Zombieland

There's not really a lot to say about this movie other then the fact that it was alright and everyone seems to think its great, when it isn't, its just alright. So in an attempt to rationalize something that isn't even really worth putting any thought into, I'm going to try and figure out why I don't like this movie as much as everyone else. while reviewing it. Awesome.

So the movie is about there being zombies around and, well, that's pretty much the story. Zombies are real. That's cool, you can tell that from the title, so no surprise, and usually you don't need story in a zombie movie so no big deal. Then you meet the main character who is played by that guy from the movie Adventureland, which this is not a sequel to, and who is not Michael Cera. He gives us his Zombieland rules, which are made up of helpful tips on what not to do in the zombie apocalypse. He also talks about whats its like to live in "Zombieland" and how "Zombieland" came to be and general uses the word "Zombieland" a lot, which is cute, I guess...

I mean, its not a bad movie. Its actually a pretty well made movie, its just hard to care about a movie that tries so hard.

Here's a picture from the movie that I found on the internet

Though zombie movies don't have to have great stories, since I can't really think of one that actually does, they do have to have zombies in them. I mean yeah, we got a few scene every once in a while where Woody Harrison's character kills one or two zombies in what are supposed to be really badass ways, but the movie is mostly 4 characters saying and doing goofy things while there are supposed to be zombies around. Its more like a road trip movie, but it doesn't even feel like that, because there isn't any wacky things that happen to them as they travel, because everyone's dead. They just kinda chill in each scene as the movie moves on. And although there are a few funny moments, none of them are laugh out loud as much as they are those moment where you go 'Oh you!" and the movie just shrugs with a big smile on its face. Its all very enjoyable, but I don't know why all the people in the theater were going so crazy over this stuff. I mean these guys were wetting their pants over how amazingly awesome this shit was, and all I saw was Woody Harrison hitting fat people in a grocery store. And Woody Harrison's character was probably the worst part of the movie.

Yeah, it's cool when you have a badass character that does cool things when there are zombies around, but Woody's character was so forced that it was kinda distracting. They have him being half way between a redneck that likes nascar and being a normal guy who wants twinkies, with none of it feeling like it actually works. And there's also his "Nut up, or shut up" catch phrase thing that doesn't work as either a real catch phrase or parody of a action movie catch phrase, and is probably the reason I gave this a 6 and not a 7. Its time to nut up or shut up guys. Nut up or shut up. They even put it on the poster, seriously, go back up to the top of the review and look at it.

Now I'm just throwing in random funny pictures from my hard drive. Its a sign of a tree.

Though I think these complaints should look pointless to anyone that likes the movie, I'm not really trying to sway anyone's opinion. I don't really have a problem with people liking this movie, or even thinking its fucking amazing, because if you like it, then you like it. There's no reason you should listen to anyone else. But I feel like this movie was liked because people wanted to like it more then they actually liked it. Its missing any atmosphere, story, or characters that usually make these movie fun or interesting and just kinda gives the audience some safe entertainment in its place. I heard that the idea was originally developed as a television show, which makes a lot of sense to me because it feels like a TV show. Like one you'd see on NBC. A nice sitcom with cute zombie scenarios where the characters try to get closer to that theme park they are trying to get to for no reason, without anyone dying or the status qua changing. I still don't know why they were trying to get there. That's kinda stupid. It would have been a better movie if it were simply Dawn of the Dead in Disney Land instead of a mall. That would have been sweet.

6 out of 10

The Limits of Control 3-10

One of the most exhausting and repetitive tasks of dealing with anything of artist merit is the discussion of artistic merit and what the definition of art is. People either pose the question out of personal curiosity, or they are most likely trying to make a point that there is no agreed upon definition of art. I'm already bored of talking about. So I submit to you, just like that guy on the twilight zone, the movie The Limits of Control. A movie that is essentially about nothing, which will have many asking if it is or isn't art, while trying to explore the more artistic side of the track, although I'm being generous with the word "explore."

The plot of the movie is that you don't know what is going on for two hours as a single character completes repetitive tasks and meets a number of colorful supporting character, with the only other character that shows up for more than a one minute long scene being a naked lady that just seems to be there until she becomes one of the repetitive tasks. She shows up towards the end of the movie again to show some more tits before the movie comes to a conclusion and you realize that it definitely wasn't worth it.

Naked and glasses is as interesting as this movie will get.

If that sounds interesting to you, then be my guest and watch the movie, but if it doesn't,  allow me to ruin the 2 hours of nothing happening you would have to watch and just tell you the point of the movie. As the main character goes all over Spain he does things like visit an art museum, watching bar gypsy's preform, and ordering two espressos in separate cups. He meets up with different people and listens to them talk about movies, music, bohemians, and how science is about molecules and whatnot. He trades match boxes with them, reads a note inside, eats it, and then moves to the next scene where he does the same thing. At one point he gets diamonds in a matchbox and gives it to the naked girl, and then he later gets an old guitar. He eventually makes his way out to the countryside where he finds a compound. The helicopter that he's been looking at the whole movie lands, and he uses his imagination to sneak inside.

Sitting at a table.

Here he confront Bill Murray, who is supposed to be some American figurehead of authority, who calls him a smelly hippy. He kills him with the E string from the old guitar and then goes back to looking at "art" in a museum, making the movie amount to being a revenge fantasy about the artsy farstys coming together to hire an assassin to kill "The Man." I'm sure the idea would be genius if it didn't seem like something I would have came up with when I was 13-years-old. The fact that there isn't a payoff at the end makes the rest of the movie, and all the time spent watching it, wasted.

More sitting at a table...

Though the movie itself is dumb, that doesn't really bother me. I see dumb movies all the time. The worst part about this movie is that I really like and respect Jim Jarmusch and his movies, but the terribleness of this movie makes me question if he actually deserves it. I hate to use the word pretentious, but if I ever did, now would be the most appropriate time to do so. This movie is so self important without having the slightest point or meaning that if makes me wonder how anyone, especially a filmmaker I much respect, would make it.

 The poster is seriously cool though, so I'll put it in twice

The thing that bothers me about the "what is art" question is that you'd have to be an idiot to put so much stock into something you haven't even defined. I mean for real, if you don't know what art is then why do you even care? Why go through the trouble of posing as an intellectual without a developed understanding of what you're even talking about? Is the allure of being a fancy pants artist really that strong that it draws the attention of every self-important idiot and causes them to put on a shallow facade that spits in the face of reason, or what the fuck?

I define art as expression, because when I listen to music, or watch movies, or read a story, I enjoy it when the music, movie, or story expresses something to me and I can feel what the creator was going for, and to me that is art. If something is just a bunch of bullshit put together to try and fool us into thinking there is some hidden meaning we arn't grasping "because we arn't cultured enough" to get it, it isn't art, its still just bullshit. Which is what this movie is. Bullshit.

3 out of 10 for too much sitting at tables...