It's the End of the World as We Know It

When did it suddenly become hip to make fun of the Apocalypse?

Just a little under seven months ago, we emerged from the year 2012 having somehow managed to avoid the predicted End of the World. This of course is in reference the oft-fanatical response to the end of the Mayan calendar, which found popularity in pop culture thanks to a Roland Emmerich movie, several New Age books and one particularly embarrassed Family Radio host who incorrectly proclaimed our doom not once, not twice, but THREE times (if you include his first error in 1994). Now that the prophesied Endtimes have officially passed and the world can get back to normal until the next time somebody predicts our downfall, Hollywood has decided to pop projects out of the woodwork to offer their takes on what was supposed to happen. This is the End isn’t the first apocalypse movie to be released this year. It’s not even the first one to feature actor Craig Robinson; that would be Rapture-Palooza, which ostensibly came out on June 7 (good luck finding a showing, though). It might not even be the funniest comedy of that vein or feature the greatest cast, with Edgar Wright’s August entry The World’s End featuring Simon Pegg, Nick Frost, Martin Freeman and Eddie Marsan. But right here, right now, This is the End takes some of the industry's most beloved screwballs, throws them in a room together, and dares you not to laugh at the results.

Name those soon-to-be-dead celebrities!

It's the coming of the Apocalypse, and six professional actors - James Franco, Seth Rogen, Danny McBride, Jonah Hill, Craig Robinson and Jay Baruchel - find themselves trapped inside Franco's new and lavish home as the Earth cracks and burns around them. At first simply believing that this is a tragedy they will be rescued from (because as famous actors they will always be saved first), they simply hunker down and await their salvation. But when it sinks in that there's no escaping the end of the planet, how will six self-absorbed Hollywood performers adjust to the endtimes? By taking drugs, making impromptu and low-budget sequels to their most popular movies, and just generally screwing around, apparently.

Yes, Michael Cera is here. And he's HILARIOUS.

For a movie directed by Superbad and Pineapple Express co-writers Rogen and Evan Goldberg, you would expect This is the End to be a marijuana-fueled, acid-trip through the tropes of the genre's fiction and film. Making their directorial debuts, you might also expect that the overall quality of their product would not match their previous efforts on camera or with a pen. As it happens, the first part is absolutely true (especially the acid trip, which results in a very strange montage set to the tune of Korean rapper Psy's Gangnam Style). Demon dongs, crass language and crude behavior were all but guaranteed from the start, and if you thought there was a line the pair wouldn't cross, you'd be grossly mistaken. But what's surprising is how good the movie actually is. Yes, Rogen and Goldberg make plenty of typical rookie mistakes - many scenes are there not because they move the tale forward one iota, but because they were "cool" or funny at the time of filming. In fact, there's very little story anywhere in here; with the exception of the first and last twenty minutes of the entire movie. In between are countless examples of the hijinks and inanities that come with the group trying to "rough it" and survive the nightmare. You could literally cut a full third of the film and still leave the plot mercifully intact.

These six vs. the Devil... I like Satan's chances.

But the hitches in the story can be overlooked when the film itself turns out to be this funny. The filmmakers did a grand job putting their minimalist script on the big screen, thanks especially to a cast that play morally questionable, fictional (hopefully) exaggerations of themselves. The story is also brave in giving the leading reigns not to Rogen or the film's two Oscar nominees (Franco add Hill, for those keeping track), but to Baruchel, the least-recognized and arguably most likable of the group. What narrative there is is moved by his dislike of Los Angeles and the struggle between his lifelong friendship with Rogen and the influences of Hollywoodland. The acting is mostly solid, with the six actors more or less sticking together quality-wise (the one surprisingly lacking is Hill ("...from Moneyball"), who unlike the others doesn't seem quite at home making fun of himself or his accomplishments), and they're supplemented by great cameos from Emma Watson, Michael Cera, and some other blink-and-you'll-miss-them show-ups. The cast and crew obviously had a lot of fun on the set, and while that at times holds up the rest of the production, it also results in gags that just wouldn't work if the cast and crew didn't let the whole thing get away from them once in a while.

And thus, the movie became awesome.

