Monday Morning Talkback: Let's Hear About Sucker Punch
Oh, dear. It seems that you decided to ignore popular opinion and spent your hard-earned money on Sucker Punch over the weekend (or, more likely, it seems that you didn't). Are you mad? Do you feel betrayed? Do you need somewhere to vent your frustration? Hey, maybe you liked Sucker Punch and want to vehemently defend its merits? Well, great! Let's talk about it! I promise, your friends at Movieline won't let the steam powered World War I-era German zombie soldiers hurt you.
Obviously, you've entered a spoiler-filled zone, so if your intention is to still see Sucker Punch, this probably isn't the place for you. But you're welcome to stay! Just don't complain, because you've been warned. So, then, for the rest of us:
· Was there any rational story in this movie whatsoever? I'm all for alternate realities, but not when we're told upfront, "Yep, this is a dream sequence and there are no stakes... at all." Which leads to another question...
· For all of the eye candy on screen, why was this movie just so... dull?
· In the first few minutes of the film -- when a shadowy looking Jon Hamm shows up to give Babydoll a lobotomy, only to have the scene immediately cut to some sort of stage play in a nightclub -- was your first thought, "Oh, I see, she just had a lobotomy. Oh, good, the next two hours are going to be a fantasy sequence"? Followed by -- after she retrieves the map (in her quest for the map, fire, knife, key and herself) -- "Oh, god, I really have to sit through four more of these?"
· Should Snyder have made the lobotomy part of Sucker Punch a shocking reveal at the end? Think about that for a second: The movie is exactly the same, only it's less transparent that everything presented on screen is in the wild imagination of a young girl. Maybe Babydoll does have the power to transfix people with her dancing while she enters another reality! Without knowing all along that these are just the thoughts of a girl strapped to a chair who is about to be lobotomized, wouldn't that give the action sequences some much needed gravitas? (Yes, if you're wondering, I do feel like I'm stretching right now by pretending there was really any way to salvage this film.)
· The ending. So, let me get this straight: a lobotomy is performed on Babydoll by Jon Hamm, with Dr. Gorski (Carla Gugino) in the room, even though both of them are against doing the procedure? And Gorski is well aware that Babydoll is having the procedure done and is well aware that she didn't approve of the procedure. Wait, what? Wouldn't Gorski have spoken up? Maybe asked Jon Hamm, "Who approved this? Me? Um, no, I didn't." Yes, this movie has a ton of problems, but a forged doctor's signature? When that same doctor is in the room for the procedure? Come on, Zack Snyder, get in the game.
· Even if you hated Sucker Punch, were there any redeeming qualities? For instance, I liked some of the music. See! That wasn't so hard! It almost feels therapeutic.
· Did you like Sucker Punch? There's nothing wrong with that! Let us know why, though.
· I am not a woman, so I find it hard to comment about whether this movie is empowering for women or not (even though I kinda did comment). A case could be made that a male calling out Snyder for feeling that this movie is empowering for women is just as bad as Snyder (who is also not a woman) thinking that in the first place. So, if any members of our female readership would like to chime in on this, we would love to hear from you.
· If you didn't see Sucker Punch, why did you stay away? Did you have any interest before the reviews flooded the Internet on Thursday and Friday?
· And the big question: Are you now worried about what Zack Snyder is doing with his version of Superman?
Subscribe to the new Movieline on YouTube
Comments
I'm jealous of all the people that only saw the posters.
Me, too.
The people who spent two hours watching this mess are the ones who got sucker punched.
I haven't seen it. But with all the brouhaha, now I am curious and probably will sneak in a coupla wine coolers to a matinee to see what all this fuss is about. Also: how does Carla Awesome Gugino end up in these promising but disappointing sci fis?
Zack Snyder is one of a handful of young directors to come about in the past decade (Nolan, Greengrass, Abrams, Verbinski being the others) the studios can trust with big budgets and big effects. And out of these select few, the man is undoubtedly the loosest canon creatively... the punk rocker. His slo-mo ramp-ramp style may be a little played out, but the dislike among movie lovers for a guy so weird and bright is very strange to me. He's the anti-Michael Bay.
All this talk of WB pulling him off Superman is ridiculous.
And replace him with who?
Nolan, Verbinski and Abrams have/had their franchises. And Greengrass is not a geek.
