The Expendables Review
The Expendables
Directed by: Sylvester Stallone
Written by: Dave Callaham and Sylvester Stallone (screenplay), Dave Callaham (story)
Starring: Sylvester Stallone, Jason Statham, Jet Li, Dolph Lundgren, Randy Couture, Steve Austin, Terry Crews, Mickey Rourke
I’m sorry, men of the world, but The Expendables is a piece of shit. In fact, as a man, I’m a little embarrassed that this putrid, structureless, diarrheic pile entertained a single one of you. Without an ounce of artistry, Sylvester Stallone has essentially created The Twilight Saga for men, and just as that series caters to a lowest-common-denominator teenage girl audience, Stallone deposits this Cro-Magnon mess for males, simultaneously juvenile and out-of-touch.
The suffocating machismo of it all makes it tough to pick a place to start. First, the film is hideous. On a technical level, many of the shots are out of focus, smearing the ugly greens and browns into a muddy pastiche. The rest is soiled by awful CG that completely undercuts the entire eighties aesthetic. I’m trying hard to think of something less conducive to an action throwback than a half-dozen rifles with animated laser-sights firing bullets that spill digital blood — no luck yet.
Even forgiving the film its bland palette, cinematographic shortcomings, and near total lack of practical effects, The Expendables misfires on the single most obvious ingredient for exciting action — compelling set pieces. It takes place, almost in its entirety, on a small South American island where there is a dock, a palace of some sort, and apparently nothing else. Those backdrops set the stage for some dismally choreographed shootouts where, despite the exotic locale and 80 million dollar budget, The Expendables maintains a consistently amateurish feel.
And for a movie positively brimming with A-List (or once A-List) action personalities, how about some personality? Ultimately, it doesn’t even register that Stallone assembled such a dynamic ensemble. There isn’t a single distinct personage among them. Sure, Jason Statham likes knives and Stallone prefers firearms, but that’s about where the definition ends. Anyone could have played these nobodies, and it reduces what should be the film’s sole distinguishing feature to mere stunt casting.
Regardless, there isn’t a flaw I’ve illuminated that would hold water if the film was even fun, but The Expendables is truthfully one of the most boring of the year. Call me desensitized, but I can only see so many torsos explode, so many fatal stabbings, and so many explosions before I start to yawn and check my watch. Action only works when there’s something at stake, and Stallone does his best Michael Bay impression in his flagrant disregard for that simple storytelling truth.
Nothing is ever at stake in The Expendables. Ever. Not one of the many protagonists is placed in even momentarily convincing danger, and with almost no story to back up the dreary killing, the action loses all dramatic impact. Stallone’s assembly line slaughter has neither the gravity to make us care nor the creativity to make us squirm — unless we’re squirming out of anxious impatience.
I’m not an idiot. I realize The Expendables is more Grindhouse than it is Rambo, but it fails even as a disposable homage to eighties action. It might be a class reunion of sorts, but it’s the kind where you end up sitting around talking about expired memories instead of making new ones. In recalling the cheesy charm of the decade that made him famous, Stallone could stand to do far more embellishing. He succeeds in making a film with an eighties mindset, but it’s a hollow, lifeless effort that completely lacks the charisma that makes those films memorable twenty-some years later.
Conversely, The Expendables would be forgettable no matter what unfortunate decade birthed it. And yet, here in the year 2010, this is the number one film in America two weeks running — I guess I just don’t get it. Everything I go to the movies for, and not just the frivolous stuff like story and character, is completely and entirely absent here.
Men of the world, if this is really what you find entertaining, then consider this my resignation. – Colin
Comments (51)
pfft
Posted by Drew on August 24th, 2010Any review that starts off by insulting the people who don’t agree with the reviewer makes me stop reading right then and there and loose all respect for said reviewer.
Colin – Go fuck yourself.
Posted by Slushie Man on August 25th, 2010Oh Lord… and the backlash starts… now.
Posted by Falsk on August 25th, 2010I have no problem with him not liking the movie. What I have a problem with is attacking those who did.
Posted by Slushie Man on August 25th, 2010I’ll go out on a limb and say that the FJ majority likes/loves this movie. I’ve liked your reviews and are at least along the heartbeat of this community, but review is way off man.
You start out the review like you have an agenda or something. That stuff doesn’t belong here. Settle the fuck down and read aloud your stuff and listen to how you sound. Your damn emo about this film to say the least.