Yes, it's incredibly stupid. Yes, the plot is thin as a piece of rice paper, and the the low budget means that the film's use of CGI emphasizes the "special" in "special effects". Yes, I was sick of Danny McBride pretty much from moment one (though the script does afford him some great moments). And you know what? I'm okay with that. This is the End is exactly the kind of mindless fun you need on a hot summer day, and while it's drug-fused production won't appeal to everyone and is nothing close to a seamless effort, it makes up for its miscues by keeping you laughing and keeping you invested. Is it a lot of fun for a summer day lacking in decent comedic offerings? Hell yes! Sure, it might not even be the best Apocalypse movie when 2013 is said and done, but for everything that could have gone horribly wrong, it remains a perfect excuse to spend a hot day in an air-conditioned movie theater.

Bombs Away

Oh, well. They can't all be Zombieland. The 2009 feature film debut for director Ruben Fleischer was a surprise hit, coming in number one at the box office and going on to become the highest-grossing zombie movie in the United States. It's success was instrumental to the subsequent surge in Woody Harrelson's acting career, as well as the notable rises of fellow stars Emma Stone, Abigail Breslin and Jesse Eisenberg, who went on to earn an Academy Award nomination for his leading role in last year's The Social Network. So it was no small hope that I carried into the latest collaboration between Fleischer and Eisenberg, the buddy comedy 30 Minutes or Less. Besides the obvious Zombieland connection, the trailers managed to convey the same fun atmosphere as in its predecessor, with some legitimately funny bits plus the addition of Parks and Recreations's Aziz Ansari with some particularly witty dialogue and delivery. However, there was still some concern, as the same trailers didn't seem to quite match the veracity of the original (Danny McBride is no Harrelson, after all) and my friend Anne predicted to me that it would be "horribly cheezy and a bit dull", despite the efforts of the trailer. It was certainly something to think about, but there really is only one way to be absolutely sure.

Remember; friends don't let friends rob banks drunk

Things aren't going well for Grand Rapids pizza delivery boy Nick (Eisenberg). The girl he loves is moving far away to Atlanta. Her twin brother Chet (Ansari) is also Nick's best friend, but the two have a spat when it's revealed that Nick has feelings for his twin. He hates his job, and is perpetually miserable there. This all comes to a head when he's kidnapped by two masked goons (McBride and Nick Swardson), who strap a bomb to his chest and demand that Nick rob a bank for them, or else they will remote detonate the explosive device and him with it. Given ten hours to complete the deed, Nick calls upon Chet to help him rob the bank, and the two must put aside their differences and come together as friends to make sure Nick doesn't make an infamous hole in the ground.

I can't put my finger on it, but something makes me like Eisenberg a bit more in this film...

Sadly, 30 Minutes or Less takes an interesting concept (loosely based on a true story) and doesn't go very far with it. Most of the humor is limited to what's shown in the trailers, and the story's complete implausibility doesn't seem to disturb the filmmakers very much, as they are quite happy to present us with an unfinished piece while calling it a work of art. What the film does do well is emphasize the two simultaneous buddy comedies, as Eisenberg and Ansari share scenes of equal importance to those of McBride and Swardson. Sadly, none of it is as funny as the trailers would have led you to believe, with far too much dialogue more vulgar than funny and lacking in any intelligence.

He's seeing that next Oscar nom just fading in the distance...

If either of the buddy groups comes out ahead, it's the pairing of Jesse Eisenberg and Aziz Ansari. Eisenberg's monotonous drone is already getting a bit old, and isn't used to its full potential as it had been in Zombieland. Still, he's serviceable enough in a comfortable role that melds his Social Network character with just the right amount of white trash. Ansari bounces off just as many walls as he needs to be entertaining, and easily carries the best lines alongside perfect delivery, almost as if the role had been written for him (it probably was, to be fair). It's really too bad his best bits are exposed in the trailers, though he still manages to carry over a few surprises to the theatrical release. Less entertaining are McBride and Swardson as the bumbling antagonists. McBride is just crude, and while that might appeal to some I can't get behind his character's complete lack of sophistication. One can't help but wonder where Woody Harrelson was as this was going on, as he could have one-handedly jump started this film. I know McBride can act (see his small part in Up in the Air for proof), so the fact that he's reached his pinnacle riding a hump of mediocrity is a bit disheartening. Swardson is slightly better and a bit more redeeming, but he's really not much more than a sounding board for McBride. The real surprise of 30 Minutes or Less is Michael Pena, who doesn't feature in any of the advertising but steals just about every scene starring him as the crazy hitman Chongo, who finds himself between these pairs of would-be leads. With the exception of Ansari he's the best of the bunch, and with respect he probably could have bested his co-star if he'd been allowed a few more opportunities.

