On My Shelf: Journey 2 - The Mysterious Island (2012)
Remember how I didn't want to watch Journey to the Center of the Earth because I thought it would be bad? "...That it would be as obnoxious as any other modern kids' movie -- full of gut-clenchingly bad jokes, lame gross-out humor, and the shallowest, one-dimensional characterization imaginable." Well, guess what... Journey 2: Mysterious Island is EXACTLY THAT MOVIE.
The Story: The kid from the first movie is now slightly older, and his mom has married The Rock (I guess she won the new husband lottery). The film begins with the kid being chased by the police and thoroughly upsetting his parents and other people -- and getting no comeuppance. The kid then goes on to explain that he's figured out some code and received some kind of radio call that leads him to believe that his never-before-mentioned adventurer grandfather, Michael Caine, is alive and well and living in Jules Verne's Mysterious Island. After thoroughly failing as an authority figure, The Rock decides that maybe he can bond with his awful stepson by taking him on an adventure to find the island. They charter a helicopter from a father-daughter (Horrible Comic Relief/Teen Love Interest) who fly them out there and immediately wreck on the island. Sure enough, our team finds an obnoxious old Michael Caine, and have adventures and see various CGI vistas (which are attractive, but not attractive enough to save this movie).
Let's just get a few things out of the way:
The Story Structure: ...Was a feeble excuse to get them to Mysterious Island -- but, granted, you don't typically need a lot of plot in this type of movie (action-packed adventure). You just need an excuse for a group of clear personality-types to go somewhere adventurous, they go there, they have adventures. That's what this plot was, so, ultimately, the plot itself wasn't terrible, any more than Journey to the Center of the Earth was. So, just looking at the structure alone -- divorced from the casting and the dialogue -- it was okay.
Adventure-having.The Casting: The casting was acceptable... for the most part. The kid was obvious because he was in the previous movie. Michael Caine looked like he was enjoying himself a lot more than he typically does these days (even when he was riding on a giant bee. In fact, particularly when he was riding a giant bee). Young female was perfectly acceptable. Over-the-Top Comic Relief Guy was super obnoxious -- but that was mainly due to the writing, not his casting (which I found no fault with).
BUT, (and this is a big but), you don't cast a person like Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson to play "ineffectual Step-Dad"... because he's seven feet tall and built like He-Man. It just doesn't work...
"Ineffectual Step-Dad"... And it makes the situation nonsensical when characters in the film are treating him like a bumbling idiot; everybody in this film takes one look at him and assumes he's incompetent at everything up to (and including) walking. Which simply makes no sense when you cast someone who looks like The Rock. Why would you look at this guy and assume he can't do anything? Really, in a life-or-death situation when you have to cross a mysterious island covered in giant monsters and mysterious traps -- isn't The Rock the one person you would definitely want to have on your team?
The role of "ineffectual Step-Dad", as written, called for someone like this:
...Somebody benign and well-meaning, who could never-the-less be convincingly pushed-around by a child and an 80-year old man. Or, you could go as far as one of these guys:
...A type who clearly is a doofus, but well-meaning and can convincingly be pushed around by a child and an 80-year old man. In fact, this might have been the best possible route to go, because then you cut out the need for the extra comic relief character. OR, you could even have cast someone well-meaning, benign, good at the action stuff and good at comedy...
Just sayin'.Ultimately, then, this movie has the same problem that
Jingle All the Way
had in spades; The Rock is literally the main draw to see this movie, because he has charisma and people enjoy seeing him in things -- and yet, he's crammed into a script that was written for a completely different kind of actor, so the dialogue and the way the other characters relate to this guy just doesn't work. They needed a major script revision that gives him more adventuresome, proactive things to do... which, sadly, did not happen.
SO MUCH HATE: I hated this movie so much that I was making a list of things I hated while I was watching the movie.
For a start, this movie features:
* ZERO Brendan Fraser! Completely wrote out the hero of the previous movie with NARY A REFERENCE TO HIM. Not even a picture on someone's desk. (I understand that there was some kind of real-life scheduling conflict/issue with the director that resulted in Mr. Fraser not being in this film. These things happen. HOWEVER, you can't just ignore that he was the entire focus of the previous film! And it would have been so easy to neatly write Brendan Fraser's character out, if they had even bothered. You could have used a line like, "Look, I know that your Uncle Brendan Fraser being away for this past year has been hard on you..." SOMETHING. But no.) Lazy scriptwriting.
