add visual flair to the picture, as he employs an armada of techniques (including jump-cuts and slow motion). The introductions of the characters, meanwhile, are intercut with images from the comics on which the film is based. This idea may be interesting in theory, but it's disastrous in practise - putting a strain on what should've been a lightweight actioner. The key problem, though, is the failure to maintain a consistent tone. A number of scenes are played with a knowing wink and seem intended for laughs, yet this tone is contradicted by the action sequences which take themselves too seriously and are inherently uninteresting. Perhaps due to budget limitations, the action is not gloriously B-grade or enjoyably over-the-top. Planet Terror is an excellent instance of a B-grade actioner filled with hilariously OTT action - this is the pedigree that would have served The Losers the best. Only actor Jason Patric delivers the material in the desired fashion. His Max is a cartoonish villain, though he's nonetheless forgettable amidst the tedious plot machinations.



At the end of the day, The Losers is an awful, tragically insipid action picture with action scenes that never rise above the run-of-the-mill. It feels more like a pilot for a television show than a feature film, to be honest, as the characters spend more time trying to be clever than allowing us to get to know them. A quick-fix shoot-'em-up needs more personality, style and verve than this. Worse, proper closure is sacrificed in favour of opportunities for sequels which we may never see due to the film's box office failure. Thus, The Losers is tonally schizophrenic, empty-headed, unsatisfying and disposable. There is absolutely no reason to see it.

3.2/10



0 comments, Reply to this entry

Good but, but lacks closure

Posted : 13 years, 12 months ago on 14 May 2010 02:11

Given orders to make sure a bombing in Bolivia goes as planned, Clay(Jeffrey Dean Morgan) and his CIA Black OPS team are sent in. The team quickly realizes that children are involved they decide to get them out of the picture. All goes as planned when the team gets them out, until they board the helicopter. Like any decent action flick out there, the copter is shot down and the kids die. The plot in this movie is simple, get revenge for the death of the twenty-five kids. We quickly discover that Max is to blame and the reason why the government thinks Clay and his team have been kiled. Clay's team consists of a computer expert named Jensen (Chris evans), Pooch (Columbus Short) the demolition expert, Cougar the long range sniper (Oscar Jaenada), and Rogue (Idris Elba) the weapons expert. In the aftermath of this Horriffic event, the team realizes that they have been betrayed and decide to go after Max. Things get complicated when Clay meets Aisha (Zoe Saldana who acting is improving as the number of films shes' in increases) who has some mysterious connection to Max and offers the team an out. The Losers is a fast moving film that is good , but lacks closure in the finale. I found myself asking the question in the movie's finale "did these people redeem themselves at all?". The simple truth of the matter is it doesn't make a difference because we may be seeing a sequel out next summer. Needless to say that the film is based on a popular comic strip. If you are looking for action this is for you, but if you want closure to a presented problem look elsewhere it's not here.


0 comments, Reply to this entry