![]() |
| Is that a carrot in your hand, or are you just happy to see me? |
Note: I don’t usually write about things that I hate, because there’s really nothing productive that can come out of talking shit on the Internet. But for Shoot ‘Em Up, I will make a special exception, on the grounds that if I even convince one person not to see this movie, I might be able to stop some injustice in the world from going down.
When I went to the cast and crew screening of Shoot ‘Em Up last night, all I knew about the film was the scant information one can garner from the posters that are currently adorning our city: I knew I would be seeing two fairly well respected dramatic actors (Clive Owen and Paul Giamatti), holding guns, grimacing, and leaping through a nondescript urban backdrop, while Monica Bellucci (that Italian chick who Gaspar Noé cinematically raped in Irreversible) stands in the background showing off her sexy hourglass figure. With a name like “Shoot ‘Em Up,” the other thing you learn from glancing at the poster is that, whether intentionally or not, you’re in for a silly, if not down-right absurd action film.
What you may not garner from a glance at at the poster, or even by watching the relatively tame trailer, is that Shoot ‘Em Up is a completely fucked up, misogynistic, self-indulgent, hateful, and downright retarded piece of shit. Let me explain. There’s nothing innately wrong with gratuitous violence. For example: Quentin Tarantino, John Woo, Park Chan-wook and Takashi Miike are just a handful of modern filmmakers who employ over-the-top cinematic violence in clever, intelligent, and emotionally resonant ways. It can even be fun to watch violence-filled popcorn movies that have no real artistic credibility, which is exactly how I approached Shoot ‘Em Up as I entered the theater— prepared to share some thrills and a few laughs with my friends. Then, the lights dimmed.
The film starts with a bored, tough-looking Clive Owen sitting at a bus stop in the middle of the night. He’s chewing on a carrot— this is one of writer/director Michael Davis’ (whose previous credits are mainly direct-to-video boob flicks like Girl Fever and 100 Girls) heavy-handed allusions to “Looney Tunes,” the cartoon he uses as a scapegoat to justify the film’s callousness. Owen doesn’t flinch as a terrified pregnant woman runs past him, moments away from giving birth. But when a man with a gun shows up a moment later, ready to kill the bitch, Owen begrudgingly becomes involved in what turns out to be a massive conspiracy to murder the foetus inside of this unnamed pregnant woman’s uterus.
After delivering the baby— in the middle of a massive shoot-out with the bad guys— he uses his gun to blast away the umbilical cord, and tries to make a break for it with the woman and her child. A minute later, she’s shot in the head and he leaves her useless corpse behind in a stairwell. Oh well! She provided a child— what more can you expect out of a woman? At least she can skip the post-partum depression. But Owen’s character is all about the sanctity of families, so he grabs the newborn and makes a run for it, cradling the baby under his arm throughout the rest of the picture as he slays dozens of bad guy cronies, who are always on his tail thanks to the ceaseless efforts of Paul Giamatti, our ever-seething villain.

Clive Owen is pro-life at all costs.
Next, we’re introduced to Monica Bellucci, who’s a hooker with a specialty in breast feeding. We see that her clientele is primarily made up of creepy old men in adult diapers, and it is at this point that we get our first inkling of the kind of beast that we are dealing with. Michael Davis— the auteur who is taking us on this wild ride— is an adult baby. Or, at least suffering from severe case of arrested development. Because Shoot ‘Em Up is written from the point of view of an angry, weak 12-year-old boy. Bellucci is recruited to function both as mother to the inner child of Davis (personified by the helpless newborn), and whore to Clive Owen— the invincible, übermensch fantasy version of our director.

Hot mama! Show us your boobs.
For example, Bellucci entices Owen to fuck her by offering him a finger covered in baby food. While giving the much-experienced whore the best lay of her life, some baddies crash through the windows, and Owen blows them all away with his gun, without missing a beat, fucking Bellucci against the wall and obliterating the last bad guy just as he comes. “Talk about blowing your load,” quips Owen as Bellucci collapses in rapture. But if we are to take his dialogue at face value, Davis claims to despise the gun/penis analogy, as a character states in another scene: “All that stuff about guns being phalluses is bullshit.”

Writer/Director Michael Davis, acting like a kid in a candy store.
“I thought this was a good way of taking pieces of my personality and putting it into a genre piece,” says Michael Davis in an interview with IGN. What Davis is referring to is how Clive Owen, throughout the film, is prone to turning homicidal at the drop of a hat over the littlest annoyances. People who don’t use their turn signals while driving deserve to die, people with pony tails get shot in the head, and hippies with dirty toes get shot in the feet. “I kind of became this angry guy who wrote so many scripts and tried to make all these movies and never felt like I could break through,” says Davis in his interview. “I became this guy who every little thing I would hate. I mean, I hate guys with ponytails or guys who drive badly on the road!” There is nothing more self-evident in the film. The only way it could have been more explicit is if Paul Giamatti had turned to the camera and announced, “Alright kids, now we’re entering a violent fantasy that the filmmaker has been harboring since childhood.”
The only thing I can compare it to is Richard McBeef, the short script written by infamous sociopath Seung-Hui Cho, the Virginia Tech killer. But at least Cho didn’t try to instill his violent wet dreams with muddled political undertones. In an effort to move the plot forward, Shoot ‘Em Up takes an anti-gun control turn, as it’s revealed that the entire vicious manhunt is a result of cowardly actions taken by the Democratic front-runner for president, who’s basing his whole campaign on the (in the movie’s Universe) wildly popular and widely supported liberal issue of gun control laws. Needless to say, this more than annoys Clive Owen, and within minutes of the politician’s scheme is revealed, Owen callously assassinates the movie’s stand-in for Clinton/Obama.

