F*** George Clooney. Am I right? The guy really isn't that good of an actor. He's half the reason why everyone is saying this will win Best Picture. Him and Alexander Payne (director and co-writer). Now, I don't want to drop a deuce on him because I've never seen Sideways and I've heard it's pretty good. But his style of directing is what makes Clooney look good in this movie to those who don't know better. Let me sum up the movie before I get too crazy.
So Clooney's wife is in a coma after a boating accident, but they've had trouble before that. He learns that she will never come out of it and the doctors have to pull the plug. Clooney is left with his younger daughter, and then decides to pick up his older daughter, Shailene Woodley of ABC Family's "Being Pregnant and a Teenager and S***" or something, from the boarding school she attends. (Rumor has it that she'll be nominated for Best Supporting Actress. I'll dispute that nonsense in a bit.) This gem of a daughter alerts Clooney that his wife was cheating on him with Shaggy Rogers (Matthew Lillard whose character is actually Brian Speer, but he was in Scooby-Doo so you know). So then Clooney tries to hunt this guy down to see his face, then eventually tell him about his wife so he can visit her in the hospital before she passes (how nice). All the while, here's where the title comes in, Clooney is trying to decide whether or not to sell a huge piece of Hawaiian land for millions of dollars that his family has passed down to him and his like 7,000 cousins, the descendants.
Tough dilemma for Clooney, right? You feel bad for him? Well don't. Every character in this movie is an ass****. It's hard to care when everyone is so awful. Let's critique the acting.
George Clooney does not deserve Best Actor or even a nomination. Up in the Air I can get behind, but not this one. By playing really depressing Hawaiian music while zooming in on his sad face, way too many times I might add, isn't good acting. The Academy falls for that garbage though. When you get a reputation like Clooney you can do anything. And he's so god**** unlikable in this movie.
Now Shailene Woodley. I've learned that it's okay for me to consider her attractive because now I know she's my age so I got that going for me. But if people think she deserves an Oscar nom for this role, then she should've won every Emmy Award for her performance in that Secret Life show. She may capture the angst of a teenage girl, but I think she's supposed to be a little older in The Descendants. She goes from complaining about everything and cursing in front of her kid sister to acting like a mother around her. And the little girl is terrible. As bad as the rest of them. When she cried in the hospital, I couldn't feel bad at all.
And then Woodley has to drag along her buddy to stay sane or whatever and this kid is a complete tool. He's a stoner who claims to be smart and we've all met someone like this, but even the most dirtbag of kids knows to shake a man's hand and say "Nice to meet you" as opposed to "'Sup bro?" Then he laughs at his friend's grandma who has alzheimer's. Really? Compose yourself in public bro.
Just when I thought I couldn't hate this movie any more, that redhead who is literally in everything shows up. This is the first time I've bothered to look up her name. It's Judy Greer. She was actually pretty good though. And surprisingly, so was Shaggy.
When I first heard about this movie, I had zero interest. I thought Ides of March would be Clooney's Oscar movie, and The Descendants would be just another paycheck. They both received good reviews from critics, but I enjoyed Ides of March a hell of a lot more. The Descendants does not deserve all the praise it's received. At first I thought, "Oh okay, it's kind of real, but in a way where people you barely know tell you everything going on in their life and you just don't care, kind of like how you sort of know these actors." Not all movies have to be entertaining so I get that, but this wasn't real. Would people actually do all this jibber jabber? (Best part of the movie, by the way, when the grandpa says that...but he's a d*** like everyone else.)
In conclusion, I refuse to fall for the bull style of filmmaking that the Academy deems superior to all else. Obviously, the Academy hasn't come out with its nominations yet, but the Golden Globes pave the way. This type of movie has Oscar written all over it, but it really shouldn't. The reason The King's Speech won over The Social Network last year is because Speech had that Oscar scent to it. Both movies were fantastic, but everyone knows Network should have won.
I apologize for ranting like an old man, but then again I think all the old men in the theater with me enjoyed it. I know the old ladies behind me with constant commentary, even discussing how nice Clooney's feet are, enjoyed it, so maybe I'm not an old man, but actually too young to appreciate it (I don't actually believe that, I'm just saying it). I thought it was a great idea for a movie, but I had zero genuine feelings for any of the characters. I could just be looking for a negative review after seeing several excellent movies lately, trying to mix it up, but I simply cannot get behind this one. I didn't like it from the beginning with Clooney's narration that lasts 20 minutes then disappears (lazy writing) and thought it would pick up, but sadly it did not.
Just to be a bit of a follower and to avoid sounding like a dumb kid who didn't get the complexity of the film, I'll give The Descendants 2/4 Stars. I know it sounds like I should give it less, but the only reason why I hated it so much is because everyone else thinks it's amazing when it really isn't. I wouldn't be this angry if people didn't put it on such a high pedestal.
No comments:
Post a Comment