Tuesday, September 30, 2014

No Good Deed ★

    "No Good Deed" is a worthless and aimless film, in which one could attach numerous other synonyms of the like to describe its incompetence. Its misguided attempts to thrill are trumped by an inept exercision of direction, acting, and a plot that would make even a B-horror film cringe.

    This is without hesitation the most idiotic picture of the year. Its presence is purely ignominious and rightfully so. For, if blunders of this caliber were commended, then everything we know and love about the art of film would be deemed trivial. Our time on this Earth is relatively short-lived and if Hollywood is going to continue to squander this utmost dearest period of our existence with asinine examples of film-making such as this, I will inevitably slip into a state of comatose.

    If you are here to receive a plot summary, then you will not be disappointed. (It is the only distinguishable facet of the film.) For, what happens or what takes place, is all this picture can yield. The only indication of characterization comes in the form of external action and uninspired dialogue. By the time the climax proceeds, there is no discernible reason to care.

    Colin Evans is a "feared" convict up for parole. During the parole board meeting, he is denied this opportunity to once again rejoin society--this also becomes the first demonstration of director Sam Miller's lack of experience, and ultimately, talent. The camera shifts uncontrollably, and rather unflatteringly, between speaker and antagonist, in an attempt to catch the reaction of Evans after seemingly every other word. (It is noteworthy, that the same effect could be achieved without the herky-jerky camera movement.)

    Our underdeveloped prisoner escapes confinement and steals a truck, only to wreck it during a late evening storm. He makes his way to a secluded home where he receives aid, or one could classify as a good deed, from Terri, a distraught married mother of two. She brings him in, dries his clothes, and indulges in routine conversation. Evans then proceeds to carry out a plan of revenge, the motivation of which is brought to our attention by film's end; however, it is much too late. Our concern is already lost and patience is already misspent.

    The remainder of the film, which plays out as a bad soap opera, consists of the heroine hitting Evans with household items and running. He recovers, and the cycle begins again. The atmosphere is created by a repeated utilization of thundering sound effects. We understand that it is a dark and stormy night; how much thunder do we really need? There are a plethora of other thoughtless actions and decisions that I care not comment on.

    In the end, "No Good Deed," which sounds like the title of a bad philosophy paper, cannot overcome the brainlessness at its core. Audiences nationwide should be ashamed of themselves, considering "Forrest Gump," a timeless classic and sentimental masterpiece that justifiably received an IMAX treatment and twentieth anniversary release, could not even reach the half million dollar mark. The other film in the discussion has already tripled its lowly budget of thirteen million, which would consider it a commercial success.

    There is a juncture in the picture in which our protagonist, Terri, asks her captor when the torment will end. I couldn't help but to contemplate the same notion, albeit under different circumstances. I have previously equated films such as this to a cesspool of unimaginative thought. However, in this particular situation, I believe that distinction would be too flattering.

No comments:

Post a Comment