Whyyyyyyyy… Did I go see this movie??
Everybody loves a good movie. Movies can make you laugh, cry, scream… and sometimes they can make you do all three. Unfortunately, there are also the kinds of films that seem like they could have so much potential, but only leave you sitting in your seat with empty pockets, a sense of confusion and betrayal, and a strong urge to punch the person next to you square in the face. Allow me to walk you through a couple of movies that did just that (for me), and how they could have vastly improved. Complete with handy dandy diagrams!
For your education, here is a simple diagram of the path an average plot for a movie or novel should follow:
Now here are the plot-lines for two recent high-profile films: Transformers 2 and Tim Burton’s 9:
Transformers 2
9
You might be asking yourself, “Ferociousaurus, what do these two movies have in common?”
Well, not much, except that I didn’t pay for my ticket to either one of them, and I didn’t regret not paying to get into either one of them. We’ll start with Transformers 2. What did the first live-action Transformers movie do right? Likeable characters? A comprehensible plot? Being able to tell who is fighting who at any given moment? Not a hundred characters who are never introduced? Not thirteen hours long? Sounds good to me. Let’s do more of that! According to Michael Bay, however, those things pale in comparison to more explosions, sexy Megan Fox *, and being really, really fucking long (The longer a movie is, the better. It’s science.). What about 9? Cool fucking trailer? Check. Sweet soundtrack? Check. Awesome, and I mean Awesome animation? Double check. What could go wrong with this? Oh. The movie is 79 minutes long and it doesn’t make any fucking sense. I guess that is a slight glitch in the formula.
Both of these movies fall prey to the same trap, in slightly different directions. They are both visually stunning. The world and characters of 9 are animated beautifully, and the fight scenes are super, super exciting. The action in Transformers 2 is off the fucking chain—giant robots blowing each other up (and Megan Fox) have never looked so sexy. The problem is with length, and making sense. 9 isn’t long enough to ever establish any kind of plot or meaningful character interaction. Transformers 2 is so long, it’s impossible to understand all the senseless bullshit that has happened by the end. What both directors seem to fail to understand is that as distracted as most moviegoers get by badass eye-candy, there has to be some kind of plot to hold it all together. Explosions and knife-wielding ninja puppets only carry a movie so far.
"IIIIIII'VE got no strings... to hold me down... now watch me slit this robots throat with my broken scissors."
It’s possible for a movie to have so much style, it doesn’t need any substance—see Crank 2 and Shoot ‘Em Up. Both of these movies have plots that are implausible to the point of laughability, and are literally action-packed from beginning to end. And they’re AWESOME. Why? Because they don’t take themselves too seriously. They’re all about flash and they know it. The main characters of these movies don’t wax poetic about the nature of humanity or justice after they light themselves on fire and accidentally murder a hooker or stab a bounty hunter in the eye socket with a raw carrot—they don’t give a shit. Neither does the director, and neither does the audience. If a movie has all the style in the world and no substance, it needs to accept that fact—not pretend to be about something more than it is. That’s why Crank 2 and Shoot ‘Em Up get the coveted Fubop Seal of Approval® and Transformers 2 and 9 get the not-so-coveted Fubop Seal of Fail®–and if more people cared about what we said, the world would be a better place. FACT.
Go in peace.
—Ferociousaurus
*To anyone who says any movie with Megan Fox in it is automatically awesome, I recommend checking out this new technology that allows for unlimited access to pictures of hot women. It’s called the internet, and it doesn’t require sitting through eleven hours of Michael Bay taking a shit on your cherished childhood memories.
... doesn't give a shit about you or your childhood
A response to some of your complaints:
A) You make a forceful point; The Beast could have been killed, if it weren't for the fact that 1 is such a cowardly leader, and believes that their little group should hide and wait for The Beast to die. Obviously, 7 doesn't take too kindly to this method of action, and decides to go it alone, tracking and hunting The Beast until finally killing it.
B) Why 9 activated The Machine at the beginning of the movie is a bit shrouded in mystery. Maybe it was for mere curiosity's sake? After all, you must consider that 9 was only recently activated, and probably hadn't developed enough common sense to piece together that re-activating The Machine would be a bad thing to do. It essentially sets up the old "good-guy-is-now-hated-by-everyone-and-their-mother" cliche. Cheesy, but it advances the story at least.
C) The Machine is killed by the talisman because 9 used it to drain The Machine of all the souls it had taken away from the scientists' creations (2,8,5,6, and 1). I guess in this post-apocalyptic world, The Machine was completely devoid of energy, and needed to live off the energy of the dolls to survive.
Many of you will probably not interpret the film the same way I did, mostly because the film is very heavily dependent on visual metaphors. But you must understand; this film, which clocks in at 1 hr, 19 min. long is based off of the Shane Acker animated short of the same name, which runs about 10 min. long. So, you can understand where the simplicity comes from.
