Wednesday, October 8, 2014

John Dies at the End

Ha this movie was fairly fun. It suffers slightly from a lack of consistent tone. It seems to be trying to be comedy one moment, immediately followed by feeble attempts at deep philosophical questions. The script had some surprising intricacies, and plot turns (not quite twists). This was just enough to keep me interested. The fatal flaw of this movie was a slightly shitty flavor of teen movie ala the dumb fucking party scene complete with band... ugh.

D

14 comments:

  1. I knew we were in trouble with this pick the second I read “from the director of Bubba-Hotep.” Much like the goofy monster at the beginning, this movie is a pile of garbage. Topper is dead-on that this movies lacks any sense of direction, and that ultimately kills it. The plot is confusing and non-sensical, the humor is a complete dud, and save a Paul Giamatti phone-in, the acting is subpar.

    Let’s start with that plot. The first 25 minutes are confusing, almost for the sake of confusion. Why do we have the ax scene? It serves no purpose other than potentially paying homage to the source material. Why the time-jumping early on? Confusing and barely explained away. I would forgive it if the movie stuck with the time jumping, but it doesn’t. It also feels like rules are just being made up along the way. Oh Paul Giamatti is a ghost Dave projects? Ok, never explained. John being able to move his “spirit” or whatever outside of his body? Sure. We keep hearing about this “soy sauce,” but we never get even a remotely satisfying answer about what it is. Maybe that’s intentional, but it’s a poor choice that leads to nothing but confusion for confusion’s sake.

    On to the “humor,” which was pretty much devoid throughout. Hey, the Jamaican dude is “Robert Marley.” Like Bob Marley, get it? Good one. Oh my God he’s talking into a bratwurst! Actually, that made me smile. But that’s my point. The fucking bratwurst was the best gag of the movie that has “comedy” in the genre type. And if the jokes weren’t bad, they were out of place. Why is Marconi given any semblance of humor before John & Dave cross into the other dimension? It felt forced and weird, like all the acting.

    Which brings me to the acting. I like Clancy Brown in other things, but he was horrific here as Marconi. Amy was a not good, Fred Chu was pretty stupid, and I wasn’t a big fan of Dave. John was probably the best of the kids, but it isn’t much of a compliment. Paul Giamatti turns in the best performance by default. He’s basically doing an impression for himself during the one day they had him for filming (just a guess).

    This is an idea where a good movie can be made, but this was not it. Pretty much a dud all around. I tried googling the budget and found that it was “less than $1 million.” They needed at least 10x that to do this right probably.

    + Giamatti being Giamatti even in a phone-in
    - Everything else

    Grade: F

    ReplyDelete
  2. The opening sequence with the ax I loved. Great philosophical question there, is it the same ax? Although none of the parts are the same I vote that it is the same ax. I thought we were getting a modern day Army of Darkness (that's when I posted about lofty scores possible). Unfortunately the plot was way too scattered. Agree that with another 10 million they could have gone an extra 15-20 minutes and revealed a little more to let us follow along a bit. The best scene in the movie was when Dave went over to John's house to find a girl that John wanted to help then bang. Here you get the goofy demon fighting duo out their best and get the best gag in the movie. When the door handle turns into a dick you get a slight chuckle. But John's reaction- "That door cannot be opened" is hilarious for me. They go back to the well a little later with Giamatti's dream being chased by a whip made of tied together dicks. Dick jokes work on me.

    By the way, Giamatti is an Executive Producer I think they had him for as much as they wanted.

    I thought it was fine but disjointed and lacking direction. I wish I'd have seen it in college, on weed.

    B-

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think we should have warched this one together riley. It would have enhanced it for both of us I think. I liked the opening philisophical question as well.

      Delete
  3. Fuck this movie for the following reasons:

    Anytime a movie immediately establishes that there is some kind of supernatural element that truly exists in its world, and then still insists on having skeptical characters, I'm basically done. The skeptics exist only to be proven wrong and humiliated, and as a scientific skeptic myself, I hate that trope.

    Phil's exactly right about the soy sauce and what kind of powers it gives people. People that take it get whatever powers are necessary for that moment. The same is true of every other seemingly impossible situation. They can't open the magic door, but luckily, the girl's prosthetic hand can for some reason. Korrok is an all-powerful being, but not powerful enough to reach one of his tentacles up to pluck the two main characters off the catwalk. Because anyone can do anything at any given moment, there's no stakes (there you go, Riley).

    Maybe the lack of stakes is because this is supposed to be a comedy. It's fine that Riley laughed, but I did not. Maybe at best, it's unintentionally funny, like when one of the characters says, "We've been chosen by the soy sauce."

    It's a waste of a possibly interesting premise. Rick and Morty's first season blu-ray just arrived on my doorstep. That series operates in alternate dimensions and realities, taking that idea to its farthest conclusion. This movie just includes it as an excuse for a bunch of pig masks. I liked the opening riddle, too, but can't figure out what it means in the movie's context. If it's just a fun sequence of scenes that has no bearing on the story, why is it even included?

