MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland poland@moviecitynews.com

Unsinking Battleship (spoilerific!)

“Shouldn’t you at least be in a bikini, getting wet, in this part of the script?”
“Wait… they gave you a script?”

I finally got to Battleship today.

I saw alone in a multiplex theater. The vibrating seats were set up… but not offered or sold to me and not vibrating when I sat in one. Was the film in 3D? The ticket taker didn’t seem sure. (It wasn’t.)

Anyway…

It’s a really odd thing about art (or whatever you want to call it). Even when the idea seems stupid, when the idea connects to something real and recognizable – even a frickin’ board game – it has a shot at working. And indeed, Battleship started working, as a movie, about half way through… when it finally go around to having a connection to the board game that is its namesake.

The problem is, the first 45 minutes is so loaded with genre cliche, uninteresting actors, and other indulgences that by the time the movie is ready to grab you – with nothing that was in the trailers or TV ads, by the way – I imagine that most audiences had already checked out of caring and were trying to think of a good place for dinner, whether they had their parking ticket stamped, or how many drinks it would take to get their date naked.

The most frustrating thing for me, as someone who really enjoys Peter Berg’s directorial style and obsessions, is that there was nothing wrong with the movie – unless you dismiss it before seeing it as genre action or because of its title – that should not have been fixed in development. Easy stuff. Obvious stuff. Basic.

For instance…

You hire action hero Liam Neeson… and then knock out of 80% of the movie by design.

You hire the quite interesting and fun-to-watch Alexander Skarsgård… and you make him an uptight boring guy until you kill him at the end of the first act.

You have the idea that The Girl is going to be an active part in the film, but hire Brookyn Decker, who enters the movies as eyes, cheekbones, and tits and never really rises above that. (Especially sad as Berg has had great parts for strong, beautiful women, from Rosario Dawson to Jennifer Garner to Charlize Theron… but they could all act.) But more to the development process, her character is stuck in between… object of lust and marriage, but a therapist, but not strong enough to actually do anything.

The movie desperately wants to be Independence Day for the first half… but the cliches are so hackneyed I was wincing more often than anything else… and Taylor Kitsch, a good looking guy who is serviceable as an actor is, simply, not a real movie star. He doesn’t have that thing that Will Smith has. He is, at best, Timothy Olyphant… who is one of my favorite character actors… but not a movie star. Just doesn’t have the gear.

And then, once we know it’s an alien movie, the mystery of the aliens takes so very long to be solved, so that the soft underbelly can be attacked, without anything really giving us anything to anticipate, it quickly bores. Basic stuff… like when the old soldiers talk about attacking Oahu in the third act… great beat… but where was the set-up? The audience has no investment in Hawaii. We opened the movie in a generic bar in a generic town and go through a recreation of a YouTube video of a botched burglary to get to a burrito joke. Wha? And speaking of that terrible opener… is there a reason WHY the bartender won’t put a burrito in the microwave for a supermodel with her rack on exhibit in a shitty little bar? I was waiting for the joke that every time she eats a phallic burrito at his bar, a fight starts between wannabe suitors… or some such silliness. But no. Not even that. Just an excuse for Taylor Dane to break into a Quickie Mart. Oy. (Yes, I know that’s not his name.)

There was a kinda brilliant Movies In 2012 idea of there being an international gathering of warships, which the aliens will attack. But all the internationalism ended up reduced to one Japanese guy who seemed to speak better English than our lead. I completely get why, eventually, the movie is reduced to a no-electronics, limited-number-of-ships zone. And that was done in a very smart way. But couldn’t a couple of other nations and attitudes have swam over after being sunk?

There had to be a better way to have The Naval Forces Of The World trying to get involved before the last 3 minutes of the battle. As I mentioned, I really missed Liam Neeson – whose daughter and forces were all outside of his ability to take action – but also everyone else they had set up.

Loved Gregory Gadson and the other veterans that Berg enlisted to perform in the film. That one of those Berg-isms that I always enjoy. He is really strong on getting close to the real thing.

There are so many missed opportunities. For instance, when our hero touches and alien and “mind melds,” it leads no where. Why do it? The great Hamish Linklater is the Jeff Goldblum character… but with almost nothing to do. Complete waste. Same with Peter Nichols. (Don’t even ask about Turtle.) Rihanna is good, though her character apparently comes from nowhere and has nowhere to go. Jesse Plemons is wasted as The Hick.