It's nice to see a film that is short, and to the point, but I really wish there would've been more to it. Maybe the DVD release will have an extended Director's Cut? Either way the film was good, as long as you interpret it the right way. (Tim Burton films have a habit of doing that.)
P.S.- The Transformers part of your review? Spot on. There's just too much wrong with the film that it just bogs down all the good parts. Like Optimus Prime's screen time. And…well…uh…
…Yeah, that's about it. Optimus Prime.
As to B, I wasn't asking why 9 reactivated the machine per se, because clearly he didn't know what it was. I'm asking why the talisman used to destroy the machine is also designed to reactivate it. Those are contradictory functions. If the talisman didn't reactivate the machine, it wouldn't need to destroy the machine. Minus the talisman, 7 kills the Beast about 15 minutes into the movie, and all danger is gone. They could have spent the next 75 minutes slowly but surely dismantling the machine while it sits in helpless disrepair. They demonstrated they could harm it with conventional weaponry, so I just don't see the point to having a magic soul talisman at all. It's a pretty big plot hole.
The talisman? How could it destroy The Machine if The Machine had no soul? I already explained that the entire premise of the talisman was to symbolize the right and wrong applications of science/magic. In the hands of The Machine, it's used to drain the life of all the dolls' souls so that he could be both:
A) posses the intelligence and the soul of the scientist.
B) restore power so that he could keep making weapons to rule the world with.
In the hands of 9, however, he uses it to free the souls of the captured dolls, and they restore life back to the planet. It's another visual metaphor about how the principles of science/magic aren't naturally good or bad.
To summarize; the talisman never had any power. The talisman is an energy converter, not a unit of energy in itself. If 9 hadn't plugged the talisman, The Machine would've been left to rust. And why would you dismantle The Machine if it's doomed for damnation? The surviving dolls from The Beast's attack (2,5,7, and 9) would've probably went back to 1 to tell him the good news, and this movie would've been over without a single fatality!
But the movie's still fine the way it is.
Bahaha. Full of snark.
I liked the article. I havn't seen 9, and i wasn't quite planning on it… But i saw it as more of an eye candy movie. Until i read people's reviews of it where he (9) does try to make a statement about humanity, which isn't what I want from some sort of CGI flick.
Same goes with Transformers 2, as well. I hadn't planned on seeing it because they, from i hear, focused too much on the human element. Michael Bay is known for huge explosions and over the top sort of effects.. Why not have like 90 minutes of robots fighting each other?
Regardless. I enjoy your work!
The Godfather came out in 1972–runtime 175 minutes. Lawrence of Arabia came out in 1962–runtime 216 minutes. The Seven Samurai came out in 1954–original runtime 206 minutes. These aren't flukes–they're considered three of the greatest movies of all time. So no, I don't remember when movies were long when they lasted 1:30, because I didn't grow up in the 1920s. Congratulations, though, for being able to operate one of these fancy internet machines even at your advanced age.
As for the movie making complete sense, explain me a few things. Before 9 brought the talisman into the picture, "The Beast" was the only predator the little puppets had to face. Why didn't they just kill it, which 7 clearly demonstrated was possible, and then move on? The main conflict of the movie arose from 9 reactivating the big, badass machine. If he hadn't done that, The Beast was dead. No more bad guys. Puppets win. Good game–no rematch. Furthermore, why would you create a weapon for defeating a machine that doesn't function anymore, and why would you make that weapon have dual functions–Function 1: reactivate machine that destroyed all of mankind, and Function 2: destroy machine that destroyed mankind (that you activated, for some reason)? Maybe all of this could have been cleared up–if the movie had added some length in order to expound on the plot a little bit. Shit, you could have even thrown in an ending where Bruce Willis realizes he's been dead the whole time, as you recommend, and that would have been great too.
All of this being said, I lampooned Transformers 2 for being too long IN THE SAME PARAGRAPH, so way to strike out on that one. In fact, the Transformers section was before the 9 section, so you would have to have skipped half of the article to miss that. My only other guess is that you were illiterate when you started reading my article, and slowly but surely learned to read by the time you got to…well, halfway through the second paragraph. If that's the case, you're welcome. Or maybe you're just a moron. Who knows?
You good sir are simply an idiot who has fallen prey to trends. So what if 9 was not the 2 and a half (and rising) hour long movie that we have been told to expect ever since Lord of the Rings? So what if the characters didnt get that much interaction. The entire movie from the characters point of view lasts less then 24 hours. 9 rises around 1 in the afternoon and defeats the giant machine the same time next day. Deal with it. Sorry it wasent another epic long annoying movie. Remember when movies were long when the lasted 1:30 ?
Secondly, the movie made complete sense. What didnt you get? The movie was incredibly simply. The machines were the professors mind, the dolls were the professors soul. The machine needed the soul to become complete.
The end was a little lacking admitinly but oh well, the rest was great, not every movie has a sixth sense ending.
JAMAL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!