Posted by Primal on August 25th, 2010Slush, I knew this review it wouldn’t win me any fans. I knew writing my first sentence that I was the adversary, but it was my intention to insult the film, not its fans.
Posted by Colin on August 25th, 2010The dry, self-deprecating wit is sort of hard to hear in text-format, I think… for what it’s worth, Colin is trying to make fun of himself… but I think it’s a little lost…
Posted by Falsk on August 25th, 2010It’s sort of a 50/50 split. I’m making fun of both myself and Sylvester Stallone’s goatee.
Posted by Colin on August 25th, 2010Saw it tonight and I’m totally with you. I really wanted to enjoy this. I think Stallone did an outstanding job with Rambo but this just hurt to watch. Choppy as all hell, no narrative flow, no characterization. The only scene that involved any real acting was Rourke’s unnecessary monologue which he pulled off despite the script. I’d forgive the whole thing if the action had been more fun but even in the high quality theater I saw it in the action scenes looked like they had been pulled off a youtube vid. Shaky, blurry, bad edits. It felt like a $10 million dollar straight-to-video Van Damme movie. Aside from a couple of fun action bits the whole thing was just wasted potential. Sometimes you break my heart Stallone.
Posted by Jason on August 25th, 2010I’m going to second the “go fuck yourself”
The writing was off in many places but other than that… yeah… go fuck yourself
Posted by Ben on August 25th, 2010Ok, you can officially fuck off if that’s your opinion.
Posted by bullet3 on August 25th, 2010Seriously Sean and Jay, get rid of this guy.
I expect Film Junk writers to have taste.
He is welcome to an opinion, even if it is contrarian when compared to the podcast. However the tone of the article is needlessly adversarial. At least Colin is proposing a sex change operation for himself. Say hello to Collette!
Posted by Juan Costrada on August 25th, 2010I have not seen the aforementioned film, but in my humble opinion, if a review lacks opinion, it lacks a point. Colin, write on.
Posted by Ali on August 25th, 2010Would that prove that video games/super heroes on movies are better than his films nowadays? In an interview Stallone admitted that he totally hates those super hero movies. It’s going to be like Superhero killed the action star!
Posted by FinalFantasy on August 25th, 2010He states in his post he’s trying to ‘insult the film’, but to me it seems as though he has issues against those who like it. After all, according to him I’m ’simultaneously juvenile and out-of-touch’ just because I like The Expendables.
Look, if you don’t like a movie, fine, that’s your perogative. But to shit on those that do, then that’s a different matter entirely. Write your piece/say your bit and leave it at that.
Posted by Rex on August 25th, 2010You don’t like the same movie I do! Go fuck yourself!
Seriously kids, calm the hell down.
Posted by Chris on August 25th, 2010This review reads like Armand White. There’s less constructive criticism or genuine analysis than there is trashing the film in a rambling incoherent mess. It’s less Roger Ebert and more vindictive stream-of-consciousness.
Hell, I haven’t even watched the movie and came here for something to work on, to figure if it was worth my ticket price only to read garbage. Empire gave this an overall positive review and in a way I appreciate and understand. I think I know who I’m sticking with on this one.
Posted by Steve on August 25th, 2010Is this your first review? because it sure did suck….
Posted by johnsmith on August 25th, 2010I totally agree with the review AND still loved the movie. It was exactly what I expected. Good old fun trash. It’s the kind of movie you can’t zap away when it airs on TV in the early hours. When I want to watch an intelligent movie there are many others to pick from.
Posted by Werner on August 25th, 2010I don’t know why people are so touchy about the review. He didn’t liked the film and gave reasons why. It’s very refreshing to read another take on the film, other than “it’s goofy and fun”. Hopefully Colin ignores the hatred and keeps on writing reviews.
Posted by Eisensammler on August 25th, 2010Stupid review. Im sure he wanted a love story but didnt get any. This is a question to this colin. What do you expect from this film? Did you even watch the action films done in the 80’s? Do you remember the type of acting these films involved, they were utterly hopeless in terms of acting but they delivered in action. And this is what this film did. It delivered action and you got dialogues which reminds of these B-films from the 80’s. But in the end Im happy to see all those stars in one film. It is rare to see them all together. If they plan a sequel they will surely take fans criticism on board.