Wait, didn't we do the Planet of the Apes film last week?

Earlier this year, I suggested that 30 Minutes or Less could be the funniest film of 2011. Well, that didn't quite pan out. While the laughs do increase towards this movie's conclusion, it's barely enough to even pale in comparison to better, funnier comedies like Horrible Bosses, Crazy Stupid Love, Paul and Bridesmaids. In this case, Anne was spot on: incredibly corny and not a little dull, especially in the first half; it's a huge disappointment for Fleischer and crew, whose bar might have been set a bit too high after Zombieland's success. Still. it's not a bad option for brainless movie fodder, but with so many other choices littering theaters this time of year, it's one for which you can afford to wait on a DVD release.

Everybody's Still Kung-Fu Fighting

Okay, today's post SHOULD have been about the new Woody Allen film Midnight in Paris, starring Owen Wilson as a man who falls in love with the French capital. It's been critically hailed as Allen's best directorial effort in years. So how did I go from that to seeing Kung Fu Panda 2? Sigh. I really have nobody to blame but myself. On Tuesday, when I had the choice of seeing either Paris or The Tree of Life, I chose the latter. My reasoning was that Allen's film had been enjoying some success; with Tree likely relegated to the limited release and indie theater circuit for the time being, and Paris getting more or less a wide release treatment, there was a better chance of Tree's showings winding down quickly, while Paris would get a little more time in the spotlight. So I decided to drag myself through Tree, thinking full well that a viewing of Midnight in Paris would be readily available only two days later, which was the next time I'd get the chance to head in town to the theater.

Whoops.

Turns out that in only two days everything changed. With my daily schedule only allowing me to see something in the mornings, I was upset to discover that the theater, which had been showing daily matinees of Midnight in Paris for the past couple of weeks, had NO morning showings on this particular Thursday. Dammit. So I was left with a conundrum. No backup plan, no interest in the latest rentals (heck, I saw most of them in the theater anyway), and very few options. Well, I did have one BIG option, but there was a reason I had been avoiding it. When the original Kung Fu Panda came out in June of 2008, it was critically acclaimed and exceeded all expectations when it came to the box office. It even broke box office records in China, becoming the first American-produced film to make over 100 million Yuan. Yet I ignored the film when it came out for two reasons; one, it looked like a kid movie, and not one that adults could really get into as well; the second reason is that I've never been a big fan of Jack Black, and anything featuring him in more than a supporting role I usually can write off completely. Still, an awards pedigree (the original was nominated for both the Golden Globe and Academy Award) plus a lack of real alternatives forced my hand, and for the second time this year (the first was Rango) I ventured into a theater where the median audience member age was less than would be legal to consume alcohol in Massachusetts.

Oh, that panda! He's so CRAZY!

The film begins with an opening montage that describes the backstory for the film's villain, Lord Shen (Gary Oldman). Shen, an heir to the throne who was exiled due to some shockingly not-for-kids genocidal acts committed in the quest for power, has returned to his family's throne bearing a new weapon, one that threatens to destroy all of Kung Fu. Meanwhile, Dragon Warrior Po (Black) and his allies the Furious Five are asked to investigate the death of one of the greatest martial arts masters, and Shen and his secret weapon may be somehow involved. Additionally, Po learns that the goose Mr. Ping (James Hong) is not his biological father and searches for the answer to who he really is and who his parents were.

Semblematic to the amount of plot they tried to cram in there

It's this last part that actually generates the most interest for this film. While it was odd enough to think that a goose would have a panda son in the first film, this idea was mostly ignored, with the anthropomorphic element so in play that the question didn't even follow. With the revelation that Po was discovered and adopted, the story turns in parts to Po's identity and where he comes from, a sweet and subtle story that has him remembering bits and pieces of his childhood before he ended up in his adopted father's care, and seeking his original family out. While adoption stories are not infrequent plot threads, the execution here is one of the few shows of perfection the film possesses.