That leaves either older or untested directors. In other words, directors whose vision for the Man of Steel nobody will give two shits about.
Sucker Punch, like AI: Artificial Intelligence, may have failed to add up to anything dramatically but, as a meta work, it's still pretty rich. The director, borrowing plots from Brazil and Heavy Metal, spends the two hour running time subverting 10 years of fanboy wetdreams... a story of sexual abuse framed around dragons, robots and zombies. If it is a failure, it's the kind of failure only real auteurs can make.
With the Superman franchise, the director will be obligated, for the first time in his career, to play nice. Iconic material in the hands of a real iconoclast. How can anyone not be at least intrigued about that?
She's actually pretty okay in this. But! I implore you, this isn't a "so bad it's fun" movie. If you're drinking, you'll be asleep by the end.
I hated Sucker Punch, but I think Snyder should still do Superman. More on this in a bit.
An odd part of me liked the movie because of the action, music, and even the acting wasn't so bad. The only thing that the movie needed was a better script because the story lacked so much. Maybe it was because of poor editing with cutting out scenes that might have been needed. But most likely it was from the poor script.
So do you think Snyder should ever be trusted with writing a script again?
At last year's Comic Con I knew this would bomb. I don't understand why Snyder thought people would be interested in watching a movie that basically has no character journey or feasible plot. I only saw the short promo they slashed together and even that was boring. Sure, it was interesting to hear the actresses talk about all their military training but for what? geek porn?? should have been a youtube video....
This movie was truly awful - I want the $16 and 2 hours of my life back. As a self proclaimed "Fan-girl" and lover of even the most laughable movies in the genre (Constantine, Jumper, Push, & Watchmen all featured in my DVD collection)... this was an epic epic disaster (even though yes, i begrudgingly admit to enjoying the soundtrack). Zac Snyder is doing his best 'Michael Bay in a geek's body' impression by providing a CGI'd, Sailor Moon in Lingerie, explosion-fest with not even the slightest hint of a rational plot. I told my roommates to play Final Fantasy for an hour the watch the last 10min of Shutter Island and that's Sucker Punch in a nutshell. And just to clarify there is NO female empowerment in a film about abused (raped) girls in a mental institute... just sayin'
I don't think the movie is the Category 5 disaster I was lead to believe it would be -- but that's faint praise, since I was expecting an incomprehensibly-edited mess and got a fairly easy-to-follow, er...is "story" the right word? Is that what you'd call it? In a thing where a lobotomy patient does interpretive dances in her imagination which, in turn, translate into elaborate video game scenarios? Anyway, I was pleasantly surprised to be able to follow the action, and understand where each character was in relation to one another, and found that the noisy violence made visual sense from shot to shot. Which is more than I could say for...y'know...'Inception'. (Noooo, I don't think Sucker Punch is the better movie! Calm down!) That being said, I have no idea what the f*ck the *story* logic was behind most of it, especially the dragon-with-magic-rocks-in-its-esophagus scenario, and yes, the movie is thoroughly unexciting due to the no-stakes problem, so...fail.
On the bright side, Abbie Cornish is acid bath hot, and I like Bjork's 'Army of Me', too...
Well, I agree with you about the empowerment aspect. But I was called out by a female fan of the film for having an opinion on something that I "couldn't possibly understand."
I love this movie. I think that it's a crazy twisted turnabout. I love the work of the director and recorded 300 with my DISH Network subscription. I think Zac Snyder has done a lot of interesting work. I prefer to watch his movies with my employee subscription versus that of a cable subscription like Comcast. I think that the geek girl craziness, clothes, and music will rock out a lot of people.
Well I liked the movie. I posted this elsewhere but I guess since few are defending it I'll say it twice...
See...this is what I really don't understand about the criticism Sucker Punch has received. I disagree with the "teenage fantasy" line. Sucker Punch to me was in fact about women being violently controlled by men and working out their relationship with regard to the men that are violently controlling them. Just because a woman might fantasize that she is in a brothel does not necessarily mean she wants to be in brothel (hence the other layer of fantasy). I think the audience was made successfully uncomfortable by the movie. Yes, you could ignore the premise of the film and go home and fap but you can do that with any film. Unless teenage boys are either a lot more sadistic or masochistic than I realized, this is no more fap material than most movies, and in fact is much less so, because it is challenging you on that premise all the time.