Posted by Lee on August 25th, 2010Hey Colin! Fuck you asshole, go die!
Posted by Kasper F. Nielsen on August 25th, 2010Guys, if I didn’t think the review was good, we wouldn’t have posted it. Yes, it’s a little bit aggressive, but take a deep breath and try to look at the film from a different point of view instead of blind love. I think he brings up valid points.
Posted by Sean on August 25th, 2010Best point in this review was the use of CG in what is supposed to be an homage to 80s action flicks. That made no sense to me either and really threw me off through the rest of the movie. That said, I’d still review the movie a bit higher. I don’t really understand your complaint that this film managed to win box office 2 weeks in a row, given how weak the past weekend’s offerings were (did you want Vampires Suck to take it over?). The real shame, to me, is how this film seems to have succeeded at the expense of Scott Pilgrim, which I thought was absolutely brilliant.
Posted by Matty on August 25th, 2010Sure there may be valid points in this (he does say that it all boils down to wether or not you had fun though, effectively negating any sort of debate about the merits of the film), but is something like this:
“Men of the world, if this is really what you find entertaining, then consider this my resignation.”
really necessary to bring up a valid point? That’s just grandstanding to get a response.
Posted by Henrik on August 25th, 2010NERD RAGE!
Jeez. Looks like all the nerds came out from playing WOW and reading sensitive graphic novels about life to throw stones.
You’ve never said a film was a piece of shit? If you get offended by something someone writes on the internet just go back to the comfortable warmth of your parents basement and I’m sure everything will be okay.
Posted by Darksiders on August 25th, 2010“The Twilight Saga… caters to a lowest-common-denominator teenage girl audience”
Wait, what? Do you even know what you’re talking about?
As for The Expendables, I couldn’t care less about it and I probably won’t like it, but attacking its “bland palette” seems to be one of the craziest angles to come at a film like this. Even in an amateur-hour review like this.
Posted by DavidM on August 25th, 2010@Jaun, Actually it’s Colleen.
@Rex, The comma before “simultaneously juvenile and out-of-touch” was meant to indicate that it described “Cro-Magnon mess” not “males.”
@Steve, If you think I’m channeling Armond White, you may want to check the tomatometer score.
@Lee, I realize what Stallone is going for, but I think the Expendables is mediocre even by 80s action standards.
@Matty, Good point. I threw up in my mouth a little when I saw Vampires Suck take 2nd place over the weekend. My intention with bringing up the Expendable’s performance was to indicate how out of touch I am.
Posted by Colin on August 25th, 2010I don’t agree with your review Colin, but for the most part it’s well written and offers valid points on why you hated the movie.
Having said that, your opening and closing comments ruin the review. Come on dude, you know better than to do write garbage like that. Makes me not want to read anything else you write.
Posted by Greg on August 25th, 2010@Greg I meant it more good-humored than I guess it came off.
Posted by Colin on August 25th, 2010I agree with Eisensammler kinda, in that I hope you still write reviews, but don’t ignore the hate. At least you have a better view on the readers here?
It’s funny when I first came on to this site, FJ use to have a motto something to the effect of Film Junk – movie news and reviews with a sarcastic edge. That’s the kind of humor we’d be able to detect and play along with. I just can’t see it in your review.
Posted by Primal on August 25th, 2010@Colin I actually thought it was kinda funny. Reading some of the the reactions I had to re read the review to find out how you could have upset so many people. Can’t see it myself. Oh well, ho hum.
@at angry people Chill the fuck out.
Posted by Robin on August 25th, 2010Did anybody read Adam Quigley’s article on slashfilm about Christopher Nolan liking Michael Bay’s films. Lots of angry comments, some quite insulting. Are you the same people writing these? Let me know.
Posted by Robin on August 25th, 2010Wait a minute. Is it the school holidays. Lot’s of bored kids with nothing to do. That’s it.
Posted by Robin on August 25th, 2010The Expendables is totally juvenile. That is why I watched it. I had fun with it while Colin did not. The rage in the comments is even more juvenile, but not entertaining like the film. I’d rather read a well written take-down of an over the top film I liked, then a reactionary “Go Fuck Yourself” comment by a fan of the film. Keep up the good work, Colin.
Posted by Glendon on August 25th, 2010If The Expendables is even half as fucked as the Twilight movies, sign me up!
