comment #1

christian says ...

this looks more like mike o'donohue's "vietnamese baby book"...brutal stuff in the day.

maybe we could send some baby armor to iraq?

comment #2

T. Holly says ...

With all Don and Dave's air kisses to Peter Amundson, how can Don fault a guy who gets it like this:

... Cinematography is important, but at the end of the day, it all comes down to editing (the most invisible and misunderstood art, since when it's working, you shouldn't even notice it). Every cut requires us to resituate ourselves, which puts the burden on the editor to second-guess what we want/need to see in order to follow along. This is where Bourne 2 & 3 editor Christopher Rouse (Oscar nominated for United 93) has proven himself so exceptional. There's something intuitive about the flow from shot to shot despite the jarring, ever-moving nature of what's actually unfolding on screen. In the third movie, Rouse juggles flashbacks and other perspectives as well, and even though we can't always make out the action, we're never confused about what is going on (contrast this with the ridiculous editing in the Batman Begins subway fight, where a nonsensical flurry of images is used to represent action, and you'll realize how much artistry such work requires).

On a personal note, the example that impressed me most was Dreamgirls, which used editing and multiple camera angles to compress what felt like six hours of story into two hours (proving how vital music is to such audacious montage in the process). On the other extreme, I can't quite figure out what Michael Winterbottom is trying to do in A Mighty Heart.

Like Greengrass, he is also constantly cutting between handheld, verite-style points of view, but the editing in A Mighty Heart actually prevented me from getting into Mariane Pearl's head (what does it mean to cut from Angelina Jolie's face to a shot of someone washing lobster in a strainer to a baby crying in the backyard to random strangers in the street?), but then, given how innovative his other films have been, it's possible that he's just ahead of his time. ...

Posted by: Peter Debruge
http://weblogs.variety.com/thompsononhollywood/2007/08/bourne-action-a.html#comments

comment #3

Rothchild says ...

God, you're like D.Z. on this one with your implications that Davis is a double agent and really hates the fans of action films. Michael Davis loves the fucking Returner, and not in an ironic way. As I said before, does Planet Terror mean that Rodriguez hates John Carpenter and the people that love his films? No. Can you make a lovingly bent satire of a genre, still genuinely enjoy said genre? Yes. Fucking yes.

You wrote one of the most interesting reviews of the film so far, but you jumped every shark in the ocean the second you said:

What it's mainly about, deep down, is Davis saying to the action crowd, "Do you understand what a bunch of lowlife dipshits you guys are? Do you understand that your taste buds are up your rectum? Do you understand what a pestilence guns are, and that they provide the cheapest and dumbest movie thrills imaginable?"

comment #4

Rothchild says ...

Debruge has no sense of humor and he pulled a Jeffrey Wells with his assumption about the title. But other than that, it's not like it was an awful review. Hollywood Reporter was pretty on the mark:

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/film/reviews/article_display.jsp?&rid=9658

comment #5

T. Holly says ...

Refresh my memory, what assumption?

I wear a helmet.
http://www.facevisor.com/

comment #6

Rothchild says ...

I don't want to quote the whole portion because it ruins one of the only plot points of the whole film, but:

(typical of Davis' sense of humor, the artificially inseminated mothers provide the off-color pun of the movie's title).

That's just stupid on so many levels. That's like saying Snakes on a Plane's title also had a double meaning, in relation to the people on the plane with bad inentions.

If you go into this film knowing what it's going to be, you'll love it. But it's not for everyone. You'll know in the first thirty seconds if you're game for what's going to follow, and Debruge is one of those guys that saw Owen shoot the umbilical cord and said, "Not for me!" That's fine.

I was at that screening, and it's strange how one of the few people in the theater that wasn't laughing, applauding, or going along with the film was the goddamn critic from Variety. There will be a couple of those on Rotten Tomatoes. But most people will go along for the ride, unless they thought they were walking into a mainstream movie that is going to play it safe and not ruffle any feathers.

comment #7

Jeremy Smith says ...

I disagree with Peter on SHOOT 'EM UP, but, as T Holly demonstrates above, he's one of the best we've got. Cut him some slack.

comment #8

Don Murphy says ...

