Jackass Presents: Bad Grandpa

Dustin: 4 of 5 stars Nick: 3 of 5 stars Average: 3.5 of 5 stars (Live canary)

Dustin: Fall is Oscar season, and riding the wave of Oscar-worthy movies coming out this month is Jackass Presents: Bad Grandpa. Makeup artists convert stuntman-turned-thespian Johnny Knoxville into an old-looking man as Knoxville demonstrates his acting chops, playing against type in a series of comical misadventures.

Your go, Nick.

Nick:  Even when Johnny Knoxville is in bad movies he still ends up being entertaining and this film is pretty good.

Dustin: I knew nothing about this film going in. I knew Johnny Knoxville played an old man, and that was it. If I took the time to indicate the movies I’m not interested in on Rotten Tomatoes, this probably would have been one of them. However, I was pleasantly surprised by Bad Grandpa.

For those of you who don’t know, Bad Grandpa was shot mostly with hidden cameras with a loose script involving a grandpa driving cross country to deliver his daughter’s son to the boy’s father. This was really just a premise to set up the jokes. I was immediately reminded of Borat. This is easily the best hidden camera movie since Sacha Baron Cohen’s sleeper hit.

Nick: How many hidden camera movies are there for that to seem like a positive statement?

Dustin: Bruno and the other Jackass movies, to name them all.

Nick: Although this film is funny it does a poor job of creating different setups for their characters to overcome. It felt as if in every setup Knoxville does something crude, people act, then he reacts and then Knoxville and the kid drive to another place for the exact same situation to come about. It bored me at times.

Dustin: I mostly didn’t care about the story, recognizing it for what it was. I said as we left the theater I mainly judge a comedy based on how much I laugh. You said comedy was subjective.

Nick: Creating laughter is the most important part, but an interesting story helps make a better film. We all find different comedians funny such as Will Ferrell, who I will never tire of, but I know a lot of people who were sick of him long ago.

Dustin: People might have different tastes, but I have been thinking of that subject today while I was at work, and I think one could make an argument that comedy is not subjective. Just some people have bad tastes. If you wanted to be boring, you could deconstruct what makes a joke funny, and why some jokes fall flat.

For example, recent Adam Sandler movies don’t have any jokes. He presents a strange character and you’re supposed to laugh because they’re strange. It’s the lowest form of comedy. If you laugh at that, you’re a moron. That’s not subjective.

Bad Grandpa relies mostly on irony. The viewer knows they're watching Johnny Knoxville set up a real person to be in an uncomfortable situation. We know something they don’t, so their reaction is funny to us. That’s science.

Nick: I still think your argument agrees that it’s subjective. If one thinks anything Sandler does is funny, including silly voices and poop jokes, then that means that style of humor is meant for them. Comedy definitely has high and low forms, but just because you enjoy the low doesn’t mean its not subjective, but may possibly mean “you might be a redneck.”

Dustin: Humor is also cultural, but that is beyond the scope of this review. I’ll just say when I lived in Japan, I found their sense of humor juvenile, and was frustrated they didn’t understand my deadpan humor. When I read the funny pages in the Spanish-language newspaper, I’m shocked at how flat-out misogynistic the jokes placed next to children’s puzzles are.

What worked for you in this movie?

Nick: The relationship between Johnny Knoxville and the little kid, Billy (Jackson Nicoll), was a highlight but also Nicoll telling random men that he “loves them” and wants them to be his “new daddy.”

Dustin: The kid was quite talented. There was definitely a dynamic between him and Knoxville. At times, when they were ad libbing, he seemed to make Knoxville laugh for real.

Nick: Nicoll has acted in The Fighter, Arthur, and Fun Size. I’ve seen the first two and didn’t recognize him, and those were some large scale films.

Dustin: It’s a bit pointless to describe the jokes in a comedy as they never come across as funny on paper, and it also makes for spoilers. But is there anything else you’d like to add about this movie?

Nick: The last 15 minutes of the film might have been the least funny, but they at least had a somewhat heartwarming ending.

Did you feel it?

Dustin: I hoped you didn’t notice me wiping a tear from my eye.

