This summer should have been a season of unforgettable cinema. And it was -just not the way we had hoped. From Spielberg busts (yes, they do exist) to an array of less-than-stellar sequels, moviegoers shelled out money that would have been better spent on iced coffee and sunscreen. In the next two issues, the Daily runs through the season's biggest flops, as well the few films that managed to escape the curse of Summer 2001.
May
The summer lineup officially kicked off with The Mummy Returns, a sequel that perhaps no one asked for with the exception of myself and the two other fans of the original. But despite these high expectations, I didn't much care for it. While it was just as big and stupid as the ads promised, it wasn't much fun. The effects were more cheesy than the original, the plot made less sense, and the actors had that sequel stare. That's where every line sounds like, "I'm doing this for the money." And any movie that features The Rock but doesn't have him give at least one smackdown, is not recommendable.
A Knight's Tale was the most anachronistic movie since Kevin Costner played Robin Hood, except this time, it was on purpose. The story was the same old underdog overcoming the odds story but with Queen and David Bowie playing in the background. Whether or not you liked this movie was decided during the first five minutes; either you nodded your head in tune with "We Will Rock You" and accepted it as silly, or you threw up your arms and said, "This is the dumbest thing I've ever seen." It's a tired story told with energy and a clever gimmick, and I got a kick out of it. But some people wanted their money back.
Nobody demanded a refund after seeing Shrek. An anti-Disney fable, the movie was dark, sharp, kind-hearted, and a wonderful story for kids. Mike Myers as a Scottish ogre? Eddie Murphy as a talking donkey? The gingerbread man torture scene? ("Do you know the Muffin Man?" "I know the Muffin Man.") While a few moments were a bit much - I don't have to see another Matrix parody as long as I live - overall it won everyone over with crackerjack timing and original characters. Shrek was easily the best children's film of the year and one of the best overall.
Then came Pearl Harbor, or "The Titanic gets blow'd up." Actually, after seeing the critics throw up their hands in disbelief and scream about how it was the worst historical epic in the last few years (did these people see The Patriot?), I walked in ready for the sappiest, soggiest special effects movie since The Perfect Storm. And you know what, it wasn't that bad. Pearl Harbor does many things wrong, but what it does right is to compellingly portray the horror of the attack itself. Was it a lousy romance? Yes. Does it go on 40 minutes too long? Yes. But during the attack sequence, no one could move. Veterans were crying softly in the back. It wasn't a very convincing love story or history lesson, but when the bombs started falling, all eyes were glued to the screen.
Finally, there was Moulin Rouge. A lot of people hated it and didn't know what to make of it. Others avoided it altogether. To me, it was brilliant. A post-modern musical, Mad Max-style, Moulin Rouge overflowed with feeling and imagination. The sheer boldness of the camerawork, the anachronistic songs, the performances...you can condemn it for the silly/camp factor, the unoriginal love story, or claim that it was just silly. As an experience, however, the movie is one of a kind.
June
June started off with John Travolta's Swordfish, which despite its aged star and misguided advertising was actually a fun movie. It was trashed by critics and mostly ridiculous, but riddle me this - since most movies these days leave a lot to be desired, shouldn't we at least praise the ones that are in exceptionally bad taste? Shouldn't we applaud the fact that producer Joel Silver paid Halle Barry $500,000 to bare her breasts for film? Yes, it's an indication of the decline of Western civilization, but at least it's fun to watch it burn. Swordfish was thoroughly entertaining from beginning to end, with clever twists and exciting action sequences. It also had Hugh Jackman and Don Cheadle, two actors who bring credibility to any movie, regardless of how silly its premise. And, as an added bonus, the movie featured Vinnie Jones ("Bullet-Tooth Tony" in Snatch) as a character who had no purpose but to fall out of a bus and explode.Evolution fell through the cracks this summer, which was a damn shame. Most audiences and critics dismissed it as Ghostbusters III or Men in Black II. I'd like to remind everyone that most $80-plus million potentially mega-blockbusters actually take themselves seriously (for instance, the X-Files movie). Evolution's laidback attitude was a welcome respite, and the alien effects were incredible. Besides, David Duchvony is funny, Orlando Jones is funnier, and Dan Akyroyd looks funny no matter what he does (his ultra-serious cameo in Pearl Harbor aside). Yeah, it wasn't Ghostbusters, but it was still a worthwhile way to spend an afternoon.
Atlantis was a flop at the box office, and unjustly so. It had nice animation, funny characters and, for once in a Disney movie, no talking animals or songs. Funny, imaginative, and not condescending, it was a very satisfying Indiana Jones-ish adventure that didn't so much break the Disney mold as reshape it. Unfortunately, it was released the same weekend as Tomb Raider, and guess which movie drew the 13-year-old crowd.
Tomb Raider, by the way, had the distinction of being one of the worst video game movies ever. Do you know what kind of competition this movie had to face to earn that title? There have been many cheaper, goofier movies based on video games, but at least those movies tried to amuse their audience. The abundance of potentially cool ideas that Tomb Raider screws up, on the other hand, is mind-boggling.
Killer robots, stone monkeys, ancient curses... all choppily directed, incoherently edited, and minimally entertaining. Even Angelina Jolie, a walking special effect, was photographed poorly. It was anti-entertainment. I don't ask for much, just that a movie prove watch-able. Tomb Raider had a star, a budget, and a major studio backing it, and the result was just inexcusable.
Sexy Beast was made up of several impressive parts but as a whole lacked that certain something. Ben Kingsley, the man who once played Gandhi, gives a performance as a mobster that only Joe Pesci rivals for intensity. Ray Winstone makes for a sympathetic, complex bank robber. The underwater heist scene, when it finally comes, easily bests The Score in timing, tension, and payoff. Yet, parts of this movie drag and drag - you're sure there's something going on, but you just can't figure out what. Still, two great performances and a great sequence make for a movie that is very, very watch-able.
In June the much-anticipated A.I. was released, which had so much going for it, but added up to... not much. The movie had an invisible arrogance about it, a feeling that because Kubrick and Spielberg were the originators, every frame was of undeniable import. Uh huh. A.I. redefined mixed bag. There were amazing special effects, but most of them were just garnish. Great performances by Haley Joel Osment and Jude Law, but to what end? The movie played like four semi-related short films that happened to have the same lead character. Imagine watching those BMW Internet movies all at once, edited together for added value.
The unforgivable sin was near the end, when everyone thought the movie was over... and then it went on for 20 more minutes, each moment more agonizing than the last. People began to laugh, leave and ask "What?!" in disbelief. Waterlogged pacing, trumped up expectations, and unfocused scripting, A.I. was this summer's Unbreakable. Great actors and scattered impressive performances, but what was that ending all about?
