Gamer Review

John Campea 41 Comments

Thanks for checking out our Gamer review. To see the video version of the Gamer review you can watch it at the bottom of this post.

Up to this point I have been a major fan of Neveldine and Taylor, the writers and directors of both “Crank” movies and producers on last years “Pathology”, so obviously I’ve been looking forward to seeing “Gamer” even though on the outside it’s looked like the weakest of their offerings to date. I mean come on… a death row inmate who is offered a chance at life if he wins a life and death publicly broadcast event. I’ve seen 3 of those movies in the last 4 years already.

But could Gamer rise above that? Thankfully yes… but just barely.

THE BASIC IDEA

The synopsis for Gamer reads something like this: “Set in a future-world where humans can control other humans in mass-scale, multi-player online gaming environments, a star player (Butler) from a game called “Slayers” looks to regain his independence while taking down the game’s mastermind (Hall).”

THE BAD

I know I generally do “The Good” first, but I feel like it’s appropriate to do the bad first here and I think you’ll see why.

I HATED the first 15 minutes of this movie for several reasons. It felt more cartoon than intense. More ridiculous than imagination and more desperation than vision. The way we are introduced to the story was told in a really contrived and boring manner. It basically treats the audience like we’re all 6 years old and couldn’t possibly understand anything beyond the simplest concepts. It holds our hands and explains what’s going on like we walk to the store with bike helmets on. It wasn’t just irritating, it made me lose interest in the film almost immediately.

I have to mention this. Neveldine and Taylor are amazing at coming up with innovative ways of pulling together terrific shots and ways to get those shots. However, I’ve found with Crank 2, and now with Gamer they’ve fallen more and more into the horrible trap of THINKING that shaking the camera like it’s being operated by monkey suffering seizures makes the film “intense”. Somewhere along the line someone lied to them and told them that doing 5 cuts per second and shaking the camera like it’s being dangled from a Mr. Slinky makes movies intense. IT… DOES… NOT. What it does is ruins great shots and great action scenes because not only can I not really appreciate and tell what’s going on up on the screen… IT MAKES ME NOT CARE. They come up with AMAZING scenes and sequences… only to ruin them by not letting us (the audience) really watch them. it’s frustrating as hell.

WHY THE FUCK IS LUDACRIS IN THIS MOVIE?!?! Damn, I wanted to gouge my ears every single time he spoke on screen. I can’t decide if the character was just bad, or (as I suspect) if the acting was really just that bad.

I know it’s not the movie, but I really do have to take a moment to talk about the trailer. It’s the worst, and it turns out completely deceiving (I’ll get to that in a moment). I can honestly say I never ONCE heard anyone say they liked the Gamer trailers. Of the roughly 20 times I saw it play in theaters, not once did I hear any buzz in the crowd after it played… quite the opposite. Such a shame, because the movie is actually much better than the trailers let on.

THE GOOD

After we get through the painful opening 15 minutes (which caused me to lose all hope in the rest of the movie), the film changes gears and… well… becomes very watchable.

The story of the film is much better than one might think. Now here’s the thing… the ass awful trailers made you think that the STORY of the movie was about “a death row inmate who is offered a chance at life if he wins a life and death publicly broadcast event” much like Death Race of The Condemned. But unlike those movies, this is just a device in the story… not the story itself. As a matter of fact, (and this is a little bit of a spoiler) the movie doesn’t stay in prison very long and once Butler gets out, the real story of the movie unfolds. And guess what, that story is pretty good. Which all leads me once again to ask why the trailers thought it necessary to make us think the movie was about something else in the first place?

I’m enjoying Gerard Bulter more and more. You can laugh at me all you want, but I actually thought he was damn funny in “The Ugly Truth” too. But Gamer reminds us that his true place is as an action star. Flat out, I thought Bulter was great in this film.

There are honestly some very good laughs in the movie (once again, once you get past the first 15 minutes). For example, Heroes star Milo Ventimiglia has a small role in the film that just had me howling every minute he was on the screen. In typical Neveldine/Taylor fashion, the film weaves humor into their intensity like a wink to the audience acknowledging just how unreal everything in the movie is… and it works.