Captain Phillips

Dustin: 4.5 of 5 stars Nick: 3 of 5 stars Average: 3.75 of 5 stars (Live canary)

Dustin: Captain Phillips is a movie based on a book based on a true story. It features a cast of unknown actors like Faysal Ahmed, a couple Barkhads (Abdi and Abdirahman), Tom Hanks and Michael Chernus.

What did you think of Captain Phillips, Nick?

Nick: This might be the best example of a trailer that actually represents the tone and theme of a movie, and for that I’m surely thankful. Though what the trailer shows didn't exactly appeal to me, and neither did the movie.

Dustin: That accounts for our differences in ratings because this is exactly the kind of story that appeals to me.

Nick: The story is appealing, but the way Captain Phillips interprets it is less interesting.

Dustin: How so?

Nick: The fact the film is called “Captain Phillips” is bothering as the only recognizable actor in the film is playing the title role. If anything, the film would have been more convincing with an unknown actor playing that part just because the ability to suspend disbelief is almost impossible when staring at Tom Hanks. This, plus the fact that if you know the story before going in almost all tension is taken away from the main character.  

Dustin:  It is unavoidable to have a well-known actor in a movie like this. Even I’m guilty of being uninterested in a film if it stars a bunch of nobodies.

Nick: Yes, but you could always put the stars in smaller roles and give the main role to a somewhat unknown actor, such as the film I wanted to see this week, 12 Years A Slave.

Dustin: I definitely want to catch that when it comes to Kansas City.

I disagree knowing the story going in took away from the tension. This was a widely publicized event, so I don’t think we’re giving away too much. All I really knew going in was what was in the news. I remembered when the story first came out of Navy SEALs gunning down Somali pirates, and Capt. Phillips was on a talk show, therefore he would live and the pirates would get shot. But at times I was gripping the seat in the theater, reminding myself the pirates would get shot at the end and the Rich Phillips would live.

NIck: I could have sworn that when we left the theater the first thing you said to me was that it killed your suspense since you already knew what was going to happen. Though the only thing I knew was the outcome of Capt. Phillips, because of his book based upon his happenings. The scenes that were fascinating were of the Somali pirates as they got ready to do some pirating! There should have been a few more minutes with the pirates in Somalia.

Dustin: I just wanted to sound brave. I agree there should have been more scenes of the pirates in Somalia, as I’ll probably never go there unless my job gets really brave and thinks I could find opportunities there. Those scenes could have been filmed more steadily with shots lasting longer than two seconds. Paul Greengrass must be an epileptic who doesn't bother refilming scenes he shot while having a seizure, which were undoubtedly triggered by his own jerky camera work.

Nick: There was probably only 45 minutes at most that should have been shot with a handycam, but Greengrass says “Fuck All” to that and shoots a scene of Hanks and Keener getting ready for the airport with the camera getting all crazy-like.

Dustin: Exactly. Not every shot needs to be jerky and exciting. The scenes on the lifeboat make sense to be shaky, but not Capt. Phillips packing a suitcase in his bedroom. Paul Greengrass is good at getting performances from his actors and creating tension in scenes, dragging out the suspense just as long as it should be, but he needs to hand the camera to someone who isn't hopped up on caffeine.

Nick: The film also did a good job of not relying on the score in order to define emotion, which makes the acting all the more necessary. Though at times, mostly towards the end, the score does become loud and overdramatic.

Dustin: Let’s get a little intellectual and talk about the theme. This is a very American movie in that it presented a problem that could be fixed by shooting it. It is very appealing in that sense. At times it does go deeper into the pirates’ motivation. They have to answer to greedier bosses and don’t feel like they have opportunities other than thievery. But the movie doesn't address the theme that the problem is economic inequality that can’t be fixed with bullets, but harder solutions like infrastructure investment and wealth distribution. Then again, a movie about an NGO in Puntland wouldn't be nearly as suspenseful, unless Paul Greengrass amped up the shaky cam and shortened up his shots, of course.

Nick: The film touches on that topic quite a lot, giving the viewer an idea that the pirates aren't evil, but are committing crimes in order to survive.

Dustin: The pirates were basically evil. They maimed and threatened to kill people. The young one and the driver were sympathetic at times, but the leader--Muse--and the fourth pirate were beyond help. Given the opportunity to walk away with an easy $30,000, no small fortune in Somalia, they turn down the offer, saying, “I want millions!”