Posted by Wintle on August 25th, 2010@ Colin. Thanks for the fantastic review. You put everything that i felt after walking out of that theatre in words. A film thats a complete piece of shit. Should be called a piece of shit. Seriously, I tried. I went into the movie with a “its going to be mindless fun mentality” but it was not fun.
Posted by Somnium on August 25th, 2010I haven’t seen The Expendables, but I want to resign from club men as well, but I don’t know who to see about getting entry into the canine race.
I think all the hatred in the comments is meant to be humorous like in your review.
Posted by Reed Farrington on August 25th, 2010Turner & Reed
Posted by Film Ape on August 25th, 2010The review was funny and pretty truthful. I REALLY wanted to love the movie but came out underwhelmed and as a result went and checked out RAMBO again just to confirm that Stallone’s capable of awesome and he is.
Expendables was just sorta sackless. It needed more big hairy sack and it just didn’t bring the ballmeat like I hoped it would.
The rest of you assholes telling Colin to “FUCK OFF” need to check yourselves before you turn this place into an Aint-it-cool talkback.
Jesus, it’s just a review.
Posted by Fatbologna on August 25th, 2010I like this Colin. Any one who can simultaneously mock himself while pissing all over Cheel’s newest love is good people.
Posted by Matt Gamble on August 26th, 2010Colin = Gay.
Posted by Kyriacos on August 27th, 2010Good lord that movie was awful!
Posted by Daavid on August 31st, 2010Anyone who said they liked this must be on the payroll.
Posted by functioning human on August 31st, 2010In a few months after box office has been counted everyone will admit it was utter shit.
Fuck off , the movie was awesome
Posted by This_guys_gay on September 2nd, 2010My brother
Posted by Allen Hendershot on September 5th, 2010I’m sorry your father left you at birth and your mother suckled you to long. Maybe one day you’ll realize there are still males in the world
If you really apologize we will accept you Just like they did gunner.
Colin – i for one would be glad to see you resign. There is no ounce of professionalism in you, and you come across as a Michel Bay fanboy (he seems to be mentioned in all your reviews i have read so far) who just can’t see the good in anything else. Some of the statements you have made makes me wonder why this website even lets you write reviews!? Lets see some of these flabbergasting statements:
“Anyone could have played these nobodies, and it reduces what should be the film’s sole distinguishing feature to mere stunt casting.”
“…but it fails even as a disposable homage to eighties action.”
“Not one of the many protagonists is placed in even momentarily convincing danger, and with almost no story to back up the dreary killing, the action loses all dramatic impact.”
Seriously, you saw the movie, right?? And you were alive in the 80s, right?? ‘Cause if the answer to these questions is true, i am totally at a loss why you would make such statements.
Posted by Angelus1753 on September 16th, 2010Well, Angeles, it looks like what we have on our hands here is a good old fashioned disagreement. I stand by each of the statements you singled out above.
By all means, enlighten me as to why no other actor in Hollywood could have played Statham’s character. What is unique or memorable about the human being he portrays?
Also, I used the word “fails” because the movie didn’t work for me, and frankly I have trouble believing that even you felt there was some remote chance that Stallone or Statham were going to bite it.
Lastly, if you read the review carefully, you’d notice I compared Stallone to Bay in a derogatory capacity. Not a fan.
Posted by Colin on September 16th, 2010Spot on review by Collin. I thought the movie was ok and would give it 3 stars (being generous). I think sly had a great idea and opportunity to do a homage to the 80’s but he completely failed in every way.
One of those movies which could have great but just wasn’t. To those who absolutely loved the movie… Are you for real?? You must be new to movies or just never seen anything like that before because if you have been watching movies since the 80’s The Expendibles is pretty poor film.
Posted by Sab on September 17th, 2010For the movie it was trying to be and aim for it was fantastic,and badass,for the movie you wanted it to be (grown up middle aged realistic) obviously it wasn’t,colin your without me ever knowing of you before are over the age of 30 trying to act like your in the “biz”.FYI nobody cares about your opinion,and also for personally attacking me for liking the movie, go fuck yourself you old fuck(if you can get it up).
Posted by Matt on November 27th, 2010Agree 100% with the reviewer. Anyone who enjoys this needs to concentrate on his own shortcomings before attacking the messenger.
Posted by Nelly on March 13th, 2011Leave a Reply