And why did aliens who can’t stand being in the sun come to a planet, the entire eco-system of which is based on orbiting the sun? We knows that more would come to finish killing us all. But why?

Look… this wasn’t aiming at being Inception. But it could have been a great, big, fun genre movie. I feel like I could have cut the first 45 minutes in half and had a much better movie, because with the exception of a few thin plot threads, there is nothing in the Let’s Establish Taylor Kitsch As A Good Looking, Charming Fuck Up Who Really Wants To Bang The SI Cover Model section that connects to the Neither The Humans Nor The Aliens Can See The Other’s Ships So We’re Going To Try To Hit Them Where We Think They Might Be movie in a real way.

There is a lot of cool and clever stuff. And the finale’ works, in spite of the long journey to get there. But man, was that script ever too complicated and too lacking in commitment to core ideas (like the iconic characters of Neeson and Skarsgård)!

This could have been another Pirates, as Universal intended. But it just wasn’t as fun. I guess Ryan Reynolds or Jake Gyllenhaal would have been a cliche in the role now… Chris Evans was busy… Ryan Gosling isn’t going on the big rides right now… you need someone who can hold that space, especially if you want that space to be so in control of the film.

But it could have been okay with Mr. Kitsch. It was like there were too many ideas and no one reminding the team, as they got excited by this, that, and the next thing, that there had better be a good-looking, sense-making pony under that big pile of fun shit. Instead, it was a stage pony. And the ass was the first half of the film and the charming dancing front was in the rear.

Be Sociable, Share!

27 Responses to “Unsinking Battleship (spoilerific!)”

  1. Krillian says:

    My sentiments exactly. The first 30-45 minutes had it in my Worst of 2012 pre-list, but once the aliens showed up, it improved. Some. But if it’d been Kitsch who died instead of Skarsgard, we could have had a better movie.

  2. sanj says:

    DP/30 Sneak Peek – The Screenwriters of RED talk about their work on Battleship

    5 minute video

  3. anghus says:

    My favorite scene is at the end when kitsch and neeson are talking about brooklyn decker and marriage and what not. Theres smiles and banter and such. The scene would have seemed less terrible if they werent having this conversation at his brothers memorial service.

  4. LexG says:

    Still my favorite movie of the year. Genuinely disappointed it’s pretty much into second-run houses on its way out of town within a month. It’s a lot more fun (and cinematic) than the dorky, boring, TVish “Avengers.”

  5. Yancy Skancy says:

    “And why did aliens who can’t stand being in the sun come to a planet, the entire eco-system of which is based on orbiting the sun?”

    Maybe they had the same travel agent as the water-averse aliens from SIGNS.

  6. arisp says:

    LEX – how do you want to be taken as a serious ‘writer’ — with your constant tweets about it – when you proclaim, with head held high, that it’s your favorite movie of the year. come on.

  7. GexL says:

    Don’t take the bait. The opinions proffered are but the lowest order of flame bait. Reading Lex is like stumbling on some teen boy’s discovery of usenet groups circa 1994.

  8. movieman says:

    While I agree with the spirit of your piece, I think you’re unfair to the first act. Personally, I appreciated the contexualizing–or backgrounding–of the characters, and thought it gave the rock ’em/sock ’em action setpieces considerably more emotional weight.
    Along with “John Carter,” I think “Battleship” is one of the most underrated movies of the year. The fact that both failed at the box office (and that both starred Taylor Kitsch) sort of proves he’s not quite ready to headline a movie.
    But I wouldn’t completely write him off just yet. I think Kitsch just needs to add some gravitas and life experience to his good looks.
    I wouldn’t be surprised if he comes roaring back someday, like Josh Brolin, the actor he most reminds me of, and has a really interesting second act.

  9. Yancy Skancy says:

    So “GexL,” is movieman offering “flame bait” as well by calling BATTLESHIP “underrated”? Can we expect to hear from your new alter ego, “manniemove”? 🙂

  10. Wilder says:

    Because movieman is so famous for his trolling.

  11. movieman says:

    Because movieman is so famous for his trolling.

    Not sure I get what you mean by that, Wilder.

  12. Wilder says:

    Respnding to yancy skancy’s comment that gexl should consider your Battleship review “flame bait” as opposed to the other real troll. Read the thread.

  13. Yancy Skancy says:

    Um, I was joshing, rather clearly I thought. Trying to point out that “GexL” needn’t give Lex grief over something he’d simply overlook if one of us “non-trolls” said it. Especially since Lex was in “non-troll” mode when he posted that.

