CHUD.com Community › Forums › THE MAIN SEWER › CHUD.COM Main › REVIEW: PROJECT X
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

REVIEW: PROJECT X

post #1 of 52
3/2/12 at 1:25am
Thread Starter 
by Renn Brown: link

Renn examines the alcohol and the ecstasy of the epic party film.
Reply
post #2 of 52
3/2/12 at 1:41am

I'm way more intrigued about this than I expected.

Reply
post #3 of 52
3/2/12 at 2:26am

It might be exquisitely concieved and structured, but I'm tired of spending ninety minutes in the company of assholes - and by extension asshole filmmakers - who think these vacuous, nasty characters are cool/fun/interesting. If we're not supposed to particularly like these guys, or get behind them, then show some consequences. Kill one of them in hilarious fashion. Do something other than shrug and say "this is what it is". Todd Phillips is starting to look more fucked-up and unpleasant with every passing film he puts his name to.

Reply
post #4 of 52
3/2/12 at 2:32am

It's the apparently amoral, or most likely non-moralizing, tone this film has according to Renn that makes me interested the most.

Reply
post #5 of 52
3/2/12 at 2:35am

Why, exactly? Guys act like lecherous moronic assholes, nothing really comes of it. It's every Todd Phillips film ever.

Reply
post #6 of 52
3/2/12 at 2:47am

I hate when every piece of entertainment, especially comedies relying on debauchery, comes with a moral coda. Something Philips' films are also guilty off. "Oh, he learned how to stand up for himself." "He realized that he really loves his family." I hate that stuff.

Reply
post #7 of 52
3/2/12 at 2:49am

I haven't seen the film obviously but....whats so "immoral" about wanting to have a good time, get drunk and get laid, especially at 17? 

Reply
post #8 of 52
3/2/12 at 2:54am

It's not the immorality of getting laid/wanting to have a good time, it's the immorality of having three leads who constantly refer to women as bitches, pussy, cunts or whatever, and a film which backs up that dumbass childish rhetoric by showing pretty much all the women in it to be slutty non-characters. You can do debauchery, even lecture-free debauchery, without presenting a bunch of unlikeable, completely oblivious assholes as the leads - and then supporting those character traits with the content of the rest of the film.

 

Even putting morality aside, that's justt irritating to watch for me as a grown adult.

Reply
post #9 of 52
3/2/12 at 3:09am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Waaaaaaaalt View Post

I haven't seen the film obviously but....whats so "immoral" about wanting to have a good time, get drunk and get laid, especially at 17? 


I said amoral and non-moralizing, meaning the absence of morality whether negative or positive among this film's concerns. Not immoral.

 

 

Reply
post #10 of 52
3/2/12 at 3:20am

Great and intriguing review of a film I still have absolutely zero intention of seeing a single frame of.

 

That bit about a classic Metallica song being used to effect at the end just reminds me of a special I saw on MTV doing a wrap up of Woodstock '99. They used One as a coda to the destruction the morning after that infamous final night. I imagine it's just going to make me sad and/or pissed off in this flick too, for every single one of the same reasons.

Reply
post #11 of 52
3/2/12 at 7:48am

My problem with this movie (from what I've seen) is the same problem I have with every party movie: no parties happen in high school that encompass all variations of the social circle in extreme populations. Nerds do not get to just show up and hang with the jocks; anti-socials and druggies wouldn't be hanging out with the conservative rich kids. Etc.

Reply
post #12 of 52
3/2/12 at 8:20am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaun H View Post

My problem with this movie (from what I've seen) is the same problem I have with every party movie: no parties happen in high school that encompass all variations of the social circle in extreme populations. Nerds do not get to just show up and hang with the jocks; anti-socials and druggies wouldn't be hanging out with the conservative rich kids. Etc.



But, DUDE!  What if the party was so AWESOME that EVERYBODY came?!!!

 

Yeah, I'm pretty sure that anybody that has written a high school party movie has never been near a high school party.  I think those movies are more influenced by other party movies than actual parties.

Reply
post #13 of 52
3/2/12 at 8:22am

Critical mass. If the party gets big enough, everyone's going, making the party bigger, attracting more people, making the party bigger and so on.

 

Fuck, I was going to see it out of obligation, but now I'm thoroughly intrigued by the whole thing. Spot on review, Renn.

