Machete vs. The Expendables
- Thread starter MovieBob
- Start date
Recommended Videos
With the distance travelled, I'm guessing both got some action 
Anyway, He covers the Expendables thing because so many people wouldn't let it go. I imagine this is the end of it, even if people carry on this week.
Anyway, He covers the Expendables thing because so many people wouldn't let it go. I imagine this is the end of it, even if people carry on this week.
Well I can't now! D:
And aren't we still avoiding the point people made that it wasn't so much the negative review of the film that got people pissed off, but rather making fun of, demonizing, and overgeneralizing the people who wanted to go see the film, not once but twice? In two different reviews?
I get you're point, and I fully understand why you hated the movie, but saying those things about people who wanted to go see it and/or liked it for what it was, that was going overboard, and to top it all off, using your "fratboy impression" in your Piranhas 3D & Centurion review to represent the people who called you out on it just struck me as a bit immature and lame, especially after you tried to prop up Piranhas 3D for the blood and for naked lesbian sex in 3D. I'm likely the only one to say this, but that's NOT much of a good reason for me to see it over The Expendables.
Comparing it with Machete, on the other hand, was a much better way of explaining the flaws of the movie while propping up anotheryou want people to see. And wait, they downgraded Jet Lee to a comic relief that can't win a fight without assistance? What the freaking Hell?! That freaking blows, man! Not only is that completely unfair, but it's kind of racist in a sense, that Asian martial artist who can kick all sorts of ass without using weapons is less of a threat than the big, beefy douchebags that are pretty much interchangeable with each other?!
Well, whatever, you still kind of own an apology to the guys you ridiculed, but you've made your other point clear.
This really is one of those articles you should've co-written with a reviewer that loved The Expendables. I think that would've been far more interesting since, as has been stated, your dislike for the film really shines through in its segments. Not defending the movie (haven't seen it), and Machete does sound interesting, I just think this format for discussion was a mistake.
I would hesitate to compare them. They're both action movies, but whereas Stallone is going for the 80s action flick style , Rodriguez is going for grindhouse exploitation style. Hence the differences in the portrayal of graphic violence.
Saying that, I disagree with MovieBob's suggestion that The Expendables lacked memorable or violent kills. What about Lundgren's opening "warning shot", that strafing run, or that incredible shotgun? It is that kind of excessive, over-the-top action that made the picture reminiscent of Commando, or Predator.
Bob is definitely right about each action hero lacking proper screen time and characterisation. Jet and that other guy I don't recognise got a really lousy deal.
Saying that, I disagree with MovieBob's suggestion that The Expendables lacked memorable or violent kills. What about Lundgren's opening "warning shot", that strafing run, or that incredible shotgun? It is that kind of excessive, over-the-top action that made the picture reminiscent of Commando, or Predator.
Bob is definitely right about each action hero lacking proper screen time and characterisation. Jet and that other guy I don't recognise got a really lousy deal.
Yes they do. How often do you hear people whining about the same ol', same ol' in cinema? You hear the audience clamoring something novel, something original... And when they get it they go see a second rate action movie instead. The same thing happens with games, the same thing happens with books and music, and the message the consumer sends is that they prefer something safe to something new. That their dollars say something different than their mouths is indeed idiotic and getting outraged over something minor like a movie critic insulting them does not help their case. If they really don't like it then they should say their peace and walk away. The fact that many of them are still here watching his videos indicates that they have nothing better to do with themselves than be insulted by a critic they no longer respect. Movie Bob can't rob them of their dignity because they've already given it away.titaniumChampion said:
Also, I don't get why people say other critics don't do this. Have you ever watched Siskel and Ebert, or Ebert and Roeper? Have you ever read the man's column? Right there you have a prominent critic who has taken everyone to task at some point in his career. Lots of other critics do the same exact thing. Criticism isn't purely objective; it can't be when you're dealing with art. Good criticism balances objectivity with subjectivity and tells you how likely you are to enjoy the movie based on your relationship with the critic. When subjectivity is eliminated from the equation criticism fails because it's the human element that makes it worthwhile.
I don't blame him to be honest, i think any true fan of the dodgy piles of crap (but inexplicably entertaining) 80's action films would feel the same way. When i first heard about the expendables i had high hopes and was expecting a team of old fart action heroes (where the hell was Carl Weathers?) taking on some cheesy bad guy in some stupid balls out ultra violent action scenes with a ton of nods and references to those crappy movies i (inexplicably) love so much.Krat Arona said:
I'm STILL annoyed by it because i KNOW it could have been so much better, why do you think people still rage about the Star Wars prequels? Well, rage might not be the right word, i'm not angry, just very disappointed.
Anyway, back on topic, i am going to see machete this afternoon, so i'll see if Movie Bobs arguements over how much better it is prove true.
Well... all things like this are subjective of course, and I'll admit right up front that I'm not a "gun guy" in the sense that I didn't really have a reference of what to "expect" out of the AA-12 or anything to compare it to. (When I play FPS games, I never know which gun I'm "supposed" to have a real hard-on to grab - I typically just take whatever has the most shots per mag and keep it the whole game and stick something with a scope in reserve if it's an option) Plus, the shootouts in the film aren't especially well-staged, so for me that whole sequence was just bad guys flying slightly further back and a much louder "BANG!" sound.CptShiv said:
But, more importantly, it didn't strike me as as much of a character scene. The two-man axe-kick, at least, you get the film's only real moment where two of these guys act like a trained/tested military unit - snapping into almost-mechanical two-moving-as-one action. Suddenly there's almost a sense of history and camraderie between whatever-Li's-name-was and whatever-Statham's-name-was.