  14. Wilder says:

    Saying Battleship is the best movie of the year isn’t trolling? Okay.

  15. movieman says:

    Wilder- I never called “Battleship” the “best movie of the year” (that was Lex). I said I thought it was one of the most underrated (aka “underappreciated”). But yeah, I definitely prefer it, and “John Carter,” to “Avengers” and “MIB3.”
    The best movie I’ve seen so far this year is “Moonrise Kingdom.”
    But I also loved “Deep Blue Sea,” “Damsels in Distress,” “Bernie,” “Kid With a Bike,””Dark Shadows” and, guilty as charged, “Prometheus.”

  16. LYT says:

    Don’t worry – it won’t be Lex’s favorite movie by year’s end. There is another Twilight coming, after all.

  17. LexG says:

    1. Battleship
    2. The Grey
    3. Project X
    4. Prometheus
    5. American Reunion
    6. Hick
    7. Moonrise Kingdom
    8. This Means War
    9. Bernie
    10. I don’t remember

  18. bulldog68 says:

    I’m shocked beyond belief LexG. No Snow White on the list. Did you wake up this morning to find out KStew is actually a man?

  19. Rob says:

    Oh, we’re doing this?

    The Deep Blue Sea is the best. I’ll do the other nine alphabetically:

    The Grey
    Headhunters
    Jeff Who Lives at Home
    Kid with a Bike
    Kill List
    Moonrise Kingdom
    Polisse
    Prometheus
    Your Sister’s Sister

    Not too bad a year so far, I guess.

  20. Breedlove says:

    Always love Dave’s reviews and usually jump on here to say so and plead for more. Maybe it’s just personal taste but I really think DP might be my favorite movie reviewer…I really like the sort of practical, behind-the-scenes insider style of talking about the different choices the filmmakers made and the reasons why and what works and what doesn’t. I can’t think of anyone else who writes reviews quite like this. Really wish you would do more of this. DEATH TO DP/30s that I never watch 🙂

  21. Yancy Skancy says:

    Don’t know why some people are so flabbergasted at the notion that someone else in the world might enjoy something they don’t.

    I don’t know anything about James Rocchi of MSN Movies, but there were a couple of tweets on the Movie City News homepage in which he praised BATTLESHIP. Is he a troll, too?

  22. jesse says:

    Honestly, I’m far more flabbergasted that so many enjoyed The Deep Blue Sea (not to be confused with the shark movie, which is awesome) than I am about Lex loving Battleship (which also sucked, sorry dude). Gosh I hated Deep Blue Sea — that was the movie I saw this year that I most wanted to claw my way out of after 40 minutes or so. I stuck it out and did not feel rewarded.

    Year’s best so far in terms of stuff I can see ending up on my ten-best list in an average year:

    Moonrise Kingdom
    Haywire
    Damsels in Distress
    The Avengers
    The Cabin in the Woods
    Prometheus

    I also really enjoyed Chronicle; 21 Jump Street; Bernie; Safety Not Guaranteed; Jeff, Who Lives at Home.

    Not a bad year at all so far, and we’ve still got Woody/Soderbergh/Oliver Stone/Nolan/Spike Lee/Rian Johnson/P.T. Anderson/David O. Russell/Spielberg/Wachowskis ‘n Twykner/Baz/Tarantino/I hope I hope the Coens and Malick, lying in wait.

  23. anghus says:

    Best of the Year so Far

    Avengers
    21 Jump Street
    Five Year Engagement
    Cabin in the Woods

    and then like, a five mile gap.

    Haywire
    John Carter

  24. LexG says:

    Saw it a fifth time tonight. As with every viewing, the audience loved it– applause, cheering, everyone seemed pleased. It’s a solid audience picture with a BEAUTIFUL visual style– widescreen, blue-aqua with flecks of grain, great lens smears and they wide-across, slightly out of focus background with POPPING PRIMARY COLORS and subtle lens flares… And RIHANNA… and BROOKLYN, both SO HOT, plus Kitsch RULES and is EXACTLY THE KIND OF GUY I’d want to be if I weren’t bald and 248 pounds with high blood pressure.

    Plus it is on THE OCEAN, meaning wall to wall water and BLUE… I don’t know, do other people not give an INSTANT three stars to anything BLUE and in 2.35?

