5 Responsed To This Post
Subsribes to this topic Comment RSS or TrackBack URL
mygif_alt
Greg C. Unleashed Says, in 1-26-2010 at 15:54:44 from     

After reading the title, a majority of moviegoers think of gun action and they are right, but mindless action that is. Director Michael Davis’s original concept–in which at first was verbally explained–was not taken seriously by several studios. He literally illustrated a 17- minute reel of animation which consisted of 17,000 line drawings of action sequences, but those studios were still confused. I really do not know why they had such a hard time understanding his vision because when watching this film; the “cartoon-like” action was very evident. Maybe that is why New Line Cinema and CEO Bob Shay understood his weird vision and gave him the green light. The character development, and most importantly the action cannot even save this rascally “rabbit” of a movie.

It’s night time in a desolate part of the city. Mr. Smith (Clive Owen)–not to be confused with Agent Smith from The Matrix–is sitting on a city bench; minding his own business, when he notices a blond pregnant woman who is walking by. At first, he is not very surprised about her appearance but within moments, he notices that she is in distress and ready to go into labor. However within split seconds; a car suddenly rushes by and crashes into another parked vehicle. The assailment immediately leaves his wrecked car and pursues his powerless victim but Smith simply cannot allow his atrocity to occur and follows the two into the building. Meanwhile Mr. Hertz (Paul Giamatti) and the rest of his motley crew of thugs arrive at the scene and join in the pursuit of the pregnant woman. Within moments, they soon discover Smith and start rapidly firing an array of bullets from the different weapons that they have but do little damage to our hero as he pursues the woman. He delivers the baby while killing all the thugs around him. Then he escapes with the new born baby but the new mother didn’t make it.

He takes the baby to a place of safety where he joins up with a prostitute (Monica Bellucci [Donna].) Then he takes her and the baby to another secured shelter and must now go after Hertz, to find out why he wants this baby dead. What will happen to our hero? Is this simply a case of revenge or something much more complicated?

Shoot `Em Up should have never gotten the green light. Director Michael Davis begins the movie as if it was a sequel from a prior film–as a Matrix Reloaded was to Matrix Revolutions, where it is understandable to have action to start a movie. Any good director with experience knows to begin a movie with background information of who the main characters are and how the story revolves around them. Shoot `Em Up begins with a bam!

Then the Director gives us vague references in the story that Smith may have been in the military, perhaps Special Forces or maybe he is a solider of fortune, but we have to guess through weak clues such as putting his lady friend into a tank or when he goes into a gun store to purchase weapons and ammunition. Mr. Hertz is the bad guy who wants the baby dead, but who is this person? Does he work for the Government of the United States? Is he involved with organized crime? The only information we receive has nothing to do with the plot, such as talking to his wife on the phone or how he shows his dislike to Smith–he might have a personal vendetta but some vague information about him appears way too late in the film. We have confusion and boredom; the focal point of the movie is the baby!

The action is plenty but cartoon-like and soulless. It was quite clear that this is a live action spoof of other films from the genre–The Transporter and Crank. There are references to Bugs Bunny and The Road Runner (with the acme traps) with Smith eating carrots and making wise cracks. Then there is Hertz responding back with “you’re a rascally little rabbit!” Is Davis making fun of Warner Brothers or Looney Tunes cartoons? Therefore, the action was unrealistic and this would be acceptable if the promotion for this film was marketed towards this theme. It leaves the audience perplexed.

The Verdict:

Please, enter at your risk. Shoot `Em Up leaves you wondering about the direction. We can see why several studios rejected this movie because they were probably confused with the director’s concept (those thousands of drawings). It leaves you wondering what New Line Cinema was thinking.

The movie appears to be a satire on the genre or themed towards Looney Tunes? The non existent character development; comical killings, not enough information and plenty of unrealistic action–which has no merit and the visuals become monotonous. Perhaps Clive’s character in this film is a way of saying that he should have been the next James Bond, but this is not the way to do it.

Rating: 2 / 5

mygif
Mystic Says, in 1-26-2010 at 18:38:57 from     

Like the other reviewers on here. This movie is just fun in your face violence.There is definetly not storyline.I did I was watching Clive Owen character from sin city with out the red chucks. It was like a pre-quel to Sin City. But without the writing of Frank Miller.This will bost Clive Owen into the next action star.When your too tired or having a good drinking party this is the movie. Makes you want watch the fight scenes again knowing it’s just as fake as the Matrix.
Rating: 1 / 5

mygif_alt
Veritas Veritatis Says, in 1-26-2010 at 18:42:43 from     

The only person who will NOT

be offended and disgusted

by this film

is one who has been weaned

on a steady diet of pornography

of the more perverse variety.

I would give some examples

to illustrate my point,

but the examples are too

offensive for print

in a forum such as this.

Rather than a life-affirming

plot about the heroic defense

of an innocent newborn baby,

it is the shameless exploitation

of a baby in danger to justify

the existance of and interest in

the exploits of two of the

trashiest human beings

I have ever encountered as

“heroes” in a film.

The villian is equally disgusting.

The baby survived attack after

attack due to the assistance

of our “heroes”.

That’s the good news.

The bad news is that little baby

“Oscar” now has to live with his

foster parents.

Good luck with that!

Trust me.

There is no reason good enough

to ignore the negatives

and watch this film.

Rating: 1 / 5

mygif
Sadik Koray Can Says, in 1-26-2010 at 20:31:00 from     

This movie is so shamelessly bad that it that it’s eclipsed by its own ending credits. It is the nightmare movie for the parents of every actor. Clive Owen & co. should spend at least six months in Tibet soul searching. I hope that nobody tells this movie’s writer if/when the writers strike ends. If you’re going to destroy one dvd this year, make it this one. Two carrots down.
Rating: 1 / 5

mygif_alt
Shyam Says, in 1-26-2010 at 20:47:00 from     

one of the most asinine movies i have ever seen, ironically i saw this after “The last boy scout” and “Sideways”..:) , really goes out of your way to insult your intelligence.

sad that actors of proper caliber like clive owen and monica bellucci are wasted in such a flick.
Rating: 1 / 5

Leave A Reply

 Username (*required)

 Email Address (*private)

 Website (*optional)

Inform me when someone post new message here

Please Note: Comments Moderation maybe active so there is no need to resubmit your comment