* An obnoxious child main character who breaks laws, constantly talks back to adults, acts like he knows everything and learns no lessons about being a better person! Characters like this used to be included in movies so that you could demonstrate this character learning something -- you know, like, learning to consider other people's feelings, learning that he shouldn't break laws and treat his parents like crap... you know. The closest they came to this was having him tell the Rock not to abandon him because he feels like he's been abandoned too much in his life... Which isn't him learning a lesson. No, it's just him still relating to people only as "things that benefit me, personally, in some way." So, ultimately, at the end of the movie he is still a jerk.
* Enabling adults who allow said child to act like a jerk without ever calling them on their behavior! Now, I don't need to see The Rock beat up a child... that would be overkill. I don't even need to see him spank a child. But his character was totally emasculated by not allowing him to even do any TOUGH TALKING with to this jerk child. And it's not like they wrote him wimpy on purpose to humorously play against the fact that he's a great, big, bulging man -- no, it doesn't come across that way at all. He's acting like normal, tough Rock in a role that has wimpy lines and behaviors. It just doesn't work at all.
I don't need this man to be sensitive.*An obnoxious comic-relief character who constantly either gets pooped ON or references pooping on himself. I don't have anything against this actor, but his character was HORRIBLY WRITTEN and I spent every moment he was on screen wishing that he wasn't. (Maybe I shouldn't pick on him, though. I felt that way about nearly every character.)
This guy = comedy gold. Oh, did I say "comedy"? I meant shame.* An obnoxious older person (Michael Caine) who constantly berates the middle-aged adult for no good reason! I've seen Michael Caine play adulterers, murderers, con men, smugglers, idiots -- and yet, have never before hated a character of his. The entire time I was watching this movie, I wanted to punch him in his 800-year-old face. (And, it must be said -- in his inexplicable, unjustified berating of The Rock, he comes across as a touch on the racist side.) Again, I don't think the problem was Michael Caine, the actor -- it was the writing.
Indiana Jerk.* Female body exploitation - OF A CHILD - in a children's movie! There is a scene in this movie where the camera SPECIFICALLY pans down to, and dwells on, our jail-bait heroine's boobs. It was blatant. Now, I don't have a problem with boobs in general, or even boobs in movies -- but when your heroine physically appears to be about seventeen years old, WE DON'T NEED TO FOCUS ON THE BOOBS. Especially in a movie that's ostensibly for children. It's just plain wrong.
I couldn't find a picture, so here's the same thing in Batman and Robin.*AWFUL "COMEDY"... RIGHT BACK TO "BAD SCRIPT". A good example of the "comedy" we get "treated" to in this film is an inexplicably long scene of The Rock flexing CGI berries off his pecks. (So, yeah, we had to spend a long time looking at male boobs, too. Granted, the Rock Executive Produced this movie, so he probably suggested this scene in the first place... but it was just really embarrassing). Also, I'd like to point out, they were CGI berries. CGI, 99% of the time, KILLS COMEDY. And it certainly did in this case!
But CGI was the least of this film's comedy problems. The comedy in this movie simply doesn't work at all from any perspective. The bad fit between The Rock's character and everybody else threw off the entire dynamic of the film -- so even attempts at comedy that should have worked just didn't.
IN CONCLUSION: The special effects were fine -- except that many special effects were set up in bad ways (again, lazy-script writing). I've talked a bit about the scene where they ride giant bees... Well, if this had been set up in a scene where The Rock and Michael Caine rangle the bees, battle them, and finally figure out they can hop on them and ride them -- it would have been fine. It would have been a good chance for some character development, and a chance for Michael Caine to realize that The Rock's character isn't useless. That would have been an appropriate adventure scene in this movie. But NO, Michael Caine just ducks behind some foliage and then pops out riding a giant bee, and essentially says, "It's easy! Just sneak upon them from behind and hop on!" Because I can think of nothing less easy than sneaking up and hopping from behind on a creature that has a THREE FOOT LONG STINGER ON ITS BEHIND. So, the failure to set up the special effect scene in the script rendered an otherwise fine scene absolutely stupid.
The Rock, and sidekick covered in poop, on bee = comedy?Ultimately, then.... the main problem with this movie was the script. When they cut Brendan Fraser and picked up The Rock, they should have done a complete re-write that fixed the dynamic so that The Rock was a more assertive character. Either that, or they should have made him even more wimpy and passive to make his hugeness a visual joke. Neither was done, rendering the movie stupid, confusing and extremely un-funny.
Do I recommend this movie, even for fans of The Rock, or people who like stupid popcorn movies?
NO! I HATE THIS MOVIE!! PLEASE NEVER WATCH IT!!