    It’s also ROUSING in that cornpone TOP GUN/ARMAGEDDON way where you get all choked up at the awesome AWESOME military, and really, every time I see it, the last act with the old vets goes over like gangbusters.

    SHIP.

  25. Wilder says:

    “the audience loved it” – does the studio know about this?

  26. LexG says:

    FYI, it got a not-bad Cinemascore. Anecdotal is meaningless, but the few coworkers, friends of mine who saw it thought it was a fun movie, For some reason there was something in the ether long before release where people thought the movie was a joke.

    It’s certainly better photographed, scored, and paced than that STYLE-LESS Avengers movie, which is bad television and like a lazy Ocean’s 11 movie with drab photography and worse 3D. Berg can direct circles around Whedon, whoever that is.

  27. jesse says:

    I was actually surprised that Battleship dropped so hard, because as much as I disliked it, it seemed more or less like a second-tier crowd-pleaser to me — not going to be a word-of-mouth sensation but probably fine with the Blind-Buy-at-Best-Buy crowd or whatever. So I guess a lot of them just stayed home? I don’t know; I think word-of-mouth is vastly overrated as a reason for a movie’s success, to be honest.

    Honestly, Lex, I didn’t think Battleship was all that well-orchestrated, paced, photographed, etc. It had some nice colors but a lot of movie had that over-FX’d haze and the lens flare-y stuff didn’t look as gorgeous as it did on Star Trek or Super 8. Battleship had no texture; it looked overprocessed and a little thin.

    I didn’t find Avengers thin-looking or TV-ish at all. There are actually some shots in that movie I loved, like the fly-around thing that checked in on all of them in battle, or the bit with Captain America running and leaping across a bus and some cars. It was the first Big Action Spectacular Climax that I actually found, as you say, ROUSING in awhile. Battleship, it’s just dueling explosions… there’s no tension in that movie, and some of the dialogue doesn’t sound like it was written by humans for humans.

The Hot Blog

Quote Unquotesee all »

It shows how out of it I was in trying to be in it, acknowledging that I was out of it to myself, and then thinking, “Okay, how do I stop being out of it? Well, I get some legitimate illogical narrative ideas” — some novel, you know?

So I decided on three writers that I might be able to option their material and get some producer, or myself as producer, and then get some writer to do a screenplay on it, and maybe make a movie.

And so the three projects were “Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep,” “Naked Lunch” and a collection of Bukowski. Which, in 1975, forget it — I mean, that was nuts. Hollywood would not touch any of that, but I was looking for something commercial, and I thought that all of these things were coming.

There would be no Blade Runner if there was no Ray Bradbury. I couldn’t find Philip K. Dick. His agent didn’t even know where he was. And so I gave up.

I was walking down the street and I ran into Bradbury — he directed a play that I was going to do as an actor, so we know each other, but he yelled “hi” — and I’d forgot who he was.

So at my girlfriend Barbara Hershey’s urging — I was with her at that moment — she said, “Talk to him! That guy really wants to talk to you,” and I said “No, fuck him,” and keep walking.

But then I did, and then I realized who it was, and I thought, “Wait, he’s in that realm, maybe he knows Philip K. Dick.” I said, “You know a guy named—” “Yeah, sure — you want his phone number?”

My friend paid my rent for a year while I wrote, because it turned out we couldn’t get a writer. My friends kept on me about, well, if you can’t get a writer, then you write.”
~ Hampton Fancher

“That was the most disappointing thing to me in how this thing was played. Is that I’m on the phone with you now, after all that’s been said, and the fundamental distinction between what James is dealing with in these other cases is not actually brought to the fore. The fundamental difference is that James Franco didn’t seek to use his position to have sex with anyone. There’s not a case of that. He wasn’t using his position or status to try to solicit a sexual favor from anyone. If he had — if that were what the accusation involved — the show would not have gone on. We would have folded up shop and we would have not completed the show. Because then it would have been the same as Harvey Weinstein, or Les Moonves, or any of these cases that are fundamental to this new paradigm. Did you not notice that? Why did you not notice that? Is that not something notable to say, journalistically? Because nobody could find the voice to say it. I’m not just being rhetorical. Why is it that you and the other critics, none of you could find the voice to say, “You know, it’s not this, it’s that”? Because — let me go on and speak further to this. If you go back to the L.A. Times piece, that’s what it lacked. That’s what they were not able to deliver. The one example in the five that involved an issue of a sexual act was between James and a woman he was dating, who he was not working with. There was no professional dynamic in any capacity.

~ David Simon