There are just some movies I can't help but facepalming during the whole thing. For those not in the know, facepalming is a physical manifestation of the phrase "Oh my God, I can't believe I am watching this." Take either hand and cover your face, palm to face. Gulliver's Travels (2010) is such a movie. From about the ten minute mark, I sat there, wondering when this was going to end. The writers could only get their hands on the Cliff's Notes version of the classic book, apparently, as this was such a bare-bones "adaptation." Granted, my hopes were not high for this to be good, but I expected a couple of laughs. Nope. Nothing. They moved the story to modern times, having Lemuel Gulliver as a guy from the mailroom with a puppy-dog crush on a travel writer at the newspaper where they are both employed. His aspirations get the better of him, and he is soon on his first trial as a travel writer.....in the Bermuda Triangle *insert facepalm here*. The filmmakers exhibited the same kind of quality control here that most game developers reserve for the Wii (read: none).
As many of you are aware, I am not a fan of Jack Black, and my mind remains firmly unchanged. He's trying too hard to be funny, and it comes off as annoying. *SPOILER ALERT* there is a musical rendition of the song "War" at the end of the movie, Jackie Chan's version from Rush Hour was better, and English is his second language. Jason Segel, Emily Blunt, Amanda Peet, Billy Connolly, and Catherine Tate also star in this, but I can't understand what any of them saw in the script.
Bad from start to finish, I want to go back and watch the classic 1939 animated version as a palette cleanser. the Ted Danson TV miniseires was actually the most accurate adaptation for those interested. Watch something else, preferably without Jack Black for your evening's entertainment. 3.75/10.
See you tomorrow, and GO WATCH A MOVIE!!
No comments:
Post a Comment