If he was one of the best "we" have kemosabe he would have said "I came to this movie in a bad mood (other people confirmed this) and I just don't get it therefore I will allow somebody else to review it.

He didn't.

Instead he took a worthless, needless shot at my director in the first paragraph.

This makes him a stupid fuckhead who, once fired, should stay unemployed in this business for life.

comment #9

Armin Tamzarian says ...

Welles is the one with disdain for the core audience here and he has to rationalize his enjoyment of the movie. Relax, man, just because you dug the film doesn't make you a mouth-breather.

comment #10

T. Holly says ...

Rothchild, man, so the title is just that: "shoot-outs every which way?" and it's not even clever in a comtemptful way? Oh boy, I'll put up with the flawed 3:10 then.

BTW, is her name DQ or not? HR: "Enlisting the help of a beautiful and maternal prostitute named DQ...." And Jeremy, a little Salvadoran restaurant around the corner from the Arclight has the most amazing beet juice (it gave me the prettiest pink pee for days). That's like borscht, right? Let's get borsched and discuss Aileen Crumb's passion for Nazi regalied men.

comment #11

T. Holly says ...

He was in a "bad mood," oy vey.

comment #12

Don Murphy says ...

her name is Donna Quintana
DQ

comment #13

Rothchild says ...

The entire film has a dark, messed up, and intentionally goofy sense of humor, but the title means nothing except "this is a movie with a lot of shoot outs."

comment #14

Peter Debruge says ...

Looks like quite a discussion has developed around my Shoot 'Em Up review. Figured it was high time I chimed in.

I don't think I had to appreciate what Michael Davis was up to in order to "get" it. There's a really inventive action movie at the heart of Shoot 'Em Up, but Davis garnishes it with the kind of deliberately vulgar humor most of us left behind in grade school (which the MPAA paradoxically limits to R-rated movies). His approach effectively narrows what could've been the ultimate ride for every teen boy in America to guilty-pleasure fare for an extremely limited audience (basically, teens at heart who like their humor as over-the-top and in-your-face as possible).

Granted, any movie that "gleefully urinates" over anything probably isn't my cup of tea, but I certainly gave the film a fair shake. And the idea that I walked in with a "bad mood" bit is just plain false.

I caught the movie at Comic-Con, riding high after seeing Leslie Iwerks' terrific new Pixar docu (http://www.variety.com/review/VE1117934284.html). I was excited/curious enough to see Shoot 'Em Up that I skipped hosting a Q&A with Neil Gaiman in order to attend the screening.

It's possible that I left the screening in a bad mood. The movie was certainly a disappointment, and I wasn't alone in my reaction. Still, I hope both sides come through in my review -- that was certainly my intention. If I was hard on the movie, it's a matter of misplace potential. I see what Shoot 'Em Up could have been, without all the cheap-shot sex gags.

In an e-mail entitled "Opinions are like Assholes," Don Murphy was right to call me out on a couple errors:

(1) "no one ever calls Monica DAIRY QUEEN in the movie. Not once." True enough. I made the mistake of fact-checking that detail in an AICN interview with the director (http://www.aintitcool.com/display.cgi?id=20024). Davis: "He calls her DQ, short for Dairy Queen." Guess that joke got lost along the way -- or maybe, like the title, it's only there if you care to read into it.

(2) "there is hardly any death metal in the film- perhaps you don't know what it is?" True again -- my taste in music's pretty tame. But it's a key point that the baby stops crying whenever death metal is played, and there's a lot of really loud rock on the soundtrack.

I appreciate the e-mail. We fixed both errors before the review appeared in print. But I stand by my opinions -- and my right to express them in a review.

comment #15

Rothchild says ...

(3) (typical of Davis' sense of humor, the artificially inseminated mothers provide the off-color pun of the movie's title).

comment #16

T. Holly says ...

Eggs in a dish, fertility drug shots and turkey basters.

I defend Peter's right to make me laugh. Hope he's getting comfy with the internet -- filmmakers vs. critic, on-line vs. traditional.

comment #17

Peter Debruge says ...

I say a critic who can't stand criticism is no critic at all.

And I love the internet. Too many look at print as a pulpit from which we preach the good word, but feedback is what it's all about.