Michael C. Hall is dynamite in the film… and I’m shocked to say that because I thought he looked lame in the trailers, and thought even worse things for the first part of the movie. But he really makes this character like a good graphic novel antagonist. Subtle, and some not so subtle quirks and manerisms he uses got me to actually LIKE his character.

Have to mention the Michael C. Hall dance number. It’s awesome. I knew the scene was in the movie, and I was dreading it like crazy, but once it started, I ate it up… it was great.

Is it possible for Terry Crews to NOT be entertaining? I mean, even if he tried? I don’t think it’s possible.

OVERALL

If you can manage to not get up and walk out during the first 15 or so minutes of Gamer, I think you’ll end up enjoying yourself… I did. The film could have been about 3x better had they knocked off the terrible shaky camera and hyper aggressive quick cut editing, but in the end Gamer ends up being a fun, exciting, at times funny and surprisingly well told story. In the words of our friends over at JoBlo.Com:

The best thing about GAMER is that Neveldine/ Taylor definitely had the pacing down pat as it runs a lean ninety minutes, and doesn’t wear out it’s welcome. I have to say, I kind of dig their whole trash/ excess aesthetic, and I image if you watch this between CRANK & CRANK 2, you could see their evolution (or de-evolution) to the trashterpiece insanity of CRANK 2: HIGH VOLTAGE (this was shot BEFORE, and sat on the shelf for awhile). If you like this type of thing (and obviously, there are people that do, as the film went over really well as the screening I attended- although it had a few walkouts) you’ll probably get a kick out of it, although you’ll be disappointed if you walk in expecting a straight-forward action flick. Still, I dug it and would recommend it to anyone looking for a trashy adrenaline rush.

I concur. When all is said and done, this is fun movie that manages to shine despite its weaknesses. Overall I give Gamer a 6.5 out of 10.

Comment with Facebook

About John Campea

View all posts by John Campea →

You may like these posts

41 thoughts on “Gamer Review”

  2. The movie Gamer follows a convict’s struggle to free himself from the control of a video games technology. The player of the game, a young boy from outside the system, is specifically connected to a gamer he controls, the convict. The realistic features of the movie’s video game are what attracts players to participate, however they do not grasp the concept of death that playing may cause.
    In response to Gamer’s dramatic plot of player and gamer interactions, it was clear that a societies obsession with making games more realistic could turn into a spiraling downfall. Even though Gamer was an unrealistic story line, it displayed how our modern programs at a smaller scale are constantly working on creating a more realistic and interactive game for future costumers. Ideally, the success and popularity of a game depends entirely on how realistic its features are. The gamer world is based on new up and coming programs that will ultimately allow complete control, essentially allowing players to get lost in the game. The drive for more interaction and gamer accessories has reached a global consumption base. Gamers now communicate with other players across countries while participating on the same program levels. The skills for these programs have reached extraordinary highs, and gaming competitions have become nationally popular. Technology is an ongoing exploration of new ideas and desires. Gamer revealed how gaming interactions capture and warp a world’s reality.
    It was a great movie!!

  4. I just don’t get the fact that he decides to stay with his wife knowing that she’s been banging other guys in the sims. He should have just kept going for his daughter & try his luck with another one… It seems to me that it’s a pretty big deal that his wife was a hotty controlled in the sims for the worst situations.

  6. John, I have agreed with about 90% of your reviews since TMB started up, but this isn’t one of those times. :-)

    I didn’t mind Ludacris. I didn’t. I normally hate rappers turned actors, but in this genre, he worked on a certain level.

    The dance and soundtrack were great. Loved them both. But, then again, I’m a Mason fan. Each were used as great plot devices to drive the lack of story forward to points where the actors could… well, I don’t know what. They really didn’t do much in this movie. It seems to have lacked an agenda for some strange reason.

    What I didn’t like was the fact that this movie – a movie clearly meant to be as vacuous as a video game is as you play it at home – didn’t go the extra bit and develop characters we could find something to like or care about. The characters in this movie were just as one or two dimensional as they would be in a real video game. I was hoping for a bit more. I was disappointed. That’s my fault. I expected too much I guess. :-)

    The action was fairly good, not intense enough to warrant the feeling that the title character was fighting for his life in the games, but good nonetheless. Also, the flashbacks were a bit distracting. Having said that, Joe maintains the best part of this movie is the chick who lost her head. *snort*

    The abrupt ending, the lack of emotion from the minions, the lackluster of care with the characters – all of it adds up to a hollow flick for me.

