Why I Saw This Movie
I thought the premise of the movie
sounded really cool. Like anyone my age,
I have a certain amount of nostalgia for videogames from the 1980s and 90s, and
I’m a sucker for mixing my childhood nostalgia with metahumour or
deconstructionist plot lines. So the
idea of taking characters from one video game genre and inserting them in a
different video game genre sounded to me like it could really have potential.
Plus the
previews for this movie looked really good.
Plus this
movie got a number of really good reviews.
(I was particularly impressed by the glowing review the AVClub gave this
movie [LINK HERE].)
The Review
After viewing this movie, I’m slightly
disappointed. It wasn’t a bad movie, but
it wasn’t a great movie either.
Of course,
it’s always dangerous watching a movie when you are not in the intended target
audience. So watching children’s movies
as an adult can be hit and miss. But
sometimes - it - can - be- really - enjoyable. Sometimes
the writers aim high, and I find the humor really funny and the storyline
entertaining.
Because
this film was marketed as being based on old school video-game nostalgia, I
half thought the writers would aim for some humor that would engage an older
audience. But I was disappointed in that regard. The writers aim low, and the humor is
squarely aimed at children. Example:
“Markowski!
What’s the first rule of Hero’s Duty?”
“Um…No cuts, no buts, no coconuts?”
Well, I can’t
knock it too much. I also would have
found that hilarious when I was 5.
Or another
example:
“What’s that? I didn’t hear you. Your breath was so bad it made my ears numb.”
Basically,
it’s all like that folks. If you have
kids, great, bring them along to this movie.
But if you’re a single guy in your 30s, there’s no reason why you need
to go out of your way to see this.
The Plot
Okay, so here’s what I think is
the central conceit of this movie: the
video game characters are just like actors.
The bad guys aren’t really “bad”, they just pretend to be bad when
people are playing the game, much like stage actors at a play. Once the arcade closes for the day and the
actors are off the clock, then all the video game characters, good and bad,
just act like normal people.
Did I get
that right? Is that what’s really going
on here? I ask, because to me the whole
central premise of this game seems incredibly inconsistent. In some scenes, it appears that everyone
knows that Wreck-it Ralph is just an actor with a part to play. In other scenes (like when other video game
characters are fleeing in terror before him at the Central Station) it appears
that not everyone is in on the concept.
Even for
the good-guys, it is never clear if they really are the characters they play in their video game, or if they are
just acting. For instance Sergeant Calhoun from Hero’s Duty has a tragic backstory pre-programmed into her role
in the video game, which haunts her despite the fact that she, like all the
other characters, appear fully aware that it is all just a game and she is just
acting a role, and that none of that had ever really happened.
And, if
everyone knows everyone else is just a stage actor for a job, then what is this
bizarre discrimination that Ralph and some of the other bad-guy characters seem
to face? I couldn’t understand where all
the hostility was coming from during the confrontation scene between Ralph and
citizens of Nicetown.
I know it’s
a children’s movie, but some understandable motivation for the characters would
have been nice.
Am I over-thinking
all this? I did feel like all these
things nagged at my brain while I watched the movie, and kept me from getting
fully into it. If the plot had been a
little bit better, or the gags a little bit funnier, I suppose I wouldn’t have
minded so much. But because the movie really starts to drag in the middle, I
had plenty of time to over-think the plot inconsistencies.
The
beginning of the movie is alright. I
liked the basic concept, and I liked all the references to nostalgic video
games.
However
once Wreck-It Ralph ends up in Sugar Rush land the movie becomes a lot more
boring and conventional. At this point,
the movie stops being about Wreck-it Ralph, and instead revolves entirely
around Vanellope, who is a clichéd anime female character, and
entirely much too cutesy and sappy. For
me, all of her scenes, which were intended to draw humor from how cutesy she
was, just fell completely flat.
As for the
other characters running around this movie:
Sergeant Calhoun is played by Jane Lynch, otherwise known as coach Sue Sylvester from Glee.