Mine’s bigger than yours!
Finally, we have Paul Giamatti’s character, the villainous hit-man. As the only man with the cojones to take Owen on, Giamatti is always on the verge of symbolically castrating our main man. After any number of stalemate stand-offs between Giamatti and Owen, the climax leads us to a resolution of the film’s main conflict: namely, the ever-present questioning of Owen’s masculinity— if not by Giamatti, then by the leagues of faceless men who try to kill him throughout. Just when it seems Giamatti is about to receive the validation he’s been seeking, waving his massive penis, I mean gun in Clive Owen’s face, Owen (naturally) turns the tables and comes out on top, delivering his death knell with one last quip, taking Giamatti to task for his weak charade: “You know what I hate more than anything? A pussy with a gun in his hand.” Well, you know what I hate more than anything? A pussy with a screenplay in his hand.


huh.
i do sympathize with this. because, while probabaly better organized and a bit more measured, i had a similar repulsion to Tarantino’s half of Grindhouse. it was mysogynistic and so stubborn to make his women fit semi-realistically some acne-riddled vision of women “kicking ass” by obsessing over cars and guns… and-and they’re *stuntwomen* too!
*and* it was presented as if they were empowered, despite the previous set of girls who had no cool interests and just a lot of lip who were destroyed in near-fetishistic slo-mo.
all with the excuse that it was an homage to a crass meduim, but it sounded like an outlet for a sexually frustrated guy who’s creating his women on-screen. at least uma was too weird to be accesible.
so yeah, i think i understand that sort of disgust at directors or writers who make us watch their fractured psyche and think that sort of misanthropy isn’t something one should eventually grow out of.
but as with anyone who tells me they really really hate a movie, it makes me kind of curious about it.
not enough though, i don’t think i ever wanted to blow ten bucks on that.
i mean…. aren’t all the over-the-top bits even mildly comical? and not “i’ve got a good quip” comical, but i see a fair bit of potential for some great visual gags. no?
Variety gave Shoot ‘Em Up a so-so review, saying it was “too stylistically audacious to dismiss outright.” And to a certain extent they’re right– the visual gags and elaborate, unrealistic killings are sometimes pretty clever, and in a different context could even have been comical.
But in the context of Shoot ‘Em Up, I couldn’t find a way to derive pleasure of out the absurdity, mostly because the film was so adamant about hitting us over the head with its own sense of humor. It’s like when some annoying asshole comes up to you and tells a mildly funny joke, and then breaks into self-congratulatory hysterics after he finishes. Not unlike the problem I have with Snakes on a Plane, I just wanted this movie to play itself deadpan and leave it up to the audience to find the humor.
Fantastic post! I’m looking forward to this leaking onto the net so I can see it in all its glorious, awful horror.
a few weeks ago a friend described this movie to me and i secretly thought she was full of it. it sounded so implaussible and lame to actually exist.
From reading all of this, I come to one conclusion:
You take yourself far, far too seriously.
Is “Shoot ‘Em Up” a classic? Nope. I enjoyed it for what it was, but I couldn’t even begin to take it seriously. I think Variety calling it “stylistically audacious” is a little too much myself. It’s a wisp of a film; granted as entertainment it offers a welcome personal fingerprint on the proceedings, which I like, but that’s pretty much it.
But to gripe about the lack of intellectual content or P.C. attitudes in a film called “Shoot ‘Em Up” basically shows you have no sense of humor. If you thought it was a waste of your time, that’s perfectly fine, but don’t use your college degree to justify that or say other people shouldn’t see it because YOU were offended. That’s just immature, not to mention humorless and fussy.
I’d encourage everyone reading this to actually go out and see it for themselves. Michael Davis actually put some effort into this; this isn’t just a Hollywood cash-in. So give him some money and buy the right to bag on him.
For the sake of accuracy, I don’t have a college degree. But anyway, I’d just like to make it clear that I wasn’t looking for something intellectually stimulating or serious, as I said– I approached it ready to “share some thrills and a few laughs with my friends”.
It wasn’t that I snubbed my nose at something stupid or artless– I’m a huge fan of many movies that could be described with those adjectives. I felt seriously nauseous and disturbed at the sociopathic, righteously angry fucked-up attitude of the film, and that’s why I don’t want people to give this guy any more money than he’s already making off of angry white teens the nation over.
And why shouldn’t I be able to tell people not to see something? It’s not like my opinion is going to make them do something one way or the other. If you feel so strongly about it, you have the right to pen a positive review on your blog, encouraging people to see it (which I see you’ve already done).
Dude, I gotta say….
You are SO wrong. This was the greatest movie in the history of ALL movies. I just saw it today. And I have to say, if I had read your review before I went, I would have been even more excited to go see it. Clive Owen is like Jesus Christ to me now. I loved him before, but now he is my savior!
Wow, there seems to be a lot of passion surrounding the film. I’ve read a lot of love it or hate it reviews, so I’ve no choice but to see it.
wow cry more
okay…..first off. shoot em up is a great example of what movies lack! balls!!! the story was kinda weak. but so what. it was great funny action packed. i thought the only flaw was there wasnt enough one liners and action….when you write a movie or two then talk on shit.
p.s shoot em up… greatest senseless action movie ever@@!!!!
er i liked it, it was fun. I thought your artical lacked any real arguments as to why it was woman hating, childish or retarded. It was pure fantasy, don’t really understand how you could get so wound up. I didn’t like your pyscho analysis of the film, I thought that was the weakest part of the artical. If pushed I could draw some pretty warped ideas from titanic or anything else. I suggest you stick to stuff with tom cruise or tom hanks starring.
After reading this review, I actually watched the movie again.