Repo Men (2010)
Writer: Eric Garcia (novel "the reposession mambo' and screen play), Garrett Lerner (screenplay)
Director: Miguel Sapochnik
Starring: Jude Law, Forest Whitaker, Alicia Braga
dude works for "the union", a company that sells mechanized internal organs at exorbitant prices, repossessing those organs that are in arrears. he's all into it until he wakes up in a hospital with a union heart after an accident. so yeah. he *gasp* can't make his payments and now his former employer is after his heart.
i liked "repo! the genetic opera" waaaay better and it had the square root of this movie's budget. i made a statement a while back on how i was starting to OD on the whole romantic comedy dime a dozen movies. i'm starting to feel the same way about "action" movies like this one. there's nothing inventive. i've seen the plot. i've seen the actors doing the same damn thing, and i found this movie's end insulting to the time in which i spent on the couch finishing one of my art collectives' projects. i had millions of questions about the plot not making sense (especially with the tardo ending), and i had problems understanding the relationships between characters and their motivations to do what they were doing. it's totally one of these movies where i roll my eyes when the credits are rolling and walk away forgetting the movie existed at all. it's ones like these where i have taken to militantly marking our stars on netflix so i will know that i've watched it and not enjoyed it if it ever comes up again.
now i'm going to talk about the ending so black highlighting away:
the end brings up the question of existence in the first place. forget about the fact that the last half of the movie takes place in a comatose brain. no. wait. let's not. ok. why would he put himself through such things? if it's dream like it doesn't matter about sequence. dreams don't make sense to the conscious brain. they're not linear. this goes back to the sort of plot cuts that irritate the boogs right out of my nose. lowest common denominator or short cutting= a lazy story teller. if it doesn't make sense don't write a story about it. if your answer is you are doing something for the audience's sake you fail! if there is some sort of obstacle course that could kill the character i feel cheated when i find out it never really existed in the first place. that's why "dallas" lost ratings after bobby wakes up when he was supposed to have died which means there was a whole season of plot that never really took place. even said obstacle course leaves me with questions. if forest whitaker was just going to blow up the big computer system, why were jude law and chick putting their hands inside each others incisions and scanning their organs back into the system for the last fifteen minutes? forest whitaker also went through an awful lot of bad guy time to just help them in the end. that was a total johnny lawrence karate kid "you're alright, larusso" moment.
now back to the existence philosophical question. if this dude thinks he has succeeded and made his wildest dreams come true who cares if that's not real? it's real to him. it's in his brain. he will never ever know anything different. so i walk away completely indifferent to the characters situation which i think is the opposite of what the viewer is supposed to feel. i think i was supposed to pity poor jude law. nope. also if they turn it off on him like the "as long as you make the payments" comment was supposed to bring up in your brain, he'll be dead and therefore will not know the difference.