![]() |
|
resurrectionsongJanuary 26, 2004Butterfly Effect: A ReviewI don't like Ashton Kutcher. He was perfect on That 70's Show--perfect in appearance, attitude, and humor. Unfortunately, with acting range only slightly broader than that of Keanu Reeves, it seems that he isn't bound to break out of that character any time soon. In Dude, Where's My Car?, this generation's Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure, he found his niche and he really should stay there. Butterfly Effect is about a man who finds in himself the ability to travel back in time and change key events in hopes of affecting a change in his present. It involves violence, child abuse, trauma, and death. This is about as far away from Dude, Where's My Car as Ashton Kutcher could possibly find himself. He's not better for the change. Butterfly Effect was blessed with a good story concept and cursed by bad acting, script, and direction. It has, early on, some genuinely creepy and scary moments, but the story never really managed to be compelling. Ashton Kutcher, while almost managing to be reasonable at times, really can't carry his character through. He's lightweight and not particularly likable. Without giving away too much of the plot, I would like to note that there are a number of scenes which must have been intended to be serious that just invoked laughter from the audience. In one, where the camera zooms away from Ashton's character Evan, we see the unintended consequences of his attempts to change the course of time. The consequences are supposed to be horrific and shocking; I'd be surprised if anyone in the audience was shocked, and the look on Evan's face was something straight out of That 70's Show. This isn't horrific, it's hilarious. In another scene, Evan is running down a hall trying to evade guards. We fear that he's gone mildly insane, the situation is desperate, and the entire movie is on the line. But Ashton Kutcher's swinging arms don't inspire the tension intended: it inspires giggles. Trust me, I wasn't the only one in the audience that felt this way. Most of the acting is acceptable, if unremarkable. Amy Smart (as the love interest, Kayleigh) was solid and certainly pretty. The one notable stand-out, though, was Jesse James. James plays one of the characters, Tommy, at age 13. His character, through most of the movie is angry and violent, and James plays it perfectly. Watching his character suddenly, explosively attacking an older boy was the most disturbing scene of the entire film. I would be surprised if James didn't manage to find more roles in the future. Not only was he one of the best actors in this film, but with a limited role, he managed to capture the stage in my mind. The acting, though, wasn't the real problem with the film. The problem was that the human interaction never felt real. It all felt like a big put on--these aren't real people that we're watching, they are the barest shadows of something real. While leaving room for the fact that this is a fantasy film, and then leaving further room for characters given that stipulation, I still couldn't put aside my knowledge that I was watching a movie. It was never more involving than that. The film moves quickly (as it must) to cover the main character's trips to his past, and in doing so manages to lose any sense of depth that it worked so hard to develop during the first twenty minutes. Some of the scenes are unnecessary (the crack whore scene in particular came across as over the top and unbelievable) and some of the scenes simply don't work dramatically. Better editing and direction could likely have given the film more depth and interest. Better acting and writing could have given me characters and events that I was willing to believe in. All of this said, it isn't a horrible movie. It's a serviceable film that is disappointing, most, for its inability to fully develop what was a pretty neat concept. I wouldn't suggest seeing this movie in the theater, but it might make a decent snowy day rental. Personally, I'll never see the film again. If I want to see a movie concerning the unintended consequences of mucking about with the past, I'll break out 12 Monkeys, a movie with a better director, a better cast, and a far better developed story. Posted by zombyboy at January 26, 2004 09:55 AM | TrackBackComments
Too bad. I was really looking forward to that movie. 12 Monkeys is such an amazing flick that I'm feeling remiss for having not seen it in a while. I'll have to reconcile that. Posted by: StumpJumper at January 26, 2004 10:22 AMWho knows--you might like it more than I did. My companion certainly did. Although she agreed with me about specific points, she still liked the story quite a bit. It was funny, I could believe that I actually wanted to see and Ashton Kutcher movie. I've never thought the guy was talented, but this concept really intrigued me and I hoped it would be a good movie. Posted by: zombyboy at January 26, 2004 10:26 AMSounds like I could spend my time better renting Frequency. Not that I was actually contemplating spending either money or time watching an Ashton Kutcher movie. Posted by: McGehee at January 27, 2004 02:34 PMYou're a smarter man than me. That's all I'm saying. Posted by: zombyboy at January 27, 2004 03:17 PMI hope a book is made from it, assuming that it wasn't made from a book. It's an excellent concept, so a literary treatment would probably make it worth a few bucks. Posted by: Dave at January 30, 2004 04:24 PMPost a comment
|
| All content ©2003 by the authors of ResurrectionSong.com except where noted. |