Well, I’ve a friend who’s a Jeffrey Dean Morgan fan, and I told her what I’ll tell you: it’s a pretty expensive way to get some sized-large viewing of someone who makes you smile. But, whatever float’s yer boat. (Most of what’s great to see Zoe-wise in the film has already been available online.)

‘Too much left out.’

(I want to preface my thoughts by reminding readers that I don’t care what the source material for a film is. I don’t care how great the novel was, the poem, the short story, the television series, the song, the comic book, the myth…or the graphic novel. I only care about what’s up on the screen, because that’s what I pay my money to be entertained by. Full-stop, period.)

No matter the genre, in order to be successful, in order to be deeply entertaining, all films need to incorporate some basic elements. Not in the same proportions naturally. But to maximize the effect on the view, the more evocative, the more stimulating, the more elemental the processes at play, the greater the payoff.

This applies to romances, comedies, thrillers, horror movies, mysteries, dramas…and action flicks. Whenever a film sticks to the genre’s basics and doesn’t veer, whenever things are kept straightforward and superficial, cookie-cut if you will, the result invariably will be…straightforward and superficial…and cookie-cut. This is a basic storytelling truth. If you don’t like this notion, if it’s too arbitrary for you, if it somehow insults your sense of ‘art’…then I’ll leave you to your predictable, unchallenging, unengaging cinematic fare. Lord knows there’s enough of it out there.

So what doesn’t ‘The Losers’ have in it? What’s missing?

Well, for starters (no pun intended), the ending. This movie is 2/3, maybe 3/4 of an actual film. No matter that there’s two tagged-on codas. More of a copout I have not seen in recent memory; a pretty disgusting execution of completing a story.

Moving into the thrust of the film… Um, there’s nothing to identify with. No reason to get involved with the characters, no motivation for empathy…nothing. Here’s a free tip for the filmmakers: you don’t get an audience on board for the ride by TELLING them about stuff. You SHOW them stuff and let THEM attach themselves in ways that end up creating a memorable moviegoing experience.

Now, I’m going to stop right here, because I’m sure at this point, some (most likely ‘young’) reader is going to say ‘Come on; this is an action film. It’s not meant to be Oscar-winning stuff. Chill out.’ And my response to that is (imagine here that I’ve typed something quite inflammatory, leaving nothing to the imagination as to the tone). Every time someone says something akin to ‘This genre doesn’t demand that, stop imposing your hifalutin expectations!’, I want to a) vomit, and b) pound my fists into their skull. LOL
Kidding.
Actually…no. I’m not. About either element.
Almost all great films have great storytelling going on. To use the ‘It’s just a genre film’ argument is a specious exercise.

This film had some great characters. Or, more precisely, it had characters that had great potential, had they been given a story that utilized them to their fullest. As it was, almost all of them were half-drawn. Chris Evans’ character was great, Columbus Short’s, Idris Elba’s, Oscar Jaenada’s were OK, Jeffrey Dean Morgan’s, Zoë Saldana’s and Jason Patric’s were ‘meh’. There was no ‘oomph’ there, no real chemistry, nothing to get excited about. And let’s face it; if a gang is on a mission, there better be good reasons for us to get excited about what they’re trying to do, and we’d better care that they accomplish their mission.

I wasn’t…and I didn’t.

To make matters worse, the plot was facile, containing very little originality or verve, there were whole sections that seemed like the screenwriters really didn’t give a damn, and the film just meandered…nowhere. (At least nowhere interesting.)

Understanding how I prefaced this review, maybe it needs to be said that what works on the page for a comic, what has impact, what can make you smile, nod your head…more often than not doesn’t hold the same currency on-screen. That may hurt to accept, but it doesn’t change the truth that you cannot use the same schtick in a movie that’s used in a graphic presentation. Well, actually, you CAN, but my experiences (most recently this afternoon watching ‘The Losers’) tells me that if you do, if you’re that arbitrary, if you’re that close-minded, you’re going to end up with something truly forgettable.

Which is what this film is.

Personal review: 6/10 (It WAS a 7, but then they went and screwed-up the ending so badly…)

But…

The story was laughable (not the premise of the story, the ACTUAL story that you watched play out on the screen). This movie plain sucked. Newsflash, without a believable story and decent continuity, you’re just wasting your time, the suspension of disbelief is what allows you to step into the world of the characters, and care about them. This movie was so trite..they even had the obligatory “Reservoir Dogs” shot with the supposed “bad assed” team walking with a camera follow effect… didn’t work, they did it too early in the movie to think they were bad ass.

This movie just didn’t work, and I gotta tell ya, for all the money, risk and trouble they went through, couldn’t they have just fired the screenwriters and hired better ones?