Nick: Muse is not beyond help and he is completely sympathetic. The character has composure and the ability of listening before acting. You are right about the fourth pirate, but at the same time, the film tells you that they have no other option. Their bosses expect more than $30,000. They even call up their lackeys and tell them not to bother coming home if that’s all they would be coming back with.

Dustin: Muse and the fourth pirate, whose name I never caught, were both shown to be hopped up on some kind of stimulant the entire time. He wasn’t very clever, radioing Tom Hanks and saying, “This is your Coast Guard!” in a thick African accent. He considered everything before acting, but I don’t think he would have hesitated to kill everyone on board the ship if it suited his ends.

By the way, I do really like the actor who played him, Barkhad Abdi. Very interesting face, and he’s more attractive in real life than his character was. He played the part well, looking sinister and inscrutable closing his eyes half-way like James Franco.

Nick: Muse had many opportunities to kill people that might have benefited his ends, including the fourth pirate we keep talking about, Najee.

Abdi and the other actors portraying Somali pirates were absolutely the highlight and why I would have to recommend the film. Though that Tom Hanks kid wasn't bad either.

Dustin: I just remember the pictures of the real Muse smiling into the cameras as he was brought in in handcuffs. Not exactly a model citizen.

Nick: That's why we’re reviewing the character in the film, not the stand-up citizen he portrayed.

Dustin:  I guess that’s why it’s only “Inspired by actual events,” much like Paranormal Activity, and every other piece-of-shit horror film released in the past few years.

Nick: P.s. Tell me if you (the audience) thought Tom Hanks sounded like Randy Marsh from South Park at the end.

Dustin: I didn't notice until you mentioned it, but I did laugh when you said that.

By the way, you and Laura did a great job reviewing Don Jon in my absence. It’s a little discouraging to see I’m not needed after all.

Don Jon

Nick: 3.5 of 5  Laura: 3 of 5 Average: 3.25 of 5 (Woozy canary)

Nick: For a couple of weeks, Dustin will be off gallivanting around Asia for his real job. In his stead, I am rewarded with the lovely wit of Laura McGee.

Laura: Thank you, Nick! I consider myself to be mostly an expert on reality television, but I will try my best to live up to Dustin’s fine work in movie reviewing!

Nick: Don Jon is the writing-directing debut of Joseph Gordon-Levitt about Jon Martello whose life is perfect between his place, car, church, family, gals, friends and most importantly his obsession with pornography. What did you take away from Don Jon?

Laura: Well, the film was really enjoyable. When the commercials first aired, I figured it was a big screen version of Jersey Shore, which wasn't entirely accurate…

Nick: Which you thoroughly enjoy, right?

Laura: Ha, well yes, it is a guilty pleasure of mine. However, I’m genuinely intrigued by this idea of second and third generation Italians, who seem entirely self obsessed, particularly when it comes to their body and clothes. I’m not clear how realistic this is of young men in New Jersey, but after watching the reality show and now Don Jon, I must assume that this culture really does exist.

Nick: Normally I don’t read reviews before reviewing the film myself, but since it took us awhile to review (my fault entirely) I chose to in order to remember what happened in the film. In the review by Odie Henderson, he tore into the film for over exaggerating the stereotype of Italians in New Jersey. Henderson is an expert in this because he is from New Jersey and is insulted by what he sees on screen. In another article that I read yesterday, the Italian American One Voice Coalition spoke out against the film for the exact same reason. Haven’t films mostly been an exaggerated version of life? Look at most cop films where there is gun usage everyday in their lives, but in real life I’m sure that’s not the case. Must a film only exaggerate when it comes to violence as to not be taken seriously? Don Jon is a comedy after all.

Laura: There has to be a certain amount of truth to some of it, although some of these things can be exaggerated for a film or television show. However, one of the first things I noticed about this movie is how misogynistic it was. Early on in the film, Jon and his friends go to a club where they rate every woman on a scale of 1 through 10, calling a perfect 10 “a dime.” After finding someone that ranked high enough for them on the scale, the next move seemed to be some drinking, making out in the club and then getting said girl home for what was certain to be a one time hook-up. It was hard for me not to watch that and compare it with the guys on the Jersey Shore reality show whose main objective was always to find a girl who was ‘DTF’ (down to fuck).  

