This April, whether you knew it or not, we had a Marvel VS DC movie war! But it was somewhat of a covert war. You had Kick-Ass earlier in the month from whose comic is released by Icon Studios, a Marvel Comics imprint, and then near the end of the month came The Losers, from DC's Vertigo imprint. It was as if Marvel and DC released their hounds on each other instead of raising their own fists. So after the smoke cleared, which one ended up as the better movie?I enjoy team-based action movies. It's pretty much why I enjoyed Ocean's 11-13, Mission Impossible 3, and to some extent, G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra. I just like seeing how every member of the team is there for a certain reason; because of some technical skill, some management and leading skill, or for the main
character, that well-rounded/jack-of-all-trades skill. For the same reason, I think that's why I enjoy games like Team Fortress 2, because each player can play as a unique character with unique abilities, all of which are useful in making a successful team. Team-based combat at its very best. Essentially, that's what The Losers is; a team-based action movie.When the original comic book was released in the 70's, it was based on a group of soldiers fighting the good fight during World War II. The series was eventually discontinued, but picked up in 2004 by DC's Vertigo imprint, whose storyline was brought to the present day. It's from this continuity that the story and characters are based off of for the movie.
The story follows a team of spec ops soldiers, dubbed The Losers, who travel the world taking down different crime syndicates and bad doers in general. On a routine mission in Bolivia, they find themselves betrayed by the very people they work for. Fortunately for them, they were not onboard the exploding helicopter that was meant to be their transport. Unforunately for 25 Bolivian kids, they were on it instead. The Losers, who are believed to be dead, begin a new mission of hunting down their would be killers.
The Losers was a fun watch, but I found that even after an hour of watching it, I had a hard time remembering any action sequences. While watching the movie it seemed good, but it didn't necessarily have a lasting effect. It was an action movie that was a quick fix if you had a thirst for bullets and explosions. The problem was that it was too vanilla; there was nothing that really made it memorable. A large problem was the lack of character development during the movie. We're introduced to what seem like awesome and colourful characters, but they don't give us much to go with after their initial introductions. I think that was the coolest part of the movie for me though. As we're introduced to each character, the movie cuts to a still frame of their comic-drawn counterpart and we're given their name and specialty.
Another problem was Jason Patric as the main villain. I just didn't believe him as a menacing last boss. They did a few things to try to get him across as a nefarious character. But at the same time, they gave him sort of a comedic edge, and the two just didn't blend well. He was no Hans Gruber.
Zoe, Zoe, Zoe. One of the main reasons why I loved Star Trek. What a fox! Well, I'm glad she was in this movie.The movie mixes action and humour together, with none of the characters really taking themselves seriously. Not a bad thing though, it does make it an enjoyable watch. The way the action was shot, imbued with humour kind of reminded me of the Charlies Angels movies by McG... but maybe a notch or two less outlandish.
So in the end, Kick-Ass won the fight. It was a better put together movie with characters that you could really get behind. The Losers, while enjoyable, was more of a by-the-numbers thrill ride. If you, like me, are filled with testosterone and like action flicks, then The Losers couldn't hurt. Til next time, later geeks!
Comments