At least with something like 'The Next Three Days', there is a great dichotomy between the quality of the first two acts, and it's decline from that point. It's easy to review, because it was a factor that niggled me so much that I kept thinking about it. It's not even that it was terrible, just that it contrasted badly with the rest of the film. And at least with something terrible there's also a lot to say. In fact, it's probably easier to go on about what's wrong with a film over what's right, which all sounds very cynical of me. All this stuff right here about how reviewing an inane film is difficult - well, that's pretty much all the food for thought that 'Gulliver's Travels' gave me.
Casting Jack Black as Lemuel Gulliver is probably the first problem. Nothing against the man, I like him, he's funny and genuinely a good actor. The issue is that he plays the character Jack Black plays in every film where the screenwriters are too lazy to make him anything more than a rock-loving, dim-witted slob who will eventually learn something of a lesson about self-worth, etc etc. Jack Black does a fine job with what he's got, but he really needs to stop playing this archetype. Jason Segel really impresses as one of Lilliput's townspeople, Horatio, delivering a thoroughly convincing English accent, and thusly stepping away from any stereotypes that he would be unfortunate to be lumped with too. Emily Blunt plays her role knowingly over-the-top yet sweet as Princess Mary, and Chris O'Dowd as General Edward doesn't get much to do beyond being a dick for the most part, but proves to be the film's funniest character because of it. Near everyone else is relegated to very few lines or unmemorable performances. I also wonder why Billy Connolly, Catherine Tate and James Corden even signed up, with how utterly tiny, pointless, and humourless their roles are.
The film fails to ever really be funny. There was about one bit in the film that made me laugh, where Gulliver starts using the lyrics to Prince's 'Kiss' as a pick-up line for Horatio to say to Princess Mary. Even then, he has to go the whole hog and start quoting all of the song's lyrics, then the actual song starts playing, then he starts dancing, which Horatio also copies. It could have been a quaint, funny reference, but it just pushes it to the point where it's embarrassing. Which also relates to the song-and-dance number at the end of the film, a trait in family movies that has to stop. At least when there are jokes the film has a purpose of sorts, though. For the most part you wonder what's supposed to be funny (even the kids in the cinema weren't laughing). The plot rambles around aimlessly, usually for no real reason other than to get to a special effects set piece (which, while cartoonish, do the job). The plot holes are ridiculous (somehow the Lilliputians manage to advance their technology tenfold just by Gulliver's mere appearance). And whilst there's nothing wrong with taking liberties with the source material, adding robots into the mix is just a bit too far on the gimmicky side. Just like the 3D, which is absolutely non-existent. Honestly, without the slightest bit of exaggeration, I could honestly not see anything remotely three-dimensional in the film.
But, regardless of the fact that I have nothing but complaints, it's never TERRIBLE terrible (song-and-dance number excluded). If it had have been, this film would have been a hell of a lot easier to write about, probably a whole lot more interesting to read about, and could have at least made the film funny on that level. But no, it's just a film that exists, there to take lots of money and probably never be mentioned again by anyone ever. Which would render this all an utter waste of time. Just like the movie.
2/5
No comments:
Post a Comment