Friday, September 03, 2010

Escape to the Movies: "Machete"

The BACKLASH on this is going to be epic if it's a hit...

Intermission: "Machete Vs. The Expendables."


TheDVDGrouch said...

So glad to hear this is worth seeing I would have been so disappointed otherwise.

John said...

I have only one disagreement with today's intermission, and even then it's because of my own interests: My disagreement is with the best part of the Expendables: For me the best part was easily the point where the auto-shotgun is used to great effect for the first time... and the primary reason I loved it so much is because I'm a complete gun nut ;)

Otherwise I mostly agree with your take on the Expendables, Bob. It was boring at best and cringe-worthy at worst... But that one scene had me laughing with manic glee.

One things for sure... if Machete is as good as you say it is (and I usually agree with you) I'm looking forward to seeing it.

(P.S. The only other movie to feature that shotgun this year was Predators... which coincidently is a much better movie than Stallone's failed launch. Seriously though, google the AA-12 sometime if you want to see one of the most ridiculously over the top weapons ever created by man.)

Crafty_Shadow said...

So, watched this like half an hour ago. My thoughts: It sucked. Big time. Let me elaborate:


This movie started out great. Machete goes against orders and runs down a house in order to save a damsel in distress, slicing people's heads open in the process. Said damsel turns out to be in with the bad guy (and obviously fresh out of clothes, full frontal nudity YEAH!), betrays Machete, his wife gets her skull opened in front of his eyes, and you pretty much know he pledges to kill the fucker responsible.

And then we get treated to a progressively mediocre film. While I didn't care much for the political message, it was delivered quite well. Where the movie failed for me was the actual pacing and kill scenes from that point forward. Excluding the "rope" that Bob mentioned, which was really cool, there wasn't a single memorable kill to be had before the credits started rolling. Danny Trejo's acting outside of "slash-hack" mode was sub par to say the least, and while the Lindsay Lohan bits were clever-ish, that's as far as they got (and much lower when she puts on the nun outfit). She single-handedly won the damn "revolution".... :-/

Anyways, this movie simply had too little kills for what it promised and too award pacing to invest the message for any depth beyond the in-the-face "message".

I really hope Bob would be up for a discussion on this one.

Willingdruid said...

movies can be about nothing and still be good, Gummo for example isn't really about anything but is really good.

John said...

@ Willingdruid

Bob has already acknowledged this, repeatedly. I agree with him though when he says that a movie is better when it actually means something.

Willingdruid said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Willingdruid said...


What i was saying is a movies intentions can be nihilist and that can be the "point" of the film.

CrunchyEmpanada said...

Sometimes I don't want anything in my movie. It's not always the case that something is more enjoyable when it's talking about something. Didn't you JUST talk about loving Piranha 3D? I enjoyed it too, but I don't believe for a second you're agree that that movie would have been better if it was about something.

I haven't seen Machete yet, going to go see it tomorrow, but for now I got to say you've got to stop giving hints in these reviews. There hasn't been a single hint you've given which didn't spoil for me. I was especially irked by the accordion "hint" you gave for Halloween II. Seriously, it was immediately obvious, just like this one.

Christopher said...

Saw it and I approve of the movie wholeheartedly! It was fun, gory, sexy, and crazy. I was promised an B-level 80s throwback, and that's what I got. Much more satisfying than Expendables (still didn't think it was horrible, but nonetheless disappointing)

tyra menendez said...

I hated Gummo. A meandering, plotless series of events is not art. I think of it much like the triangle paintings, in Art School Confidential.

Anyway, Rodriguez almost always has some iffy casting, in his movies. Like Iglesias, in Once Upon a Time in Mexico. I think the only movie I've seen, with Seagal, that didn't make me cringe, was the original Under Siege.

Still, I'm sure I'll rent this.

Willingdruid said...

@tyra menendez

Each to their own i guess, i thought Gummo was a realistic at times and dream like at others portrayal of a town that everyone forgot. It broke a ton the cinematic convetions and gave a beautiful and depressing experience.
But i can see why someone wouldn't like it.