By contrast, the described scene from "Machete" - while certainly creative and audacious enough to rate high on it's own - is all the MORE memorable because it's such a great character-establishing moment for the hero. See, the film is VERY consciously working to ram home the idea that Machete isn't just a mindless bruiser but a quick-thinking, highly-intelligent operator; which isn't easy to do without slowing down the momentum. So instead, they use scenes like this to let his actions define him - he improvises a distraction and a lethal-weapon out of stuff he finds around the hospital, and executes the intestine-swing based on something he overheard from the doctor. So while looking awesome, it also tells us important things about the guy too. Contrast this with the "arc" of the AA-12 element in Expendables, which is basically just "Terry Crewes tells us he likes his awesome gun" followed by "see? He told you the gun was loud."
Now, I wouldn't presume to tell Stallone how to do his job, but off the top of my head here's how that might work out better: Instead of giving Crewes the gun right off the bat, give it to one of the bad guys and have Crewes notice it on Stallone & Statham's "recon footage." Have him get all excited and geek-out over the AA-12's specs. That gives him two extra details of character depth: Surprise! He's the smartypants "tech-head" of the team AND he's crazy-observant about background details. PLUS, it gives the audience something to root for regarding him: We now REALLY want to see him get his hands on that gun. Later, during the big shootout, have him finally come upon the thing. Close-up on the gun, heroic music swell, close on Crewes, BIG smile, pick up and arm the gun, HUUUUUGE cheer from the audience, transitioning into sustained applause as he puts it to work - we're thrilled to see this gun that's been built-up work, AND we're happy because HE'S happy.
Here's the deal: Machete may have been a better movie than the Expendables, but it's still not a movie that has real depth. It took a one-dimensional concept (Rebel Alliance v. the Evil Empire) and made it two-dimensional (also there is racism). We can do better.
The thing is, as mentioned in the article, the movie isn't subtle at all. The issue is. It's not about insane racists versus heroic underdogs anymore than it's about heroic vigilantes maintaining a border against an ever growing horde of leeches and criminals. Those are strawman arguments, and that's all the movie is making. A good movie would show you the benefits and drawbacks to each side, such that at the end, while you're positive which side you're on, you have no idea where the filmmakers stand. Better yet, you're convinced the filmmakers ultimately take your side in the issue until you talk to your friend who saw the movie with you and is equally certain that they support his opposing viewpoint. And then you both go argue about it on the internet for the next three weeks.
The thing is, as mentioned in the article, the movie isn't subtle at all. The issue is. It's not about insane racists versus heroic underdogs anymore than it's about heroic vigilantes maintaining a border against an ever growing horde of leeches and criminals. Those are strawman arguments, and that's all the movie is making. A good movie would show you the benefits and drawbacks to each side, such that at the end, while you're positive which side you're on, you have no idea where the filmmakers stand. Better yet, you're convinced the filmmakers ultimately take your side in the issue until you talk to your friend who saw the movie with you and is equally certain that they support his opposing viewpoint. And then you both go argue about it on the internet for the next three weeks.
Just because he is comparing a movie he disliked to a movie he liked does mean you should come into this thread and insult him. It was one movie he got mad at. He has made many other good reviews and I we need to give him the benefit of the doubt.heamrh said:
On Topic: Machete looks like a pretty gory and awesome film. The idea that some guy gets his large intestine ripped out and used as a rope is cool. I have got to see this movie.
I guess I missed the episode where they sat in the theater not doing an insightful critique of a film, but instead shouting "f*ck everyone who likes this" and "this makes me question evolution" over and over. In a film that Ebert thoroughly hated (North,1994) [http://bventertainment.go.com/tv/buenavista/atm/reviews.html?sec=1&subsec=1163] he goes over point by point what he hated and gave reasons. At no point did his evaluation turn to the audience, he simply mentions that this will be marketed to kids. That is professional ladies and gents.SirPumpkinLongshanks said:
MB called everyone sheep, but from what I can gather from your first paragraph is that they aren't being led in the direction you want them to be. Popularity is the measure of success, and that means appealing to a wider audience. I don't blame people for not enjoying every new idea out there all of the time. Some things become great on their own, some things achieve cult status, and others don't get any attention at all. If you have $60 dollars to your name only, and want to purchase something that will keep you entertained and satisfied, you will likely pick something safe as well. Dollar value aside, it's a hard sell to tell everyone you have to invest in experimental or outside their norm medium. Everyone wants to be entertained, and you need to accept that people will choose things, regardless of what they claim, that are safe as human nature.
Lastly, Inception did incredibly well at the box office and reviews. That is an experimental/out of the norm concept. That became successful and popular with the audience. Two key differences between Inception and SPVTW: Marketing and Demographic.
tl;dr.MovieBob said:
But really though, that scene you described would have been a huge improvement on the movie, and I suppose you do have a point about your iconic kill. However, I am a huge fan of the AA-12, so when I saw the thing was even in this movie, I let out a squeal of joy. But, to each his own I suppose.