Nick: The difference between them is that Don Jon is not a misogynistic film, but has its main character grow from that into something that is considered an adult. So in no way does the film say the main character is right for thinking this way, but laughs at him and his OCD ways, especially when you see the true insides of “a dime.” While in the Jersey Shore the misogyny is “the show,” but is also justified by just how sexually perverse the women are too (at least in action). I must state I have never seen the show but have seen many clips on The Soup and I read many entertainment articles.

Laura: Haha, well I am going to stop drawing comparisons to the television show at this point, it is just a little bit hard not to associate the two. But anyway, yes, Jon does go from being a shallow guy, spending all his time on making the things he cares about look up to his standard. Early in the film he meets Barbara (a dime!) played by Scarlett Johansson and begins a monogamous relationship with her. He seems to adore her, although he seems motivated by her looks more than anything. She in turn, almost immediately begins to try and subtly change Jon, suggesting that he start night school and telling him he would be so “sexy” with a “real job.”

Nick: Barbara had amazing negotiating tactics! After withdrawing sex from the beginning of the relationship and then dry humping Jon while subtly giving her demands for their relationship to further itself. Something that irked me about the film was the writing whenever a character went through a transformation. Every time a character “transformed” it seemed abrupt instead of building steadily. Barbara with her reaction to the Swifer and Jon with any moment he has in the film.

Laura: The transformations did move quickly, although I felt like there were warning signs of the type of person she was right off the bat. A major theme in this movie is Jon’s pornography addiction. He claims to prefer porn to real sex and watches it all the time. Barbara has no idea the extent to which he watches it, but catches him looking at some the first night they spend together and tells him he can no longer watch it. She makes him promise. Granted, he did watch an awful lot of porn, but what did you think of her immediate demands that he stop?

Nick: It’s a somewhat ridiculous demand, but that is what some real relationships ask for. I have certainly heard of some that dealt with the watching of porn and other demands that are even crazier. Jon said he would stop just to calm her down and make her stay, although to his credit he tried to stop, but failed miserably. It was pretty funny that he insulted his father for not knowing what a TIVO was, but failed to recognize the irony of a search history, which shows all the porn he watches and has been around longer.

Laura: Ha, I didn't even think about that, but was surprised he didn't know how to clear his history, considering the amount of porn he watched. As the movie progressed, it became clear that he was attached to porn as he had never had a real relationship and tended to look at women as objects more than people.

Nick: Barbara was as much of an object to Jon as he was to her. Barbara saw him as a broken object that she could potentially mold into something better.  

Laura: Very true. They sort of used each other, although I did feel that Jon really wanted to make the relationship work, even when it became clear that Barbara wasn't an especially layered or even nice person. In his night school class though, he meets Ester (Julianne Moore), who is a bit older and very much the opposite of Barbara.

Nick: The film is very harsh on Barbara, who becomes more and more of a caricature the longer the film goes on. In her final scene she is brought back to show how ridiculous of a character she is while trying to make us think Jon is clear of all misdoings. Ester is another perfect person right from the start, but she never gets to have a downswing of emotion so the viewer never gets to know her well. This is OK because Jon’s name is in the title and the only purpose her character served is to be, as you said, a complete opposite of Babs.

In all the reviews I read before writing this, not one critic mentioned Jon’s possible obsessive compulsive disorder. Is this something I’m imagining or did you ever feel that way?

Laura: Jon was a controlling person and liked to have order in his life. He seemed like a man of routine. It never really occurred to me that it was affecting his life negatively.

Nick: Depends on how one looks at it. As you stated, all the times he did a routine in order to get a girl in bed, then he does a routine after he gets the girl in bed (jerk it, never call her again, and clean his place). These routines are negative and lead to his inability to give himself emotionally to another person because as he states in his voice over narration he has figured out the perfect formula for life.

Laura: This is a more enjoyable film than I thought it would be. In the beginning it looked as if it was going to be another movie that sort of objectifies women and promotes a certain type of lifestyle. However it was surprising how the characters grow and also, being forced to accept that their is some double standard in getting upset with men for focusing on looks and sex so much, when in fact women can do the same things, their focus tending to be on status and money.