    The upsides to this one: Kira Sedgwick finally gets a meaty role as the ballzy broad, Gerald Butler as an action hero getting to flex his muscles and the use of the main competition in the game (sorry, forget his name).

    I love Michael C. Hall. He’s a gifted, brilliant, inventive actor, but some of his scenes (the last few especially) were grating. Dunno why, but they just were. I adore him as an actor. I really, really do, and he was the main reason I wanted to see this movie. Perhaps it was the lack of substance in the script that made me not like his portrayal?

    Anyway, Joe and I walked out of the flick not really caring much about it. We were almost indifferent to it. And we thanks the dogs we used some Air Miles points to get the tickets because we would have hated to plunk down money for this obvious video rental wannabe.

    Overall, Gamer isn’t the worst movie of the year – or even ever – but nor is it worthy of accolades upon accolades.

  7. I would have to agree with John’s review; Gamer is a solid movie with some moments that will make you cringe. As a gamer, I would have to disagree with his observation of the first 15 min. I though that the filming was spot on for how things would feel if games like Halo, Rainbow 6, or Medal of Honor were actually real. Above all else though, I think that this movie was a very sharp criticism of our societies dependence on technology for everything from interaction to stimulation. It honestly felt like I was watching the internet in live action, and some of it was REALLY disturbing. Milo’s character (for example) came off as more of a sexual predator lurking around chat rooms than a humorous fixture meant to entertain. Either way, I really enjoyed the film.

  8. I disagree completely with John, big surprise…

    This is quite possibly the worst movie I have seen this year, and I loved Crank 1 and 2.

    The movie is only an hour and 30 minutes and it still somehow found a way to drag. The movie is very nihilistic in how it tells the story by showing humans becoming more and more depraved, but then comes out with a happy ending.

    The story is just plain bad and 100% predictable.

    Terry Crews and Gerard Butler do solid in their roles, but Gerard Butler only has about 10 lines in the whole flick.

    When the highlight of an action movie is a song and dance by the villian, your movie has issues…

  9. Gerard Butler’s going to be in the 15-20 million per movie league very soon. If Christian Bale decides to back out of Batman, Butler’s the best bet to replace him and continue the Dark Knight saga.

  10. Dear The Movie Blog,

    After years of watching movies and many of them involving Ludacris I have come to this conclussion.

    When Ludacris get Beat up by Terrence Howard the movie gets an Oscar nod. “Crash and Hustle and Flow”

    When Ludacris lives the movie flat out sucks, “2 Fast 2 Furious, Max Payne, etc etc

    I can hardly hold an argument to acknowledge the acting ability of Ludacris due to how minor his role was in the movie…

  11. I agree with John on this. I was pleasntly surprised by this movie. Is it a classic that we’ll remember years from now? No, but it was fun, it was interesting, and believe it or not, kind of original. You’ll have to see it for yourself to belive that last part.

    I know you’re friends with them John, I wonder if you could ask them sometime if they we’re trying to have a political underlining message in there. I noticed some similarites to real life. They incorporated the reality of internet socilaizing as of now, with what it could morph into; And I couldn’t help but ask myself, could we be heading in this direction. It was a little creepy. The scene with the fat greasy man playing a sexy woman and tricking men, very creepy, but brilliant.

  12. I actually have not seen either of the Crank movies (I’m gonna get a lot of shit for that), but I hated Pathology. All it got right for me was the sex and that was it. I want to Gamer, but I’m not sure I’ll be able to get a chance.

  13. I must disagree, but I will say that they did try to make a good movie. There are two scenes I did love. The first 2 minutes were a smart way to introducing us to the world of the future. No typical cliches, just images set to music. We see that the game Slayer is as popular as American Idol and that Michael C. Hall’s character is not just a mogul, but a pop-culture icon, things that should be noticed before the show starts.

    The second thing is the dance scene. Like you, I was sure this would suck back, but in fact it is the centerpiece, representing this character in a visual way. Not to mention that if I had control of a bunch of people’s minds I might do something like that myself.