    The two leads are completely uninteresting and I can't figure out what is actually happening, so I didn't care about anything happening onscreen. I was extremely bored by this movie about an alternate universe created by cross-species breeding, as bored as I've been by any movie I've ever seen.

    The supporting characters played by real actors are the only things keeping this from an F. Clancy Brown is coasting on previous work he's done that I've liked, Glynn Turman is game, and Paul Giamatti is actually good, though making him say Korrok hurt me. I have no idea what made him agree to be in this movie.

    I honestly wasn't paying enough attention to get further into it. Maybe the plot is followable with a close-watching, but I just never bought into the world or characters. I so wanted to turn it off after the dog brings John back to life, but stuck it out for however much longer this way-too-long film continued. For a D- movie, it didn't deserve the benefit of the doubt.

    ReplyDelete
  4. You guys are crazy. This is an enjoyable movie despite some of the flaws. It's not high art, but I'd rewatch this any time.

    This movie largely works for me as I enjoyed the humor, both the sarcasm and some of the self-aware meta stuff. I loved the physical gags. "That door cannot be opened" is a fantastic line. We're at the beginning of a movie and there's a monster thing that looks ridiculous. This is looking like a bad horror flick. But the dick joke (one of many and I'm always a sucker for them. The jokes, not the dicks.) says to me don't take this seriously. It's not just comic relief like the fat guy in Van Helsing or any of the witty one-liners in Tombraider. This movie is a comedy first, then sci-fi horror movie second. What say you? Is this a comedy?

    Chase Williamson as Dave is what drives this movie. I think his deadpan delivery is well-done. He doesn't display a lot of emotions, but this isn't a serious film. I don't need him to. His character remains consistent throughout: A unwitting and reluctant protagonist. He has no idea what's going on in the flashbacks and is learning as he goes. He’s the idiot hero. (Which I believe was first perfected in Dude Where’s My Car.) I think his timing and mannerisms are perfect for a comedy that is a borderline spoof. I find Dave to be relatable. He’s just a normal sarcastic dude who is as clueless at the viewer for most of the movie.

    Chase Mays as John is a bit less interesting, though I also think he suffers from being too handsome for us to buy him. This is talked about by Adam Carolla a lot. Some people are just too good looking to be serious actors or actresses. We can’t relate to them. We’re just staring at their perfect features. I do think he plays off of Williamson well, though. I wish he had some more depth, but again, this is a comedy full of dick jokes.
    Is Paul Giamatti as Arnie a wasted role? I don’t think so. He doesn’t have to do much in this role but be skeptical and eventually get angry. It’s not meant to be a starring role. He does fine, though maybe doesn’t add much to the story. His character is just a way for the narrator to share what is going on. Is that a waste? I don’t see why. Just because a quality actor takes a bit role doesn’t mean it’s a waste if they perform in that role. Brad Pitt in 12 Years a Slave was a waste. George Clooney in Gravity was not. Tell me I’m wrong here. I dare you.

    I also thought Glynn Thurman did a fine job as angry black detective guy. I was surprised by his timing in what is a comedy. Nicely done.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you Shane. I am glad I'm not the only one who likes dick jokes.

      Delete
  5. I love the obvious and sorta self-aware jokes here. It’s not quite at a meta level, but some of the jokes are meant to be ridiculous for viewer. Bob Marley is such a ridiculous name for a Jamaican character. That they went with that name was amusing. The characters are forced to take the dude seriously. I like when a writer does that. I love that the main guy’s name is David Wong and he’s by all accounts a white guy. I was amused each time they said his last name was Wong and no one ever questions it. Again, the writers are making the characters take these things seriously to our amusement. Bark Lee is a stupid name for a dog. Awesome. The fake hand looked terribly done, which had to be intentional. I wish I could remember more of the jokes off hand.
    No one has even mentioned the unreliable narrator aspect of this whole thing. Did any of this stuff actually happen or is it all the result of the drug. We have no way of knowing and I don’t think it really matters. The reality is what the narrator gives us. We’re lead to believe that the narrator is reliable when he’s able to show Arnie his powers by describing Arnie’s dreams. So he does have special powers. But then it turns out Arnie is a ghost and Dave is able to make him disappear. So now we’re back to having a narrator who hasn’t proven he can be trusted. I thought this was a nice bait and switch.
    I also enjoyed the twist that Bark Lee was the actual hero. The reader has been lead to believe that Dave and John are the heroes, but it turns out they’re just distractions for the true hero in this alternate universe. It’s not a big reveal, it’s just so inconsequential and insulting to Dave and John that they don’t really react. This makes sense since they had no idea what they were doing the entire time. They started off like normal dudes and end up being normal dudes. Does the soy sauce give them super powers? If the narrator is reliable, it does. They don’t know the powers, but they seem to be learning and guessing as they go along. If none of this is real, it’s just Dave’ imagination so he can do whatever he wants anyway. I love the angle that Dave has such low self-esteem that even in his drug-induced dreams, he’s not the real hero.