Nick: Very well stated. Don Jon is a piece of edgy filmmaking with scenes from pornographies spliced throughout and showing sex between the characters as something that is not so special. The film never takes itself too seriously, but maybe should have in regards to making Jon start off as even more of a prick instead of just making him charmingly sleazy. Although it’s nowhere near perfect, Don Jon shows that the world of film has an interesting new voice that will make his main characters obsessed with masturbating!

Riddick

Dustin: 3.5 of 5 stars Nick: 3 of 5 stars Average: 3.25 of 5 stars (Woozy canary)

Dustin: Riddick is the fourth movie in the Pitch Black trilogy, and stars Mark Vincent (aka, Vin Diesel) as Riddick, a future space mercenary of some type who wears glow-in-the-dark contact lenses. The third installment finds Riddick stranded on a deserted planet inhabited by dingo-like CGI canines and giant scorpion alien creatures. He sends a distress signal and shenanigans ensue. What did you think of Riddick, Nick?

Nick: Let me start off by rating each of the three acts. All being rated out of 5; Act I is a 4, Act II is a 3 and Act III is a 1. What occurs at the end makes everything that happened previously unrealistic in the world that was set up in the quite brilliant first act.

Dustin: I admit I was drawn in during the first act, even though I thought it looked a little cheesy at times. Sometimes it was clear you were looking at a Hollywood soundstage, and having the opening credits roll during the opening sequence reminded me of a TV miniseries. But the world looked unique, and having Riddick brave the elements alone was exciting. Do you want to break this review into acts?

Nick: Sounds like an interesting proposition. Lets do it!

In Act I Riddick is left on a desolate world by the the leader from Chronicles of Riddick. On his lonesome he braves the threats that stand in his way. When Riddick trains and trains in order to defeat just one of these scorpion-like beasts is what put me off so much about the ending when even lesser opposition are able to defeat dozens at a time. Like you said the CGI is pretty silly at times especially when talking about the water that the scorpion lives in. Though this doesn’t bother me as much since the filmmakers were trying to leave the big budget of the second installment behind and create a world much like Pitch Black.

Dustin: I haven’t seen the first two movies. I felt a little out of the loop at times, especially during an early flashback, and later when the antagonist introduces himself and by the way he says his name, it is clearly significant, but I had no context. Otherwise, I was able to understand the movie as a standalone film. I’d say Act II begins when the bounty hunters arrive. Here, again I felt like I missed something, because Riddick is suddenly even more badass and is able to pick them off one by one. I wasn’t sure if this was something that had already been established about his character.

Nick: In the previous installments he is certainly a type of superhuman and his eyes have been “polished” in order to see at night (which goes along way in Pitch Black). At the beginning of the film Riddick’s narration begins with explaining how soft he’s become to what he had been. Only other-worldly beings have ever been a match for Riddick while humans never stood a chance.

Dustin: I guess this is where “showing and not telling” is more effective. I thought Act II eventually found its tone, and this is where I became engaged in the movie again, what with the bounty hunters wanting to capture Riddick, and finally succeeding. But there’s irony when Riddick and the audience knows something they don’t, which is when the rain comes, so will the giant scorpion things, and their bounty hunter mission will need to take the backburner if they are to survive.

Nick: While the second act was still exciting its intelligence started to falter. Why did Riddick constantly tell them that they need to leave the planet now instead of telling them there are giant ass creatures by the thousands that are coming, which is why we needed to get going? It reminds me of the Piranha remake where the sheriff knows all these piranhas are coming in to the waters where the college kids are having a spring break and all she does is yell get out of the water, so nobody listens to her because she didn’t yell, “There’s a bunch of mother fucking piranhas coming in this mother fucking water” is how I’d imagine Samuel Jackson screaming the line. There are many instances of this lack of intelligence the grows as the movie pushes forward.

Dustin: If he tells them why, then they might actually listen, then he’ll never have the “I told you so” moment.

Nick: Very good point.

THE FOLLOWING SECTION CONTAINS SPOILERS

Dustin: Why did it fall apart for you in the final act? (Let’s say Act III starts when the inclement weather and the accompanying scorpion aliens arrive.)