Yeah, yeah, we get it. The panda is crazy.

With that exception however, the rest of the film proves to be almost an almost complete mediocrity. Although there is one inventive fight scene early on that has the heroes battling in a village of musicians (and has some of the background music performed by a direct result of the action), much of the settings and story feel unoriginal and uninspired. The setup for the story is rushed and without surprise, and the whole thing would have benefited if we HADN'T been told the entire backstory up front. Even worse, the jokes fall flat, and most of the film slips between unfunny comedy and too-serious drama. Tack on less than spectacular visuals and you don't come up with a very entertained viewer.

About to take this franchise behind the shed to hide it from the children

One of the worst things an animated feature film can do is load itself down with celebrity voices, because hey, who cares if they'll never actually see the actors on screen? Sure, you can argue that you're getting the best people for the job by hiring Hollywood's elite, but your argument goes down the tubes when that "elite" talent does very little over the course of the film. Black is better than expected in a leading role, with Po easily being one of his deepest performances while still allowing him to retain his usual brand of laid-back enjoyment. And Gary Oldman is wonderfully malicious as Lord Shen, his presence perfectly voiced for the role. It's the rest of the cast that is either misused or overpaid, as Angelina Jolie, Lucy Liu, Jackie Chan, David Cross, Seth Rogen, and Dustin Hoffman having little to no character development, meaningless and unfunny dialogue, and more or less being paid top dollar for replacement level jobs. Michelle Yeoh, Danny McBride, Dennis Haysbert and Jean-Claude Van Damme are other big names brought in whose talents are unrecognizable on screen and therefore unnecessary. Essentially it's money thrown out the window, and doesn't do the film any favors.

Those pesky Jehovah's Witnesses never learn...

Despite authentic appreciation for ancient Chinese customs and kung fu action films, there's not a whole lot to invest yourself in when it comes to Kung Fu Panda 2. Cheesy and unfunny dialogue and an average story mean that your first impression upon seeing trailers for this film were most likely spot on. Kids might get some fun out of it, thanks to second-grade physical humor, but rationally-thinking adults would probably be better off with a good book. Unless your children are begging, skip it.

High School High

Sometimes I see a trailer I absolutely hate. The trailer would fill me with such a loathing and bring me no end of misery, often resulting in my dismissal of the film because there could be no way that it could ever be good, not in a million years. Sometimes my initial opinion turns out to be mistaken. Sometimes that trailer I hated so much turns from ugly duckling to beautiful swan and the full-length film is so much more than the bits and pieces of trash I had initially viewed. The Adjustment Bureau is the best recent example I can come up with, decent-at-best previews turning into a much better time than I had been expecting. So yeah, sometimes that works out. Sometimes, however, what you see is what you get. When trailers began to show for Your Highness, the latest movie by the director of Pineapple Express and the latest movie release specially designed for chemically-treated individuals, it would be safe to say that I was less than impressed. Despite genuinely liking Danny McBride in small roles in other movies and Natalie Portman's general awesomeness, I couldn't get past the idea of wastes of space like James Franco, lousy-looking special effects and the trailer's overall vulgar attitude. It was a major turn off, so when I sat down to watch it this past Monday (the only other feasible option was the historical thriller The Conspirator), I was hoping that the real thing would trump any previews.

Be afraid of where she sticks that arrow...

McBride plays Thadeous, younger son of King Tallious (Charles Dance) and brother of the heroic Fabious (Franco) in a mystical realm of enchanted creatures and heroes. While Fabious is celebrated all over the land for his bravery and combat prowess, Thadeous's antics are generally frowned upon by the people in his kingdom's court, and he isn't taken seriously by anybody, not even his own father. When his brother's bride to be (Zooey Deschanel) is kidnapped by the evil wizard Leezar (Justin Theroux) for part of an evil ritual, Thadeous finds himself forced to join Fabious on a quest to get her back. Teaming up with a strong female warrior (Portman), Thadeous must discover a strength he never knew he had and rid the land of Leezar's menace.

It's good to be third in line to be king!