Sarge said...

How come every time Bob mentions women, he only talks about them as sex objects? You say you're a heterosexual right there on your main page, dude, you don't need to remind us in every issue.

We get it. You like tang.

Marsailis said...

A movie just as bad a s the Expendables, but because it had people pulling cell phones out their vagina's, Alba side side boob, and some of the cheapest, shoddiest, CG blood and gore of all summer, along with its paper thin veil of a political message its an instant hit.

Typical neckbearding Bob, all it takes is tits for you to gloss over any dung heap as acceptable, because this was just s shitty as the Asspendibles, but you hate one so much you fervently push the other. At least you didn't bash the movie-going populace this time.

I'm telling you, A Serbian Film has every thing your warped heart desires MovieBob, just give it a short, can't be any worse than any of the other shit films you push onto others.

tyra menendez said...


Part of the reason I didn't like it, was because it was all too familiar, content-wise. Being from "that side of town", some of those people were my neighbors. Especially at that point in time.

CrunchyEmpanada said...

Saw it a few days ago. Would have replied earlier but I was busy.

I liked it. But I wouldn't call it particularly good, and I definitely wouldn't call it "the answer" to Expendables. They weren't even trying to be the same thing. Machete isn't an 80's throwback, it's a 70's throwback. Machete is like one of those 70's blaxploitation film, except it's about Mexicans. It's a mexploitation film. It's not an 80's action flick.

Don't get me wrong, it wasn't "bad." And it was better than the Expendables. But it suffered from several problems, which I'll get to in a minute right before I get annoyed at Bob for something.

Bob. You're synopsis of the two films shows your bias. You portray The Expendables overly negative while you portray Machete as overly positive. I'll actually agree with everything you said about The Expendables in that synopsis, but your synopsis of Machete is way too nice. Machete does not really join anything, he mostly bumbles around walking into events as they happen. He joins them, I guess, in the end, but for the most of the film he doesn't seem to care. A more accurate description of the plot after he gets betrayed would have been "he walks around running into people, while everybody else have boring conversations with short bursts of action scattered throughout." I also like how your forget that Michelle Rodriguez also suffers from that "dies but comes back at the end" syndrome. I myself didn't believe she "died" by getting, you know, shot in the eye, but some of the people I was with did and were of course confused when she showed up again.

You're also completely wrong about being able to "always see what's going on" in Machete. Both Expendables and Machete suffered from that shakey cam during fights, and terrible CGI blood (the former more than the latter). Interestingly enough, I think they both had great opening scenes (of course, Machete's was better), but the action really died after that.

Machete was a better movie. But it was better than a movie that's not hard to be better than. And it wasn't that much better. It has excessively long boring parts, and minus two fight scenes, the action went from really lame to mediocre. While the Expendables suffered from a lack of compelling villains, Machete suffered from too many villains. There were what, 4? 5 if you count Jessica Alba as a turncoat? There were too many, and we really didn't need them all. Expendables didn't have a "real" villain because the villains were lame and weak, while Machete didn't have a "real" villain because there were so many villains you didn't know which one was the "true" villain of the movie. In the end, it did succeed where Expendables failed. The Expendables failed to be a good bad 80's movie. Machete succeeded in being a good bad 70's movie. But you the end it's just a good bad movie. I think I'd rather have a good good movie.

Ezenwa said...

Saw this movie on Sept. 10th, ironically, when looking at the subject matter. My verdict: Rodriguez is very good at what he does. The age of the B movie might be upon us. As for comparing it to Expendables, well, it's like comparing the Dirty Dozen or something to Death Wish or a Chuck Norris film. Can it really be done? I just enjoyed Machete more b/c of my love for Rodriguez and his approach to subject matter. I can only hope someone wises up and gives him the rights to the Deadpool film.

Oh wait, he does have the rights to it. SCORE!