comment #1

televisiontears says ...

Ben Lyons must love him some "torture porn". And by extension, Wells, if he seconds this sentiment.

comment #2

crsryan says ...

I think Ben is actually right on with this. Wasn't Rambo a thousand times more enjoyable than Babylon A.D.? A poorly-conceived, rushed or just inappropriate backstory is a bigger demerit than low ambition any day. Pathos has become way overrated. If the action choreography is great and the acting supports it and the camerawork is great, the movie will work.

comment #3

bradb says ...

@crsryan Hard to compare Rambo to this considering Rambo already had his backstory with three prior films. However, the problem with Lyons' argument is that even the gun play in Max Payne is boring. The film needed a story and it didn't have one, at least not a good one.

comment #4

Brian R says ...

If he all he wants to see is Max Payne shoot people then he should just play the f****ng game and leave the movies to people who actually like movies.

comment #5

Bob Roberts says ...

We all have guilty pleasures, generally because they do what they set out to do, sometimes even well, they don't talk down at us or worse bore us.

While I have not seen Max Payne I think that is Ben's point. Max Payne was never going to be ART, but it could have been a fun guilty pleasure.

comment #6

storymark says ...

Setting aside the fact that the dead wife and kid were a big part of the game's plot as well -

I'd much rather an action movie that aspires to be something more, and falls short, than one that aspires to medicority, and succeeds.

Not that Max Payne seems in any way to be the former.

comment #7

Brian R says ...

Sure, Bob. But sometimes a little bit of character development in amongst the bullets can help lift something which might otherwise be uber-violent nonsense. Like Shaun of the Dead compared to Cannibal Holocaust. Do you root for the hero just because he has a gun and is pissed?

comment #8

crsryan says ...

Storymark: Aspiring to something more doesn't have to mean deep and memorable character motivations or five-hanky moments, etc. Kathryn Bigelow aspires to something more every time she makes an action film -- she aspires to make the finest action films ever made. Your statement implies that action flims are themselves mediocre. And yeah, that may be a truism of today's action films, but that's only because the genre is at a low ebb.

comment #9

Brian R says ...

Absolutely, crsryan. Action is made more exciting when we give a shit about the characters. Going on from your Kathryn Bigelow mention, Cameron's Aliens is lso a prime example. Hell, I even gave a shit about some of the characters in Predator.

comment #10

storymark says ...

"Storymark: Aspiring to something more doesn't have to mean deep and memorable character motivations or five-hanky moments, etc. Kathryn Bigelow aspires to something more every time she makes an action film -- she aspires to make the finest action films ever made. Your statement implies that action flims are themselves mediocre. And yeah, that may be a truism of today's action films, but that's only because the genre is at a low ebb."

Not saying that at all (though I might say that about all videogame movies). But we're talking about basic backstory and motivation here. Without those things - or something, anything else - it's just a stunt show. I'm not looking for five-hankie scenes, just a reason to give a shit about what's going on.

If I wanted just action - and nothing else, be it character, theme, pathos, what-have-you, I'd watch wrestling.

comment #11

Santo says ...

I'm probably in the minority here, but I thought Cannibal Holocaust was pretty smart for what it was.

Movies like Crank and Rocknrolla are wanks, but there is nothing wrong with a wank if you know that's what it is.

The Dark Knight is great because it stretches our notions of what a comic book movie should be. Max Payne failed trying to do the same thing, at least it tried.

Ben Lyons has no grasp, no reach and wouldn't know which direction to sit in a theater if the seats weren't bolted to the floor.

comment #12

Rich S. says ...

I think the movie Ben actually wanted to see was Shoot 'em Up, which I found ridiculously entertaining in its way.

comment #13

JustThisGuy says ...

I think the thing that ticks me off the most about Ben Lyon's is that he has an extremely limited grasp of the English language for someone whose job is critically analyzing film.

Since capacity to utilize language is usually linked to capacity to think, sentences which call Body of Lies "overtly complex", when the context of its use clearly shows that he meant "overly complex" and calling Miracle at St Anna a "classic of epic and scope", clearly indicate that he is barely mentally qualified to watch, at most, a summer action film, much less critique one. What the hell is a "classic of epic and scope" anyways? What the hell does that fragment even mean?

comment #14

televisiontears says ...

He actually used the term "classic of epic and scope"? That is sixteen levels of stupid. How did this man graduate ninth grade English, let alone ever get paid to write something?

comment #15

televisiontears says ...

Well, that could have been either "graduate ninth-grade" or "pass ninth-grade English"... I guess I have some pot-kettle issues.

comment #16

Scott says ...

This guy has got to be stopped . . .
http://stopbenlyons.blogspot.com/