    But here’s a few questions I ask to everybody: What’s the point of this movie? If it’s supposed to be an action extravaganza, why are there only four humdrum action sequences that run about five minutes apiece? Because of the satire in the movie, it’s makers must be trying to convey a message about gaming, so to those who game, would you play Slayers or Society if given the chance? And if not, then what’s the point of either game?

    Gamer reminds me of Rollerball about another bloodsport, but that at least sells the concept of the game as a control device on the masses to keep them oppressed (or even Gladiator to keep the masses distracted), but it never gets around to really saying something.

  14. Did the knowladge that they were using that RED camera effect the expierience at all? Did you notice the picture quality looking better or anything?
    I personally really liked the look of it and have to agree with joblo that I really like the whole trashy like aesthetics.

  15. Hey John, I noticed there wasn’t a review for (500) Days Of Summer up. Have you watched it yet? I thought it was amazing.
    Also I think you should check out a trailer call Precious

  17. I keep asking my self the same question. Why do the production companies continue to use shaky cam? Nobody likes it, there are so many complaints about it, lack of shaky cam is applauded, so why do they keep doing. It was a great idea but it practice is not so good.

  19. John, we’re usually on the same page when it comes to reviews, but wow. You seem to at least tolerate it, but damn did I HATE this movie. Just atrociously bad. And when that musical number started, my jaw dropped and not in the good way. The only good thing I can say is that Butler at least looked good, I like the Manson song that they used, and my friend paid for my ticket with a gift certificate so I didn’t spend a dime on this puppy. Good God.

  22. havent even finished watching (3:41 in), and i can already say, this is by far, the most entertaining movie blog review ive EVER seen
    (and ive been a fan since 06)

  23. “This is not somethin’ you can control” lol.

    BTW, thanx for giving ratings again, I thought you’d just toss them aside like you did with “No,Go,and Routh” after you didn’t rate G.I.JOE or Inglourious Basterds.

  25. I saw this a few hours ago and yes it does get much better after the first 15 minutes with schizo camera angles. The sad thing is that about 3/4 of the audience I was watching it with were leaving because of the horrible camera work.

    I’d give the film a 7 out of 10. It’s not original but it’s damn entertaining.

    1. People were getting up out of the theater and leaving over the shaky camera-work? Holy cow. It’s getting worse every year. What are these directors and cameraman thinking? All the great action flicks have none of this shaky-cam crap. Raiders didn’t have it, T2 didn’t have it, The Matrix certainly didn’t have it. Neither did X-Men 2(a personal favorite of mine with some great choreography). They had cool, visually striking action. Shaking the camera in order perpetuate an illusion of intensity is almost never artistic, not to mention entertaining. Plus, it just gets so OLD.

  26. Huh, JoBlo’s words are interesting because I have yet to see Crank 2.
    I thought the Dance Number was kinda weird, but kinda interesting.
    I really enjoyed this, more then Transformers 2 and Inglorious Basterds, but not as much as District 9.
    I would’ve expected a little higher rating like maby a 7, but oh well.

  27. I think that Butler is going to be up there with Pitt and Depp pretty soon once hes in more movies

    Not talent wise, I mean- hes been in 300, now this…and Law Abiding Citizen…I know im missing another one…well, I really think hes going to start getting LOTS of roles. Hes got a face, a recognisable one and I think hes going to be a pretty name soon (which he is now)

    I just totally see him getting a HUGE role or two pretty soon. Like “RDJR in Ironman” big, or Harry Potter big.

    3. Thanks,James for the comments re: Gerard Butler. Maybe you’re thinking of Phantom of the Opera, The Ugly Truth, and/or RocknRolla. Gerard is already huge, and continued widespread recognition for his talents will only grow his already solid fanbase. I’ve been an admirer of his work since 1999 when I saw him in The Jury, on PBS, where he stole the show in the ensemble cast! He successfully takes on a variety of roles, by design, and puts all of his heart and soul into each of them. Also,thanks to John for his interestingly objective review of Gamer. Check it out, and look for Law Abiding Citizen in Oct.

    4. I’m not sure I totally agree. Pitt and Depp are who they are because they can fill just about any role (though I think Pitt is better at it). Butler seems to be more of the Crowe type of person. He doesn’t really seem to do a lot of comedy. His last comedy he did, Ugly Truth, really helped out in that genre. So yes, I see him getting more roles, but I think you made the wrong comparison.

Leave a Reply