Nick: First off, the more astute and aware bounty hunters are the first to be picked off when the film made such a big deal about how they were easily the more capable ones. The first guy, especially, because he actually knew what the creatures were, yet he stands right next to the thin layer sheet metal wall and is the first to die. Then for some reason Johns (leader of the more adept crew) doesn’t ride behind the outlaw who rides up behind him and bumps him off his bike down into a valley of scorpion creatures. When Johns joins back up with Riddick and the outlaw nothing happens as if the incident never occurred. Then for the instance that aggrieved me so much that I would give the last act one star is where Riddick, who had to give it all in order to defeat one of these monsters while in peak physical condition, is able to thwart and escape hundreds of the creatures while injured in the final scene. But to note, so did the bounty hunters who Riddick was easily able to defeat yet they could escape several monsters as well.

Dustin: I thought the visuals in the third act were impressive, but the story could have unfolded better. Another reviewer thought it would have been better if Riddick died when he was cornered by the scorpion things on the precipice. I thought that would have been more satisfying too. I don’t imagine these movies are popular enough that there’s a compelling reason to have kept him alive at the end.

Nick: While some of the shots throughout the film are brilliant, the CGI never impressed, so when everything was CGI in the final few scenes nothing seemed to be able to entertain me. With the way the story was set up, Riddick probably should have died at the edge of the cliff and he would have, but then he would have died less heroically than if he would have saved the others and then died. If the hero has been alive for several movies then he would not be expected to die in an unheroic manner so the thought didn’t even cross my mind in that scene. Though I did think it was also weak the way he was saved in that moment.

END OF SPOILERS

Dustin: Any other points you want to make about this movie?

Nick: Pitch Black is a film that constantly entertained while never wearing out its welcome. It was a sci-fi film made on a shoe-string budget with no stars that had every genre included besides romance.

Also I loved the dog companion in Riddick! One of my favorite side characters in recent memory.

Dustin: I liked that it had a small scale for a sci-fi flick. Most sci-fi movies are epic, and sequels tend to be too big, typically employing an epic battle. Which is OK, as long as the battle is to wrap up several conflicts at once, rather than just impress the audience with a bunch of shit filling up the screen. I liked that Riddick was a simple story about a small group trying to get off a hostile planet before it was too late.

Would you recommend it?

Nick: If you like sci-fi/action/western films, then yes. But if you enjoy film with drama lasting beyond the first act then I wouldn’t.

I Declare War

Dustin: 3 of 5 stars Nick: 3.5 of 5 stars Average: 3.25 of 5 stars (Woozy canary)

Dustin: Sometimes adults need children to show them the absurdity of their behavior. I Declare War is about a group of kids who take capture the flag to an extreme, acting out their fantasies with realistic war strategies. What did you think of I Declare War, Nick?

Nick: What a fun and clever idea. A movie called Son of Rambow came out a few years ago that I was really excited for but ended up missing, but I Declare War is how I hope that film played out.

Dustin: I thought it was clever at times too. The relationships between the characters are complex and believable. The main character, PK (Gage Munroe), is a strategist who always finds a third option when only two are presented, and opposite him is Jess (Mackenzie Munro), who is an expert manipulator who turns friends against each other. PK’s other antagonist is Skinner (Michael Friend), who takes over the other army in a coup. While the kids are playing with make-believe guns and water-balloon grenades, he resorts to actual violence to win and doesn’t care about the rules. However, he and PK have a lot in common. PK refuses to break the rules (although there is a plot hole here I’ll get to later), but he does cross unwritten lines in interpersonal relationships to win. They both go to unacceptable extremes and only differ in their methods. And both commit violence on Kwon (Siam Yu) to achieve different ends.

Nick: The only poor characterization in this film is of Skinner. While every other character is basically a normal person throughout the film, Skinner acts like a psychopath, and why he was invited to play this game is beyond me as they play up how he used to be a friend of the game but nobody likes his company.

Dustin: I think he got into the game by joining the other team that didn’t know much about him. I thought Skinner was a believable character. I’ve known people who were insanely jealous when their friends began hanging out with other people, and were no fun to be around because they wouldn’t follow the rules that ensure a game is fair and fun, and then threw a tantrum when they lost.