I'm really torn about what to do with my copy of this film... because I really don't want to own it anymore, but neither do I want any small children or other impressionable people (.... or just anyone, really) to watch it. I might need to find someone who can drop it in a volcano or sink it to the deepest part of the ocean for me, or something like that.
The Story: The kid from the first movie is now slightly older, and his mom has married The Rock (I guess she won the new husband lottery). The film begins with the kid being chased by the police and thoroughly upsetting his parents and other people -- and getting no comeuppance. The kid then goes on to explain that he's figured out some code and received some kind of radio call that leads him to believe that his never-before-mentioned adventurer grandfather, Michael Caine, is alive and well and living in Jules Verne's Mysterious Island. After thoroughly failing as an authority figure, The Rock decides that maybe he can bond with his awful stepson by taking him on an adventure to find the island. They charter a helicopter from a father-daughter (Horrible Comic Relief/Teen Love Interest) who fly them out there and immediately wreck on the island. Sure enough, our team finds an obnoxious old Michael Caine, and have adventures and see various CGI vistas (which are attractive, but not attractive enough to save this movie).
Let's just get a few things out of the way:
The Story Structure: ...Was a feeble excuse to get them to Mysterious Island -- but, granted, you don't typically need a lot of plot in this type of movie (action-packed adventure). You just need an excuse for a group of clear personality-types to go somewhere adventurous, they go there, they have adventures. That's what this plot was, so, ultimately, the plot itself wasn't terrible, any more than Journey to the Center of the Earth was. So, just looking at the structure alone -- divorced from the casting and the dialogue -- it was okay.
Adventure-having.The Casting: The casting was acceptable... for the most part. The kid was obvious because he was in the previous movie. Michael Caine looked like he was enjoying himself a lot more than he typically does these days (even when he was riding on a giant bee. In fact, particularly when he was riding a giant bee). Young female was perfectly acceptable. Over-the-Top Comic Relief Guy was super obnoxious -- but that was mainly due to the writing, not his casting (which I found no fault with).BUT, (and this is a big but), you don't cast a person like Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson to play "ineffectual Step-Dad"... because he's seven feet tall and built like He-Man. It just doesn't work...
"Ineffectual Step-Dad"... And it makes the situation nonsensical when characters in the film are treating him like a bumbling idiot; everybody in this film takes one look at him and assumes he's incompetent at everything up to (and including) walking. Which simply makes no sense when you cast someone who looks like The Rock. Why would you look at this guy and assume he can't do anything? Really, in a life-or-death situation when you have to cross a mysterious island covered in giant monsters and mysterious traps -- isn't The Rock the one person you would definitely want to have on your team?The role of "ineffectual Step-Dad", as written, called for someone like this:
...Somebody benign and well-meaning, who could never-the-less be convincingly pushed-around by a child and an 80-year old man. Or, you could go as far as one of these guys:
...A type who clearly is a doofus, but well-meaning and can convincingly be pushed around by a child and an 80-year old man. In fact, this might have been the best possible route to go, because then you cut out the need for the extra comic relief character. OR, you could even have cast someone well-meaning, benign, good at the action stuff and good at comedy...
Just sayin'.Ultimately, then, this movie has the same problem that
Jingle All the Way
had in spades; The Rock is literally the main draw to see this movie, because he has charisma and people enjoy seeing him in things -- and yet, he's crammed into a script that was written for a completely different kind of actor, so the dialogue and the way the other characters relate to this guy just doesn't work. They needed a major script revision that gives him more adventuresome, proactive things to do... which, sadly, did not happen.SO MUCH HATE: I hated this movie so much that I was making a list of things I hated while I was watching the movie.
For a start, this movie features:
* ZERO Brendan Fraser! Completely wrote out the hero of the previous movie with NARY A REFERENCE TO HIM. Not even a picture on someone's desk. (I understand that there was some kind of real-life scheduling conflict/issue with the director that resulted in Mr. Fraser not being in this film. These things happen. HOWEVER, you can't just ignore that he was the entire focus of the previous film! And it would have been so easy to neatly write Brendan Fraser's character out, if they had even bothered. You could have used a line like, "Look, I know that your Uncle Brendan Fraser being away for this past year has been hard on you..." SOMETHING. But no.) Lazy scriptwriting.
* An obnoxious child main character who breaks laws, constantly talks back to adults, acts like he knows everything and learns no lessons about being a better person! Characters like this used to be included in movies so that you could demonstrate this character learning something -- you know, like, learning to consider other people's feelings, learning that he shouldn't break laws and treat his parents like crap... you know. The closest they came to this was having him tell the Rock not to abandon him because he feels like he's been abandoned too much in his life... Which isn't him learning a lesson. No, it's just him still relating to people only as "things that benefit me, personally, in some way." So, ultimately, at the end of the movie he is still a jerk.