    ReplyDelete
  6. So, what doesn’t work?
    This movie wasn’t edited well and is confusing as fuck. They took this from a web mini-series that was released in bits and pieces. That’s not a great format for a movie, though. The cuts between times were too much and seemed like they were confusing for confusing’s sake. We didn’t need that added in. The natural confusion of the story should have been enough. Especially at the climax. It was way too hurried. Ten more minutes would have given us a lot more clarity. Was the opening axe scene necessary? It seems like it wasn’t. I’ve been trying to justify it by saying maybe Dave is the axe and as he travels between dimensions he changes, so is he still the same Dave? Is he the same Dave Dimension 1 as he is in Dimension 2? But they didn’t really flesh that out. A missed opportunity.
    There is the issue of way too much convenience. Some of it was ridiculous. They were able to get Marconi on the phone so easily? Ok. Why didn’t that all powerful monster just grab them? That’s a great question. Her hand worked with no explanation. He can talk to ghosts. They can talk to their future selves, etc etc. It did seem too easy, though. Focusing on the all-powerful being not grabbing Dave and John does miss the point that they weren’t the actual heroes. They were distractions anyway. This only allows the protagonists to survive, but doesn’t change the result of the incident. Because who was paying attention to Bark Lee?
    Clancy Brown is entirely wasted here. Brown is a powerful and intimidating actor. His work in Carnivale was simply fantastic and frightening. So casting him in a comedy seems odd. Does he got jokes? Turns out: Nope. His timing is off. His character is flat. At first I thought it was Jeff (Chef) Goldblum in the role. That would have been much, much better. The Marconi character actually distracted me.
    So, this was a good, not great movie. Also, in my personal rankings, I think it’s really hard for a comedy to go above a B+. A perfectly executed comedy still wouldn’t get above the B+ in general. There needs to be a bit more to it. This movie falls below that standard and would be a B-, but I’m gonna give it a bump because I know I’d watch it any time I came across it on television.
    B

    ReplyDelete
  7. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
  8. Well, this is just not a good movie, but I didn't all together hate it.

    Right, so we start with Theseus' paradox in the form of an ax... but it has nothing to do with anything else in the movie? I thought, hoped, we would be returning to that ax (or whatever ax it is now) in the end. Nope, not even metaphorically. Most of the jokes didn't work well on me, either. David Wong? Did he just watch Seinfeld's "The Chinese Woman"? At least Bark Lee took on a Bruce Lee like moniker and ended up the hero for it. Meat monster, nah. Homophobic dick door joke, nah. Robert Marley, driving dog, Shitload, nope. I, too, smile at the bratwurst phone. Arnie's a black dude, but really a projected image from Dave's mind.... No. I did appreciate the vocal nod to Kubrick's "Eyes Wide Shut".

    It's been stated plenty about how incoherent John Dies at the End... even though he dies in the middle, unless it's just a play on the fact that everybody, in fact, does die eventually... at the end... of their life. Whatever. Things weren't set up well, they weren't explained at all, and there was no worthwhile payoff. Why didn't we learn more about the Soy Sauce? I was expecting the spider-like monster caged in the back of the car to be the source, or even Korrok. Since when could Dave manifest ghosts? Oh, conveniently right when we needed an explanation for Arnie not being Arnie? Neat. I will say, at least they set up Amy's hand being the way to open the ghost door by having Fred be a dick and ask her about Phantom limb syndrome. That might be the only recognizable setup and follow through in the entire film. I did, immediately after the credits started rolling, wonder if it was all going on in Dave's mind, thanks to the Soy Sauce... but it it was, the movie doesn't want you to know that, or anything, anyway.

    I'll skip the acting, directing, editing, and anything else technical as it was all mediocre at best. As I said, I didn't hate this movie... but I'm not even completely sure as to why not. I think it was interesting, and I like when movies throw in some philosophical jargon and make a viewer think. Plus, it was fun in a really shitty poor version of Shaun of the Dead kind of way. Perhaps it's because I'd probably enjoy it more on a second viewing... which I would give it if it came up on the TV while guide browsing. But that doesn't make it any better of a movie.

    D

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't think the doorknob joke was homophobic. Just not everyone wants to go around grabbing dicks. Reminds me of the wall to wall dick carpeting Mr. Wong Burger requested in the Dickisode episode of Aqua Teen.

      Delete
    2. Nor should everybody go around just grabbing dicks! But, if your life is actually in danger, and your choices are to grab a dick to live or die... which do you do? I'm not sure what other word describes a "I'm not ever touching a dick, even if my life depends on it" mentality.

      Delete
  9. This movie nearly broke Sea Inside's record for number of times to get through the whole thing? The opening season gave me hope, but after that nothing worked. The characters were lame, the acting terrible, the jokes unfunny, and the special effects worse than any movie we've seen.

    I compare watching this movie to going out to dinner with a drunk, unfunny acquaintance. I"ll leave names out, but I just kept waiting for it to end.

    Seriously, John's character could not have been more bland.

    D- for now. I remembered the grade so I don't have to revisit this movie in my brain.

    ReplyDelete