Nick: OK, but that is exaggerated in this character multiplied by whatever ridiculous number will convince you it’s surely exaggerated. The character could’ve been toned down a little more and the ending would’ve been stronger because we were supposed to feel some empathy for Skinner, but because of his ruthlessness, it was hard for me to see his warped vision.

Dustin: The whole movie was exaggerated. Their make-believe guns become real, and seem to fire actual bullets, although there is no blood and no one actually dies. Also, I’ve never known kids who could build a sturdy tree house and formulate such intricate strategies.

Nick: Well PK is totally like Brad Pitt in World War Z: he is ultimately flawless. Everything that is exaggerated in the film I enjoyed when it was on the side of representing violence but no violence occurring. While in Skinner’s situation he was committing pretty extreme acts of violence in the theme of a movie that wasn’t as finely put together as say Lord of the Flies, where we see the kids grow into something that is quite scary.

Dustin: I thought PK was a flawed character. He didn’t hesitate to sacrifice his best friend to achieve his goal, and he never learned to put others’ needs before his own. He gets what’s coming to him, but he doesn’t seem to learn from it.

Nick: That’s not a flawed character, that is a static character. Kwon is supposedly the main character who goes through a change and he is ultimately the only one who didn’t take the game too far. Kwon realizes this at the end and instead of acting irrational, like the rest of the kids, walks away and says he’ll call PK later. (Which, shhhh, I don’t think he will.)

Dustin: Overall, I thought the characterizations were quite good in this movie. It was also good from an artistic standpoint. There were some flaws in the writing, which was lazy at times.

For example, in one scene, Kwon utilizes a lighter and some type of oil spray. There is a crummy CGI showing he has a lighter in his pocket right when he needs it, and the audience immediately understands how he will use it. The lighter should have been “planted” earlier so the scene would have been more satisfying rather than irritating. But that would have required writing a second draft.

There is an excellent plant and reveal in the movie Mud from earlier this year. Mud uses two boys to run errands for him, and he has them deliver a note to his girlfriend. We see the note is written in permanent marker, and we guess maybe that’s the only writing utensil he has since he’s in hiding, or maybe it’s just another of his many eccentricities. Later in the movie, there’s a dramatic scene where a permanent marker comes in handy, but the audience doesn’t question why Mud is carrying the marker since it was already subtly established this is what he writes with. That is an excellent example of the use of this technique that other movies could learn from, and was painfully missing here.

Nick: With the narrow focus, it’s hard for me to find too much fault in anything, but at the same time with such a narrow focus things like “plants” can be focused on more.

Dustin: There was also a plot hole involving the Asian kid who pretends to be Kwon’s brother. Early on, PK tells the Joker that using cell phones during the game is against the rules, but PK apparently called this other boy to come help rescue Kwon. And we already know PK wouldn’t break a rule, so how did he call the Asian boy?

Nick: I believe he was Kwon’s brother, but he was lying about their mother breaking her arm.  You’re right though! Maybe he made some smoke signals or maybe he has people waiting on the other end of a walkie talkie (off screen of course). I failed to notice this.

Dustin: He wasn’t Kwon’s brother. Kwon is clearly half-Asian, but this boy was full-blooded. Kwon looks just as confused as Skinner when this boy shows up. Also, when asked personal questions about Kwon to prove he’s his brother, like what’s Kwon’s birthday, he becomes evasive. I figured PK just called the only other Asian he knew and hoped Skinner would fall for it.

Nick: Since it is such a narrow focus, how do you know that it isn’t his step-brother or half-brother and maybe his older brother is an asshole who doesn’t feel like being questioned when his (maybe) brother is being tortured. I see your point though, and I saw the character’s evasiveness, but when Kwon breaks free and goes back to PK, he asks about the Asian character and seems generally concerned on how well he is after being pelted with large rocks.

From a technical film point, this film was solid and maybe was made to showcase their talents, which is why the script seemed a bit lazy. The film could have followed Jess more like when she leaves the game to go home and maybe she saw Quinn and they have another conversation because of how much time we are forced to watch her fixate about him.

Dustin: I would have liked a scene where the real world comes in to set these boys straight like Lord of the Flies. The comparison between the two is obvious, and most reviewers are mentioning it. I think an adult coming in at the end would have put things into perspective and provided an opportunity to drive home the point of this movie (if there was one).