Why has this movie taken so long to come out in the UK? It debuted in October in the US, and it's now out on DVD while the UK still hasn't had the full opening yet. It's that sort of lacklustre marketing and staggered release which makes it appear that the studio is noncommittal about what they've created, which is a real shame because Goosebumps is quite marvellous in its own way. Damn, that sounds noncommittal. Right, let me try again...
This big-screen adaptation of what can only be described as a literary phenomenon sometimes feels a little overshadowed by the presence of Jack Black and saunters in on the heels of some rather unimpressive trailers. Black over-eggs the pudding of course, but that's why you hire Jack Black. In a comedy/adventure environment, he's value for money if nothing else.
The film takes a good twenty minutes of its run-time to get warmed up (or rather, to become more than the sum of its parts), and the early backstory/exposition can feel a little heavy-handed, even making allowances for the target demographic. But after the initial scene-setting, the script is far more comfortable in itself as Goosebumps becomes a family-friendly horror adventure, with slapstick and dry humour in equal measure.
The books which inspired the film may be a product of the 1990s, but the movie itself is an almost Spielbergian homage to adolescent adventure movies of the 80s, like a feel-good version of The Lost Boys. For obvious reasons, it's packed to the rafters with Goosebumps references and in-jokes, but there are also Easter-eggs and nods to all manner of horror flicks from the last fifty-or-so years, too (including an above-average number of jibes in Stephen King's direction).
On a graphical front (and the film is proudly flagged as a Sony Animation production, so nit-picking is fair game), it's got to be said that a few of the creatures look a little 'plasticky' and almost unfinished, although those moments are outnumbered by the ones which pass the bar set by most studio movies in the 21st century. While it's not the best or worst CGI you've seen recently, Sony's trumpeting certainly suggests it's their A-game. The 3D, on the other hand, skips between average and ineffectual. It's not that it's badly rendered, it just isn't used to the potential that a film like this carries.
But Goosebumps is very much a movie for the youngsters, and is very much proud of that without being patronising to its audience. It's perhaps a little throwaway, but any film which demonstrates the power of books and imagination to a new audience is a great thing, indeed (even if it does so in quite a self-serving and brand-aware sort of way). I'd have gotten even more out of the film if it had just slowed down and done fewer things more thoroughly, but then it wasn't really made for me.
Enormous fun for the right audience, if a PG-rated Jack Black comedy can win over a cynic like me, you might just enjoy it too…
That's debatable, to be fair, although it's certainly going to look its best on a big screen.
I think it does.
Hmmm…
Probably not.
I didn't hear one, although the film's about 70% shrieking, so it wouldn't surprise me if a Wilhelm slipped through in one of the crowd scenes.
Level 2: Goosebumps stars Odeya Rush, who appeared in 2012's The Odd Life Of Timothy Green alongside Joel 'Uncle Owen' Edgerton.
DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.
• Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.
• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organisations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.
Take a good look at that poster, there. It may not be quite at Drew Struzan's level, but it's painstakingly executed in a classical style, and tells you everything you need to know about the tone of the film and the visual markers you'll get along the way. It's a bloody good one-sheet. I imagine it also took more hours to bring to completion than the screenplay…
Okay, I should really try not to be too hard on Scouts Guide To The Zombie Apocalypse, as it's clearly been made on a restrictive budget. Then again, the effects, filming and general production values of the movie aren't the problem; that dubious honour belongs to the first-draft of a script stuffed to the gills with everyone else's stuff, and which appears to have been cast with the actors who agreed to the roles in the shortest time. Ploughing full-tilt into the 'horror-comedy' sub genre, the film can't decide which side of the fence it's based on, and the result is that it's not convincingly both, but neither.
As comedies go, it's broad and sloppy; but as a horror-flick, it's an outright mess. Equally in stylistic debt to Superbad and Shaun of the Dead, the film ropes in a couple of From Dusk Till Dawn's beats just to keep things moving. And as amiable as most of the movie is, SGttZA's not as funny, clever or heartwarming as its obvious influences, and it has nothing else to bring to the party to make up for that. It's as satisfyingly predicable as a greatest-hits album, but a one which is also being performed by a cover-band. There's also a definite air of "Oh, it's got Champ Kind from Anchorman in it! I guess that's where the budget went…"
Admittedly, my other main problem (and more tellingly, I think) is that I'm a massive, unashamed snob when it comes to zombie movies. I think they're very difficult to do 'right', and more to the point I'm glad that that's the case. There'll always be room in the market for schlocky knock-offs, where the "wouldn't it be cool if…" moments are more important than the craft. But if you're going to successfully navigate the land of the dead, you're going to need more than swagger, luck and an overworked knob-gag. This film wants to be Zombieland, but it's not even Cockneys vs Zombies. The comedy/horror (or horror/comedy) sub0genre isn't an overcrowded graveyard, but it's a one littered with failures and also-rans which should serve as a warning to all who fancy their chances.