However that explanation of the movie is not something a 14 year old is necessarily going to come up with. So I think it should've been rated R.
I thought this movie was more like a two hour long music video than a feature film. It was a good ten minutes into the film before there was any dialogue, which ended up not being so bad considering much of the dialogue was so lame. The music was awesome but distracting.
I was confused about what was real versus Baby Doll's imagination for most of the film. Maybe I was suppose to be confused, but it seems like there should have been a better transition between the asylum and the brothel. Also, the plot is pretty weak. Most of the story was about them getting the five things to escape. I think it would've been a more interesting story if it was about the actual escape and the characters involved in it.
I am a woman and I don't think this movie had anything to do with empowering women. It's a fan boy fantasy complete with skimpily clad girls participating in violent acts against avatar-like soldiers while things blow up everywhere. Meanwhile, all of the female characters are abused by real-life men (i.e. stepfather, orderly/pimp, mayor).
I feel bad for the cast. Jena Malone, Scott Glen, Carla Gugino, and Jon Hamm are all very talented actors who are given next to nothing to do in the film.
Scott Glen gets to utter such wonderful cliches as, "If you don't stand for something, you'll fall for anything," and, "Don't ever write a check with your mouth you can't cash with your ass." Horrible!
I don't even get why Jon Hamm was in this. The High Roller character was truly disappointing as he's mentioned over and over again throughout the film but is only seen briefly while walking into the club and sitting at a table. Sounds like the role might have been a little more substantial in an initial version but a scene had to be cut out between him and Baby Doll in order to get a PG-13 rating. I think it would've probably been a much better movie if it had been rated R.
I did not see this film. Nor will I. Ever.
Years ago when the trailer for 300 came out, I saw it and thought, ok, that could be kind of cool. So I saw that crapfest and I concluded that Zack Snyder was a hack. But for some reason a lot of people liked that film. So then I thought, maybe I just had a bad day. Could it really have been that bad? Yes.
A trailer for Watchmen comes out (which I must interject is one of my favorite graphic novels, and I believe one of the biggest influence in the graphic novel universe), and I thought, wow, he's trying to pull the same sort of tricks he did for 300, and this trailer doesn't even look good. Or if it did, I know better than to believe it. But my friend dragged me to a screening anyway (and he paid for the ticket as I said I would not). And guess what: worst, crappiest film I'd seen in YEARS. Many many times I wanted to walk out (and so did he, so I know I'm not alone), but I had to sit through it just so I had a full cartridge of ammo to argue how bad it really was.
And after that I vowed that I would NEVER see another Zack Snyder film again, no matter what he directed, what topic it was, or how good these moron friends of mine claimed it to be. Although this one no one thinks is good (thank God!).
And so, in the end I've managed to save money, stay a little more sane, a little less angry at the world and at the question of how can these hack filmmakers keep making crappy-ass films while I can't seem to get my projects off the ground.
And as far as Superman goes... if he is not fired from the project, if he truly does direct it, mark my words: he will singlehandedly ruin the Man of Steel. And I won't see that movie either.
And the Owls of What? F@#$ that movie and F#$% Zack Snyder.
I liked SuckerPunch. It was an incoherent mess. That being said, I went to just see the style and effects of the "music videos" and I thought they were great. The rest of the film didn't really hold up. So yeah, I pretty much agree with the review, but I enjoyed the parts I wanted to see from the trailer. It looked great. I think you are right, as long as someone else is in charge of the story and dialogue I think Zack Snyder will do fine.
oh, please. Snyder is a hack at best. He has done nothing of any significance and at best his work is made for loser 15 year old boys who still hide pornos under their bed but fail to use them ....300, Watchmen, Sucker Punch, the three worst movies of the last 100 years ...it's no wonder all he does is hang out with dykes and try to hyper sexualize men and women who aren't even remotely sexy.
Hey jackp, if Watchmen was the worst movie you've seen in "YEARS", then you obviously don't watch very many movies. And as far as Snyder "singlehandedly ruin(ing) the Man of Steel"? If Superman can survive "The Quest for Peace", I'm pretty sure he can survive anything Zack has in store for him. Grow up, you sound like a bitter, angry failure, and I'm betting that has more than a little to do with my you can't get your own projects off the ground.
