April 18-20, 2008

Was not a banner weekend for movies.

Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back -

I would not go so far as to say I am a Kevin Smith fan. I enjoyed Clerks. I enjoyed Mallrats. I enjoyed Dogma. Never saw Chasing Amy or Clerks II though I am lead to believe they are enjoyable. But I don't hold the raving, frothing at the mouth fandom that others keep Kevin Smith in as a spokesman of my generation/sub-culture. But I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt.

Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back was bad. It was. This film was nothing more than an excuse to string together cameos from all his other films (aka fanservice) with a bunch of references to other (better) films, all tied together with gross out humor and dick jokes. I've said it before, I'll say it again. I don't like gross out humor. A fart is not a punchline. Shoving a drink cup over an erection is not funny. They are poor excuses for humor. This film was a mistake. Most of the time I did not laugh, much of the time I did laugh I immediately felt guilty about it, and there were remarkably few times I genuinely laughed without reservation. As for entertainment value? Meh. The characters of Jay and Silent Bob are interesting, but perhaps not interesting enough to carry a film. There was little coherence to the film, it was more a reason to get a bunch of people Kevin Smith likes together again to hang out. Which may be fun to make, but does not make for good watching.

On the list of Kevin Smith films, this should go at the bottom.

Grade: D+

The Breed -

I'm.....not sure why I added this to my Netflix list. I'm sure there must have been a reason, but what that reason was I cannot remember. The basic premise is this: vampires are a genetic offshoot of humans (aka, a separate Breed) and in the near future have chosen to reveal themselves to the "government" in the hopes of being integrated into society. They have immense physical strength and regenerative powers, but other parts of the mythology are incorrect. For example, they have little problem with sunlight and a stake through the heart or garlic won't do much. Only an immediately lethal wound will kill them (aka taking the head off or blowing them up). They have a synthetic substitute for blood, so they don't actually prey on people any more.

I think I know what the director was trying to do. I think the director was using these "nonviolent vampires" as a metaphor for a misunderstood race of people subject to hatred and bigotry for poor reasons. Basically racism. Which isn't a bad idea, in that it's an interesting take on vampires and a potentially intriguing allegory. At the heart of the film it's a political thriller, and for the middle third of the film it's actually quite engaging.

But here's the problem. The heart of the film, the political thriller about the vampire allegory, is completely BURIED under a mishmash of references and styles taken from dozens of different films. On top of the two genres already mentioned (vampires, political thrillers), the film also tries to incorporate film noir, Terry Gilliam surrealist visuals, Orwellian dystopian government, bondage club PVC clothing, an inexplicable Matrix-inspired fight sequence, and a metaphor to Nazi Germany that isn't just heavy-handed, it's fucking beaten over your head. In other words, it's a complete mess. You have to wear waders to get through all the styles to actual point of the film. It's....amateurish. Which is sad.

The acting is pretty bad all around. Bokeem Woodbine is so wooden that a cardboard cutout of him would have seemed lifelike by comparison. He was trying to be the hardboiled noir detective, and it just wasn't working. Adrian Paul (aka Duncan MacLeod of the clan MacLeod) was pretty good. He did the best he could with the material he was given. He has a good screen presence, and was working the tiny mustache. The hissing was a bit much, but it's a vampire film so what are you going to do. Why is it that vampires have to hiss? I don't get it.

Nice try, but swing and a miss.

Grade: C-

Where the Buffalo Roam -

A more broad telling of the history between Hunter S. Thompson (Bill Murray) and Doctor Gonzo (Peter Boyle) taken from various Thompson writings. Now, it's impossible to view or critique this film without comparing it to Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas. Which is too bad, because I think for the time it was pretty well done. Like The Depp did later, Bill Murray spent some time with Thompson to learn about him, pick up the voice mannerisms and such. And he does a pretty good job. Some times it's uneven but when he's calling people "swine" you really feel the Thompson there. Boyle was an interesting choice as Dr. Gonzo, but he does a decent enough job.

Both the strength and the weakness of the film is that it's main focus is not the gonzo lifestyle, but the interaction between Thompson and Gonzo. It's the strength because it's an interesting facet that is not really examined much when it comes to Thompson. It's the weakness because it's not explored nearly to the depth that it should have been. The film is presented essentially as a series of vignettes about Thompson (taken from the writings) where Dr. Gonzo weaves in and out of the narrative seemingly at random. He shows up, things happen, he disappears. It really should have been much stronger.

In total, it's a passable film, but inferior to Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas (which I immediately watched afterwards), and probably only worth watching if you are curious about A) Hunter S. Thompson and B) Bill Murray playing Hunter S. Thompson. And the ending was so trite it made me want to retch. Terrible terrible TERRIBLE ending.

Grade: C