Reply
post #14 of 52
3/2/12 at 8:32am

From Angela Muredo's ZERO STARS review over at Film Freak Central:

 

"While Project X is suffused with the same deep misogyny and awe before Dionysian dickishness as its producer's directorial work, it's also a testament to Helms's grounded performance as those films' mild-mannered demon-in-wait--and proof of how unsustainable Philips's poisonous alchemy is in the hands of the truly useless. That would be first-time director Nima Nourizadeh, who has no instinct for narrative, characterization, or composition, and whose licentious camera unfailingly roves up the skirt of every 18-year-old extra lassoed in what the press notes eerily call a "nationwide talent search." Woe and hilarious Taser gags to anyone who searches for talent here."

 

Yeah, I think I'll skip this.

Reply
post #15 of 52
3/2/12 at 8:42am

I am surprised at the amount of praise this is getting - it looks utterly awful.

Reply
post #16 of 52
3/2/12 at 8:45am

I'll watch WEIRD SCIENCE again instead, thanks.

Reply
post #17 of 52
3/2/12 at 10:15am

I already said I'm too old for this, and I stand by it.

 

Well, lean by it.  With my walker.

Reply
post #18 of 52
3/2/12 at 4:56pm

Renn, what's your take on Meredith Borders' reviews over at that other movie site?

 

Because from her take, Project X sounds like an even worse 90 minutes then I thought.

 

Oh and what happens to bouncingdog?

 

Reply
post #19 of 52
3/2/12 at 5:37pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaun H View Post

My problem with this movie (from what I've seen) is the same problem I have with every party movie: no parties happen in high school that encompass all variations of the social circle in extreme populations. Nerds do not get to just show up and hang with the jocks; anti-socials and druggies wouldn't be hanging out with the conservative rich kids. Etc.



The film is inspired by an Australian high school party where a kid named Corey Delaney posted a party invite on Myspace and over 500 people showed up and did $20,000 in damage.  Riot police were called in.   Unlikely? Yes.  Never happens?  Nope.

Reply
post #20 of 52
3/2/12 at 6:12pm

To compare this to Animal House is an outrage, the final cherry on a review that starts off decent, but then firmly crawls up its own ass by the end as the reviewer attempts to justify what seems like a pretty reprehensible film. Which I have to see now.

 

In other news, this sounds like Nick's favorite movie ever. 

Reply
post #21 of 52
3/3/12 at 12:11am

You really really don't have to see it. You're going to appreciate and enjoy it PRECISELY as much as you think you will.

 

Reply
post #22 of 52
3/3/12 at 1:16pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leonard View Post

 

 

In other news, this sounds like Nick's favorite movie ever. 



I am baffled.

Reply
post #23 of 52
3/3/12 at 1:45pm

This sounds like the most ghastly shit ever. I'm ashamed for everyone involved, and the only pro's Renn seems to be finding in them, appear to come from him reading into intentions that aren't there and neat music video tricks. Anyone giving this shit money deserves a swift kick in the head all the way home. Without roast beef.

Reply
post #24 of 52
3/3/12 at 1:52pm

You know what, there are films we all like that are questionable but the more I read and see of this flick the less I understand people defending it.

Reply
post #25 of 52
3/3/12 at 1:56pm

The nerd kid did a porn for Bang Bros.:

 

http://www.tmz.com/2012/03/03/project-x-geek-jonathan-brown-porn/

Reply
post #26 of 52
3/3/12 at 2:02pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barkatthemoon View Post

The nerd kid did a porn for Bang Bros.:

 

http://www.tmz.com/2012/03/03/project-x-geek-jonathan-brown-porn/

 

i wonder if the producers knew when they cast him.
 

 

Reply
post #27 of 52
3/3/12 at 2:09pm

Jesus, not safe for work. NOT SAFE FOR WORK.

[edited for PORN] although, to be fair, it was funny and awkward.

Reply
post #28 of 52
3/3/12 at 2:21pm

I don't understand why anyone over the age of 22 would care about this. It looks like a feature-length bro-ified Andrew WK music video. PARTYPARTYPARTYPARTY.

Reply
post #29 of 52
3/3/12 at 2:25pm

I once saw Andrew WK live at penn state college. It was a surprising dull night. I think even Mr. Party himself would balk at the idea of this.

Reply
post #30 of 52
3/3/12 at 3:15pm

 The review made me think about seeing Project X. My first thought was it looks like 90 minutes of people being tools. If I'm really really bored maybe I'll check it out. My opinion my be colored by the fact I'm 36.

