Monday, September 5, 2011

"Red State" - Zach's Take

I really wanted to like Red State. I honestly did. In fact, Maria and I had no intention of reviewing it for CFP until she brought it up after we finished watching it. It's a huge misfire, a complete failure. An utter disappointment.

I was with it for the first 30 minutes or so, despite some awkwardly-acted speech and the complete absence of anything remotely resembling subtlety. Then, as Michael Parks' Abin Cooper delivers his endless sermon detailing the church's beliefs, I realized that's all this movie was going to be. Exposition, weak characterization, and pointless, go-nowhere plot threads.

The film follows three teenagers on a quest to get laid after responding to a Craigslist-like sex solicitation post from a middle-aged woman. Turns out she's a member of the Five Points Church, a riff on the Westboro Baptist Church (despite the film weirdly mentioning the WBC and distinguishing one from the other), a cult that has been capturing gays and killing them, Old Testament style. From there, the movie turns into a siege, as the ATF assaults the compound and a firefight breaks out.

Except the firefight is almost entirely in the background, as John Goodman's ATF Agent character spends ten minutes on the phone in a one-sided conversation with his superior officer. Oh, and that's the second time in the film we see him talking on the phone for an extended period of time. When he's introduced, he takes ten minutes to deliver even more exposition on the Five Points Church, who they are, why they're different from the WBC, and why they've been buying guns. Of course, Kevin Smith cleverly hides this exposition by having John Goodman's wife cook breakfast. Now that's cinema!

There's a point, late in the film, where John Goodman's character mentions that he rarely finishes his supper. Now, all congratulations are in order to Mr. Goodman for losing so much weight, but in Red State, he DEFINITELY does not look like a guy who rarely finishes his meals.

There's really a lot to dislike about Red State. It starts interesting plot threads in one scene that never develop because a character gets shot and killed in the next. It's stupidly nihilistic, like a first draft screenplay written by a 15-year-old kid who just heard about the Wesboro crazies and the atrocities at Waco. There's no payoff. No reason to care about anything that happens on screen, because it's either too silly to accept or too overwrought and melodramatic to have any impact.

There's one major thing that happens towards the end which feels like the movie is finally going to become interesting, only to be explained away in the final exposition dump. I mean, it would have been silly and completely out-there, but at least it wouldn't have been dull like the rest of the film.

I suppose we could applaud Kevin Smith for trying something new, but this movie feels really amateur. And while he might have stepped out of his comfort zone, nothing in the film feels bold or daring. It strives to be ambitious, but it feels like a small, contained movie, with a ton of bizarre tonal shifts. One moment it's a Hostel-style horror movie, the next it's an action, then a comedy.

Red State is, sadly, a bad movie. The only slightly redeeming thing about it is Michael Parks' acting, but the film surrounding him is so bad, such a chore, that it all goes to waste.

Please go back to being funny, Kevin.

Red State - Maria's Take

I have to give Kevin Smith some credit. He took a risk and also took full control of his own work. However, having said that, the new, "edgier" work he produced with "Red State" feels more like a step backwards than anything else. Before I review, I just want to restate that I give Kevin Smith some credit for stepping outside his comfort zone and working on a very ambitious, albeit overall amateur work.

The first words out of my mouth as the credits rolled were, "Well, that was very on the nose." There was nothing subtle nor innovative about the film. Characters were flat and most offensively misused. The acting was pretty decent. I think Melissa Leo always has the slightest tendency to overact and try too hard to steal whatever scene she is in. Michael Parks gave a good performance, but his character had little depth and was simply evil. What bothered me about the Abin Cooper (Michael Parks) character was there was simply no justification for his cartoonishly evil persona. I understand blind faith, but Abin had a weird, warped sense of morality. Kevin SMith asked far too much of the audience. We had to instantly buy that these people just read The Bible too literally and felt it necessary to murder those who are not perfect. I needed more story.

The writing was mediocre at best. Characters shifted loyalties without any explanation, plotlines went nowhere, and the whole film felt like a teenager's rant about religious zealots and corrupt government. Smith starts several different storylines, but ends them before they can get legs. Many of the storylines are far too convenient, and Smith is constantly telling the audience what is happening without any attempt at showing things. I understand John Goodman is a terrific actor, but he doesn't need to spend the last twenty minutes of the film explaining scenes Smith, for whatever reason, felt were unnecessary to film. There are a couple of instances where I felt completely ripped off--it is like if a death in a slasher movie happens off screen--something gets lost.

As we were discussing this film during the credits, I tried to make some analytical sense of what I had just seen, but it seemed unfair that I felt compelled to do so. There were many moments that appeared to be Kevin Smith attempting to channel the Coen brothers. Unfortunately, something got short-circuited in the wiring, because even the worst Coen brothers movie would put this disappointing film to shame.

I actually feel a little guilty for disliking this film so much. I am a big fan of Smith's and this one was more painful than the release of "Cop Out." He never promised that movie to be anything more than it was, but this film he was touting as the defining film of his career.

I do appreciate his attempt to stretch himself as a director and challenge his comfort zone. I think he had an interesting premise, but the execution failed to be anything more than a bizarre, overwrought siege film.