I rather liked SuckerPunch in the beginning.. visually awesome. I dont see how you could have a mocie full of gorgeous women, giant demon samurai, nazi(kaizer?) zombies, assassin ninja robots on a nuclear train all wrapped up in an epic tale of prison break..and still be disappointing.. but it was exactly that. This tale of empowerment took a sour turn 3/4ths of the way through and somehow dropped the ball. No one wants a story about self sacrifice and pity.
The fantasy world wasn't Babydoll's, It was Sweetpea's. It was her fantasy that started to form when she was on stage and started staring at Babydoll.
Three worst movies of the last 100 years? That sir, is patently PREPOSTEROUS.
All me to school you:
1. The Last Air Bender
2. Sex and the City 2
3. Vampires Suck
...are the three worst movies of the last 100 years. SuckerPuch may have failed artisitically, but it is utterly ridiculous to take you seriously, if you think SuckerPuch could number among that lot.
In fact, I think many of you are over reacting. Some of you should go back to to your WoW tournaments or playing with your Glo-Sticks that pass for light sabres. Don't think that all of us will confuse your geek incited repulsion with what appears to be little more than pretentious artistic intelligence. The two are mutually independent.
Zack Snyder is a very competent director — he is no Chris Nolan, but he is competent none the less. As for calling him a hack, I think M. Night Shyamalan is more deserving of that description. The Last Air Bender was utterly ATROCIOUS. I'm sure SuckerPunch was nowhere near that horrific.
Gentlemen, get your geek hate straight and leave the emotions out of this.
It has come to my attention that the movie Sucker Punch has had some negative reviews. I must strongly disagree that this movie was far from good due to a lack in story line; it had a solid plot that mixed in fantasy with a "sucker punch" of reality. Not every story ends with rainbows and victory, which is what made the film so interesting in my opinion. For those disappointed with a lack of plot, answer me why? The film shows strong points in keeping a solid theme interesting by stunning cut scenes and a twist from the expectations. The plot is unique and the punch line expiring, no matter the hardship, you can fight through it. Baby Doll didn't lose her battle, she survived through it, and that was all she needed before she could let go. As for those who say the whole movie was for the effects, think about the purpose of a movie; it’s for entertainment! If your a guy who doesn’t think stunning girls fighting samurai, Nazi zombies, dragons, and robots to be thrilling, than your clearly homosexual and while their is nothing wrong with that, I can now see where your dislike for the movie comes from. For all those geeks out there who sit on their ass all day dreaming about being a knight in some WoW based fantasy or whatnot, I can’t see how you wouldn’t relate to this movie. Maybe it's jealousy spurred by the movie (which should be agreed sounds pathetic), or maybe a loss of hope for a misunderstood ending. The point is Baby Doll never saw herself as losing or giving up. The directing wasn't bad either; it consists of a large portion of unspoken setting which the audience must figure for themselves, a device which allows the audience to form predictions and formulate reasoning that best fits their likes. By showing the lobotomy first, it brings about a sort of dramatic irony even though we may forget this after a while of hoping that Baby Doll does indeed become free from the asylum in the physical sense. With this device, it’s easier to become attached to the character working in a beginning-end-middle direction (many movies use this). The music was used only for the purpose of adding excitement due to the fact that music, in its nature, creates emotions and moods in people.
All in all, I felt that this was a great movie and that Zack Snyder did a terrific job at making a piece of entertainment that is certainly worth seeing if it fits your liking. I just felt that I needed to give an underappreciated movie the rebuttal it rightfully deserved!
The movie let me a strange feeling at the end, because I did not fully understand it. Many people criticize the plot, however if you understand the full story, the plot is indeed very interesting and complex. (SPOILER warning! don't read the rest if you haven't seen it) first, you need to understand that there are 3 levels: the asylum (reality), the cabaret and the fantasy worlds. everything makes sense if you realize that sweet pea is the one telling the story, and baby doll is only a projection of her imagination. It is sweet pea's voice at the start, and if you notice, baby doll never speaks in the "real" level, in the asylum. it is sweet pea who will receive the lobotomy (sucker munch) and she imagines everything. there is a great (french only) website that explains the whole story here:
http://lestoilesheroiques.blogspot.com/2011/03/sucker-punch-fin-sucker-punch-reve.html
Unfortunately, snyder's movie is very good but misunderstood... i really liked it.
Next »