Reply
post #31 of 52
3/3/12 at 4:40pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by SeanCE View Post

This sounds like the most ghastly shit ever. I'm ashamed for everyone involved, and the only pro's Renn seems to be finding in them, appear to come from him reading into intentions that aren't there and neat music video tricks. Anyone giving this shit money deserves a swift kick in the head all the way home. Without roast beef.

REALLY? I have to see this, the way people talk there must be like real child murder in this. 

Reply
post #32 of 52
3/3/12 at 7:29pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaun H View Post

My problem with this movie (from what I've seen) is the same problem I have with every party movie: no parties happen in high school that encompass all variations of the social circle in extreme populations. Nerds do not get to just show up and hang with the jocks; anti-socials and druggies wouldn't be hanging out with the conservative rich kids. Etc.



Not unheard of, at least when I was in High School. More than a few times I would end up at parties that had kids from all corners. Of course, it wasn't really till I went to college that I found out it was unusual that the jocks, brains, punks, skaters, rich kids, goths, stoners and everyone else ALL did drugs.

Reply
post #33 of 52
3/3/12 at 8:21pm

The degree of hysterical condemnation has become so hyperbolic as to be total farce. It's getting to a point of hilarious exaggeration that I really can't help but laugh at it in an entirely condescending manner. Especially since it's absolutely clear that no human being is going to be convinced by another on how to feel about it, so getting into debates about it is worth fuck all at this point.

Reply
post #34 of 52
3/5/12 at 2:30am

I don't think the condemnation over at BAD or AICN is hysterical or hyperbolic at all (well...Capone's review kinda goes there). Maybe engage those as the counterpoints rather than the Talkbackesque "this is the most heinous non-reverse-anal-rape-scene-inclluding film ever!!!" silliness.

Reply
post #35 of 52
3/5/12 at 3:38am

There's a bunch of people with very, very set minds on this film without even the small benefit of prior knowledge. That's all I'm saying.

Reply
post #36 of 52
3/5/12 at 3:46am

Maybe, but even Renn admits the film's moral code is about on a par with Chad's from IN THE COMPANY OF MEN. I mean, I'm not even arguing from the "think of the children" standpoint, but the film seems pretty upfront about it for those who do have issues with that aspect.

Reply
post #37 of 52
3/5/12 at 7:07am

Renn, I really don't get what you see in the film, but that's fine, like what you like. But just ignoring quite why people dislike it so much and acting as if they're all Helen Lovejoy is pretty stupid.

 

The best review I've seen of it comes from Ultra Culture's review of 21 Jump Street.

 

Ultra Culture
Warner Brothers executives must have been rubbing their cocks against photos of naked teenage girls hands together in delight last Friday when the reviews came in for Project X. As expected, it was almost universally reviled by UK critics, who wheeled out their lowest star ratings and sharpest one-liners (‘the most repellant party this side of the BNP’) for a film they seemed to perceive as more of a personal insult than a legitimate cinema release. This, of course, was the desired effect — after all, who wants a thumbs up from the very establishment you’re trying to set alight?
 
Part of me, therefore, is eager to like Project X. I want to live up to my reputation as a ‘young, desperately trendy’ critic and champion it as a revolutionary work of post-Empire fuck-you-ism, breaking down everything we thought we knew about the teen genre and rebuilding it from the ground up. But I can’t, because whichever way I look at it, it’s crap. With the exception of some neat camerawork, Project X adds nothing to the genre it seeks to redefine, instead provoking only nostalgia for the teen films that came before it.
 
Perhaps its failings are all the more disappointing because it arrives at a time when teen movies are in remarkably good health. Since the second teen golden age ended in 2004, adolescent audiences have been lucky to get one decent teen movie a year, and even then they’ve hardly ranked amongst the all-time classics (highlights include She’s the Man, Superbad and Wild Child). Now, suddenly, we’re faced with a glut of worthy teen fare: in the first quarter of 2012 alone there are at least four choice offerings, including one all-out masterpiece that I can’t tell you about just yet
 
One such highlight is 21 Jump Street, a reboot of the late-80s cop show about a squad of youthful-looking cops going undercover in a high school. Thematically, it’s similar to Project X, exploring what happens when the unpopular kids at school are given a chance to transform their social standing. There’s even a party scene, replete with the sort of violence, drug use and general lawlessness that helped make Project X so ‘edgy’. And yet nothing about 21 Jump Street leaves a nasty taste in the mouth, primarily because it allows its characters to act like bastards without becoming one itself. That’s really the key difference between the two movies: 21 Jump Street is the nerdy kid at the side of the party, carefully taking notes; Project X is the douche with the baseball bat nicking all your CDs.
 