At first glance you might think that not a whole lot of effort was put into the making of Your Highness, and for the most part you would be right. According to director David Gordon Green, the script was nothing more than an outline for the story to follow, meaning that most of the movie was made up as the filmmakers went along. This outline was written by McBride and Ben Best, who in the past has teamed up with McBride on the film The Foot Fist Way and the HBO series Eastbound and Down. That prior collaboration aside, the lack of in-depth scripting means that all the dialogue here is improvised, which can be a clever move when done intelligently. Unfortunately, most of the performers here are obviously not that good when it comes to improv. Far too often, the punchline to a joke is reduced to immature cursing and poop humor, which the film takes the time to revel in. It also features blatant nudity when it can get away with it. Don't get me wrong; I like dirty jokes at times, but even I demand my crassness to aspire to an intellectual level. Futurama; Monty Python's Flying Circus; The Marx Brothers; W.C. Fields; Rocky & Bullwinkle; if you're going to be dumb, you can at least present that stupidity in a clever way, as these examples have over the history of film and TV. Instead, most of the humor here lacks severely, funny only to those whose higher brain functions have been limited by choice (and plenty of narcotics) or chance.

Portman wonders what demon she pissed off to be in Your Highness

Another item lacking is in the special effects department, whose sole duty is to make fantasy tales like this fun to look at. Sure, it's a fantasy PARODY, but when the story goes all out with dragons, witches, minotaurs and ogres, you might want to make them as real as possible to avoid seeming TOO self-degrading. Unfortunately, the team hired wasn't up for the job, as the effects look okay at their best, atrocious at their worst. It's obvious they blew their money on one or two big scenes and had to scrimp and save the rest of the way. One scene featuring a "wise man" who dispenses advice is weird in that the character is obviously a mediocre puppet, a clear sign of mismanaged funds when you consider a much more ferocious monster battle later on.

The blank vacant look to Franco isn't acting...

What was probably the film's biggest coup was hiring big-name actors to play the lead roles, most notably 2011 Academy Award Best Actress winner Natalie Portman, who gives it all but is all wrong for this role after capturing the hearts of audiences in last year's Black Swan. Not that she can't play the part; she's far and away the best part of the film as the ranger (think Tolkien's Aragorn or Legolas) with trust issues and a killer right hook. The problem is that she's BETTER than what this film could possibly have to offer. You might think that one bad role doesn't unravel a career, and you'd be right. Still, with 2011 already adding this and No Strings Attached to her resume, one has to hope that Portman makes no more missteps in the near future. This material is much closer to McBride's usual fare, and even I'll admit that he can be surprisingly funny as the film's cowardly hero. McBride is one of those talents who seems to be on the Jack Black career path; best as a supporting character, he's stretched in a lead role and can't be counted on to be at his best throughout. He's certainly not helped by his character's ability to be completely unsympathetic. At least he's better than Franco as the lofty heroic brother. This one's for you, James. Everyone seems to think you're hot shit. They think you have awesome talent. Well, I haven't seen it yet. Maybe if you didn't whore yourself out to whoever would give you screen time, or maybe if you kept the illicit drug use (need we remind you of your simply awful Oscar hosting gig?) to a minimum, I might be more considerate and give you half a chance. As it stands, you can't impress me, ESPECIALLY if this is the kind of material you so often bring to the table. The rest of the supporting cast is unremarkable, as talents from Deschanel to Dance to Damien Lewis are wasted and Justin Theroux doesn't do himself any favors with his mediocrity. And when you think about it, why would they even care? It's hard to believe this was anything more than a paycheck for most of them.

The film has horses... that's a good thing, I guess

I'm all for pot comedies, but when you take the "comedy" aspect out of the equation I'm not sure what I'm supposed to do with what's left. Easily one of the year's worst, I had hoped that Your Highness would be so bad it was good. Instead, it looped all the way around and became bad again, surely a sure sign of the level of quality Hollywood can get away with when given a chance, by consumers too high to care. Honestly I'm not sure what the film's producers were aiming for; were they TRYING to insult most of their potential audience? No matter, I suppose. It's likely this film won't be remembered by this time next year, and I can't imagine a more fitting end for Your Highness than to go up in smoke.