In my opinion, she’s miscast in the role, because her voice is so
distinctive that it’s impossible not to think of coach Sylvester whenever
Sergeant Calhoun speaks. It pulled
me right out of the movie every time she opened her mouth.
There’s
also a romance going on between her and Fix-it Felix, which happens for no
reason, and feels incredibly contrived.
The writers were obviously counting on the fact that the audience would
just accept that these two fall in love without asking any questions about why.
Final Verdict
Not a horrible movie. A pleasant enough waste of time if you’ve got
2 hours to kill, but no reason why you should go out of your way to see this.
Notes (SPOILER
WARNING)
* I know it’s cheating to use someone else’s writing as a
substitute for my own thoughts, but the review of this movie in The Atlantic [LINK HERE] pretty
much captures exactly what I think about this movie.
I part
company from The Atlantic reviewer on
one issue only—I didn’t mind all the cameos and video game references. In fact that was the part of the movie I
enjoyed.
* Speaking of video game cameos, there are a few scenes in central
station that are so chalked full of familiar video game characters that I had a
hard time catching them all on my small screen.
I know I’m
giving this movie a mixed review, but if you decide you are going to see it
anyway, it’s probably better to see it on the big screen than the small screen.
* So, how is it that Turbo is the only character who can access
the video game code?
* And on a related note, Sour Bill at one point says of
Turbo, “He’ll do anything to keep her
from racing because if she crosses the finish-line the game will reset and she
won’t be a glitch anymore.”
This doesn’t
make a lot of sense to me, and it’s never explained why the game will reset if she crosses the finish line. But okay, it’s a kid’s fantasy movie, and
part of the genre is that they get to make up the rules as they go along.
The thing
that bugs me is that they didn’t even stick to this. Although she had learned to control it, she
did still glitch even after the game reset.
* While watching the end credits to this movie, I was
pleasantly surprised to hear part of the movie soundtrack recorded in
Japanese.
The Japanese group who recorded the song is the all girl
Japanese teeny bopper band AKB48, who, as it happens, were just
recently in the news a couple months ago.
(Did anyone else see this?). One
of the members of the band, a 20 year old woman, was publically
shamed in the Japanese media and she shaved her head in repentance. Her crime?
It turns out she had a boyfriend, which was in violation of the band’s
code. [LINK HERE]
Link of the Day
Violence and Dignity–Reflections on the Middle East
4 comments:
Hey Joel,
Just wondering what age group you think this movie is appropriate for? Some reviews say it is too violent for kids under age 8.
I would have said under 8 actually, before you asked. But I was unaware of those other reviews.
I don't think it was all that violent actually. There are a few scenes that are a parody of violent first person shooter games, but instead of killing people you kill mutated bugs. (If that makes a difference to you.) The climax of the movie is not a fight, but a car race.
I don't know...as someone without kids take my opinion with a grain of salt. Maybe 6 is to young, but around 8 is good?
All I can say with confidence is that adults are definitely not the target audience here.
Watched it with the teenagers a week or two ago, without getting too distracted by the weaknesses mentioned. I probably laughed hardest at the "Hero's Doodie" quip.
I thought the movie started off with some deliciously subversive potential, as did MegaMind. Ralph wants desperately to be acknowledged as necessary and valuable -- no Ralph, no hero, no video game. There's material there for some genuine mischief, but as with MegaMind, the writers default to the no-brainer template: introduce a villain that is TRULY bad, and unequivocally needs to be DESTROYED. Ho-hum. Business as usual.
I agree that the movie is very similar to Mega Mind, but to me the similarity in premise is not to this movie's credit. Both the idea of a villain craving social acceptance and approval, and the idea of the symbiotic nature of the hero/villain relationship would have interesting had mega mind not already done both of these the previous year. After Mega Mind, many of the themes in Wreck it Ralph seems like a re-tread.
I did like the idea of one video game genre character hopping into other video games, and this seemed like it had potential, but unfortunately it was abandoned early on. Once Wreck-it Ralph gets to Sugar Rush land, the movie becomes very boring and conventional (as you said).
Post a Comment