* Enabling adults who allow said child to act like a jerk without ever calling them on their behavior! Now, I don't need to see The Rock beat up a child... that would be overkill. I don't even need to see him spank a child. But his character was totally emasculated by not allowing him to even do any TOUGH TALKING with to this jerk child. And it's not like they wrote him wimpy on purpose to humorously play against the fact that he's a great, big, bulging man -- no, it doesn't come across that way at all. He's acting like normal, tough Rock in a role that has wimpy lines and behaviors. It just doesn't work at all.
I don't need this man to be sensitive.*An obnoxious comic-relief character who constantly either gets pooped ON or references pooping on himself. I don't have anything against this actor, but his character was HORRIBLY WRITTEN and I spent every moment he was on screen wishing that he wasn't. (Maybe I shouldn't pick on him, though. I felt that way about nearly every character.)
This guy = comedy gold. Oh, did I say "comedy"? I meant shame.* An obnoxious older person (Michael Caine) who constantly berates the middle-aged adult for no good reason! I've seen Michael Caine play adulterers, murderers, con men, smugglers, idiots -- and yet, have never before hated a character of his. The entire time I was watching this movie, I wanted to punch him in his 800-year-old face. (And, it must be said -- in his inexplicable, unjustified berating of The Rock, he comes across as a touch on the racist side.) Again, I don't think the problem was Michael Caine, the actor -- it was the writing.
Indiana Jerk.* Female body exploitation - OF A CHILD - in a children's movie! There is a scene in this movie where the camera SPECIFICALLY pans down to, and dwells on, our jail-bait heroine's boobs. It was blatant. Now, I don't have a problem with boobs in general, or even boobs in movies -- but when your heroine physically appears to be about seventeen years old, WE DON'T NEED TO FOCUS ON THE BOOBS. Especially in a movie that's ostensibly for children. It's just plain wrong.
I couldn't find a picture, so here's the same thing in Batman and Robin.*AWFUL "COMEDY"... RIGHT BACK TO "BAD SCRIPT". A good example of the "comedy" we get "treated" to in this film is an inexplicably long scene of The Rock flexing CGI berries off his pecks. (So, yeah, we had to spend a long time looking at male boobs, too. Granted, the Rock Executive Produced this movie, so he probably suggested this scene in the first place... but it was just really embarrassing). Also, I'd like to point out, they were CGI berries. CGI, 99% of the time, KILLS COMEDY. And it certainly did in this case!
But CGI was the least of this film's comedy problems. The comedy in this movie simply doesn't work at all from any perspective. The bad fit between The Rock's character and everybody else threw off the entire dynamic of the film -- so even attempts at comedy that should have worked just didn't.
IN CONCLUSION: The special effects were fine -- except that many special effects were set up in bad ways (again, lazy-script writing). I've talked a bit about the scene where they ride giant bees... Well, if this had been set up in a scene where The Rock and Michael Caine rangle the bees, battle them, and finally figure out they can hop on them and ride them -- it would have been fine. It would have been a good chance for some character development, and a chance for Michael Caine to realize that The Rock's character isn't useless. That would have been an appropriate adventure scene in this movie. But NO, Michael Caine just ducks behind some foliage and then pops out riding a giant bee, and essentially says, "It's easy! Just sneak upon them from behind and hop on!" Because I can think of nothing less easy than sneaking up and hopping from behind on a creature that has a THREE FOOT LONG STINGER ON ITS BEHIND. So, the failure to set up the special effect scene in the script rendered an otherwise fine scene absolutely stupid.
The Rock, and sidekick covered in poop, on bee = comedy?Ultimately, then.... the main problem with this movie was the script. When they cut Brendan Fraser and picked up The Rock, they should have done a complete re-write that fixed the dynamic so that The Rock was a more assertive character. Either that, or they should have made him even more wimpy and passive to make his hugeness a visual joke. Neither was done, rendering the movie stupid, confusing and extremely un-funny.Do I recommend this movie, even for fans of The Rock, or people who like stupid popcorn movies?
NO! I HATE THIS MOVIE!! PLEASE NEVER WATCH IT!!
I'm really torn about what to do with my copy of this film... because I really don't want to own it anymore, but neither do I want any small children or other impressionable people (.... or just anyone, really) to watch it. I might need to find someone who can drop it in a volcano or sink it to the deepest part of the ocean for me, or something like that.
No comments have been added yet.