But, credit where it's due: I smirked, I smiled and at one point I guffawed out loud. But I also rolled my eyes and winced more than I should have. When the film's on-form it's a perfectly enjoyable 'DVD with a few beers', but that's not a consistent state and there are a few scenes which shouldn't have made it into the shooting script, never mind the editing suite (to put it delicately*1, the film earns its 15 certificate more by poor-taste than actual gore).
Ultimately, Scouts Guide To The Zombie Apocalpyse isn't awful, it's just a transparent attempt by a studio to pick up any audience that isn't currently wanting to see James Bond.
You can't blame Paramount for trying, although in this case you can certainly blame them for not trying…
In case you hadn't gathered, no.
Either a rental or £3 when it's on the bargain-shelf in Asda.
From the cast-members I've seen before? No.
From the ones I haven't? I hope not.
Even with its low ambitions, not quite.
Oddly, no.
I didn't hear one, but there's a lot of wailing and shrieking going on. It's entirely possible that there's a Wilhelm mixed in there somewhere, but if that's the case then it's the only subtle thing about this film.
SGttZA stars Tye Sheridan, who's due to appear as Cyclops in X-Men: Apocalypse; a film which also features Rose 'Dormé' Byrne and the voice of Oscar 'Dameron' Isaac.
*1 Which is more delicate than anything the film does. Let's just say that stabbing a naked woman in the head with a broken bottle seemed less awkward when Nicholas Hoult did it, somehow..?
Oh, and how come if the old-lady-zombie can't bite Carter's arse because she hasn't got her false teeth in, the 'eating out' zombie manages to chomp away on his victim despite not having a lower-jaw? Answer: Because they're both incredibly cheap jokes which say more about the scriptwriting process than the film's actual dialogue.
DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.
• Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.
• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organisations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.
Is this teenagers, nowadays? Obviously that question says more about me as a middle-aged man than it does the target demographic (and cast) of the latest John Green screen-conversion, but really: is this what the kids want? A largely directionless road-trip movie with the blandest soundtrack imaginable?
Jake Schreier 's angst-less teen dramedy follows the bookish Quentin (Nat Wolff) as he embarks on an evening's mayhem with his childhood crush, Margo*1, following which she disappears, leaving a trail of clues as to her whereabouts. With graduation and the prom on the horizon, Quentin and his friends learn lessons about trust, friendship, taking risks and not taking the good times for granted. Also features an uncredited walk-on by Ansel Elgort exhibiting all the subtlety of a Stan Lee cameo.
Most importantly (to me, anyway), the film's not bad. It's certainly a long way from great, but I can see where its heart is and have a pretty strong feeling that the award-winning source-novel has more time and articulation to build the characters fully. Because even at just under two hours, the film makes a pretty shoddy job of painting more than one dimension for any of its players. And for a film whose first act makes a big show of planting incredibly specific 'clues' in the trail for Margo, it's woefully vague about the practical points of the road-trip*2.
But in fairness, it's not meant to be a movie about specifics; quite the opposite, in fact. Paper Towns is about the lack of answers which life provides, even when you search for them, and in that regard it fulfils its own mandate a little too well. On paper, the story is a touching, bittersweet drama about awkwardness, self-realisation and friendship. On screen, it's like a flick made by someone who's heard of John Hughes movies, but has never seen one.
The Breakfast Club, American Pie, Superbad. Each decade has a definitive coming-of-age fable. The slot for the teens is still open. To reiterate: It's not bad, but the upcoming generation deserves better.
Leaving all that aside, Paper Towns features an elevator-music rendition of The Lady In Red without a shred of humour, irony or self-awareness; that's all you really need to know.
Only if you're sixteen and really impressionable.
For the film's target audience it'll be a buy-er, but probably once it's on the shelf for about a fiver.
Although I don't think the kids buy the discs any more, do they?
While she's not dreadful, if this is the best work of Cara Delevingne then that IMDB list isn't going to get much longer…
Not particularly.
Not particularly.
Not at all.
Cara Delevingne starred in Anna Karenina, as did Keira 'Sabé' Knightley.
*1Really, that's where we are now. A writer can name their protagonist Margo because they know their target audience will never have seen The Good Life so will be able to take the concept seriously.
*2 Things like "who's paying for the gas on their 2,400-mile road-trip, since they're all high-school students with no visible means of income and the car belongs to the protagonist's mum?", or "when the car spins off the road and the gang have to wait for the breakdown truck to arrive, what exactly is wrong with it, since the guy arrives and apparently fixes it without having to move the car himself?", or "if their road-trip is so meticulously planned that the stops are timed at 6 minutes, how come waiting hours for the breakdown truck doesn't throw everything to cock?", or "if the return journey was begun on the proviso that the gang would be able to drive 1,200 miles and just get back in time for the prom, how come Quentin has time to mope around, go for a milkshake, get the fucking bus back and apparently only miss the first two songs the DJ's played?". Or even just "how come an abandoned store in a neighbourhood so rough it's highlighted by the script hasn't been looted or is full of squatters?".
Y'know. Details.
DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.
• Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.
• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organisations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.
