|
One of the things I happen to do on my Facebook page is write small movie reviews. My friends seem to enjoy them and some have even come to use them as a factor in deciding if they're going to watch a movie or not. Part of it is the way in which I review movies. I don't just say a movie is "good" or "bad". I may say why I like or dislike a movie, but my goal is to try and give an idea of what might make a movie interesting to other people. My "job" in doing a review isn't to get people to see or not see a movie. My job is to give them information that will help them decide if they might enjoy it or not. After all, we only have so much time and we might only be able to get in one movie in a weekend. It's best we make that choice count. With that being said, it seems I may be doing movie reviews for Collector's Times once in a while. I've done some in the past, and as I see a movie in the theaters almost every weekend it's not that large of a stretch. So, let's get going with an opinion on 'The World's End'.
'The World's End' is the third movie in what has come to be known as the "Cornetto Trilogy". Those that aren't familiar with the phrase will simply see the movie as the third teaming of Edgar Wright, Simon Pegg and Nick Frost (and others). The first two team-ups in the set were of course 'Shaun of the Dead' and 'Hot Fuzz'. So, if you're familiar with the first two movies and enjoy them, then seeing 'The World's End' is simply a no-brainer. We're talking about the same kind of humor, even if the story doesn't quite have the same initial impact as the first two. Of course, that's not a bad thing. It can be a plus or minus depending on your view.
Of the three movies 'The World's End' has the least rooted foundation. 'Sean of the Dead' was an homage to zombie movies and 'Hot Fuzz' was an homage to buddy-cop action movies. Yet, while each was an homage each was also a new movie in the genre itself due to the unique elements that surrounded the familiar elements. They don't sit outside the genres due to spoofing them, they sit within them and show there is still new ground to cover and be found. While the trailers for 'The World's End' hint that the movie will have a strong sci-fi element, the question was, "Which elements?"
As I said earlier, 'The World's End' doesn't have the same initial impact of the first two movies. That's because you don't know which elements of the sci-fi genre it will tap in to. For me, that was initially a little odd and uncomfortable. The first two movies came right out and said (in their own way), "This is what this movie is going to be." 'The World's End' does not do that. The movie starts out with the idea of bringing relationships back together (the first two movies starting with relationships ending). So, that's the initial vibe the movie runs with. It's not bad. In fact, it's kind of nice for Simon Pegg as "Gary King". Gary is the most lost character Pegg has ever played in one of these movies, and it's a nice change. Before, Pegg played a hero. One was a reluctant one, and the other was an overachieving one. Gary is a screw-up, plain and simple.
Add to that the rest of the group that Gary is trying to reconnect with, and you have a number of characters that have come together for a reason that even they are not sure about. The ball of chaos that is Gary plays a nice foil to characters that believe (or appear) to have their lives "together". The movie could have easily started out the same way for a drama about a group of friends reconnecting and finding the "meaning" in where their lives have gone. In fact, it emulates that feeling quite well. Part of the reason I'm mentioning this is that if you believe you would (or wouldn't) like a movie like that, just know that the feeling isn't staying. Once the action in the movie kicks-off, the vibe changes completely. There will be small returns to the personal elements for a variety of reasons, but for the most part once the group is dealing with the larger situation then that's where the energy stays.
Something that's new to this movie that wasn't in the previous two is the type of action. Now, each of the other movies did have action, but not like this. We're talking a mild-mannered individual suddenly becoming someone that can whoop some serious ass. The closest movie I can compare it would be like 'Scott Pilgrim vs. the World' (another Edgar Wright movie). It's not to that degree of sudden fighting skill, but people do end up doing things that had me thinking, "Woah! Where did someone like him learn to do something like that?" I didn't think it hurt the movie at all and made it that much more fun.
Then there is the comedy. The comedy depends on your humor style. If you liked the first two movies I think it's safe to say you'll like the comedy in this one. If you've never seen the first two movies I would say you have to decide how much you enjoy "British humor". My mind moves back and forth between US and British humor pretty fluidly now, so I have a difficult time distinguishing between the two unless it's an extreme presentation of one. However, I would say that this one is probably the best blend of humor styles, or the one that will be easiest to digest for those that didn't like the more "British" humor elements of the previous movies.
I'm pretty sure I'll be buying a copy of 'The World's End' when it's released for home. It stands with the other movies in the Cornetto Trilogy quite well. I am thinking that when I watch it again I'll probably just skip to the action, but that's what I always think before watching 'Shaun of the Dead' or 'Hot Fuzz' again and I always watch the whole thing. The shift in vibe from the start to the end is what makes the other movies work as a whole and I'm sure 'The World's End' will be no different. Oh, and I should add that of all three movies I think 'The World's End' has the ending that is the least predictable. You may guess elements of it (as I did), but I don't think you'll guess all of it.
|