Even more importantly, 21 Jump Street feels like it’s doing something new with the teen genre, while still acknowledging its debt to the classics that came before it. Its central idea (that clique-oriented 90s teens would be completely lost in today’s less codified high school environment) doubles as a reminder of the dangers of making 21st Century teen movies in the mould of their obsolete ancestors — a warning that Project X would have been wise to heed. Because let’s be honest, for all its iPhone-viral-Facebook-invite-web-three-point-oh credentials, it’s basically Animal House shot handheld.
 
Of course, the elephant in the room here is that both movies were written by the same man: Scott Pilgrim co-writer Michael Bacall. Perhaps some explanation for their vast difference in quality can be found in Bacall’s claim that he wrote most of Project X “at nights … between working on 21 Jump Street“. Because really, that’s precisely what the former movie feels like: a teen movie fever dream, never intended for the light of day.  

 

Reply
post #38 of 52
3/5/12 at 7:51am

I don't think characters need a moral code for a movie to be worth my time. It's a terrible movie because it's 90 minutes of found footage montage with a terrible soundtrack and slow motion. And its message is that being cool is the most important thing - which I found vapid.

 

And for the love of Zeus, why does a found footage film need slow motion? It's a film that desperately wants to convince you of how cool it is by hitting every party movie cliche on the way to credits. 

 

Reply
post #39 of 52
3/5/12 at 9:31am

Wow, this review. However, warning: it seems to include some spoilers (as if this movie could be spoiled.)

 

One of the reasons the Jackass movies and TV show work is that all (or at least) most of the shenanigans being committed are aimed at the members of the crew and not towards outside society.  The new style seems to be made up of people Tasering random people, shooting them with paint guns and camcording just full-out assaults on people. It's like America has turned into the douchiest Frat in the world and we are all unwitting pledges.  And now these assholes have a feature length movie to wank to!   

 

And no, I haven't seen the movie.  Maybe it is completely different from what i have been led to believe.  Possibly.  But when you read 20 reviews (Jesus, I think I might have really read that many reviews of this movie) and you find one positive review and 19 others pointing out the same faults, I would bet on the consensus.  

 

Maybe I am too old for this.  And maybe the future of America is fucked.

 

 

EDIT: And if that sounded like an attack on Renn's review, I didn't mean it to be.  Different people like different movies. But this movie just looks like the newest salvo fired against decency in America.  And I don't mean Decency as in Pure; I mean decency as in don't be assholes to each other for no reason.

Reply
post #40 of 52
3/6/12 at 8:13am

Hahahaha! Holy shit, this a minute by minute run down of the guy from Project X's porn.


The film begins with three girls (Jennifer Dark, Ashli Orion and Phoenix Marie) pulling up at a Mexican drive-through in a van. They order three tacos and a large fries. It’s not entirely clear whether anyone is actually taking the order; they seem to just be yelling at the menu board.
The girls have decided to play Rock, Paper, Scissors to see which of them gets to have sex with Jonathan first. In explaining the rules, one of them says something along the lines of “whoever gets rock first, wins”, which is an unusual spin on the classic game. In the end, they go with the more traditional ‘luck of the draw’ approach.  
One development I certainly hadn’t anticipated was the arrival of a prosthetic penis wearing a cowboy hat and shades (and speaking in a British accent) as a sort of greek chorus to the action unfolding in the van. I HAVE LITERALLY NO IDEA WHAT THE FUCK IS GOING ON.
One of the girls is feeding Jonathan fries while he has sex with the winner of the Rock, Paper, Scissors competition. This combination of fried food and sexual intercourse is not a visually appealing mix IMO.  

 

Reply
post #41 of 52
3/6/12 at 9:30am

 

Quote:
One of the girls is feeding Jonathan fries while he has sex with the winner of the Rock, Paper, Scissors competition. This combination of fried food and sexual intercourse is not a visually appealing mix IMO.  

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vLKhJnKrf9M

Reply
post #42 of 52
3/15/12 at 3:17pm

This movie... inspires!

One kid gets shot in the head, and the other teens all scream "Project X!"

 

Reply
post #43 of 52
3/15/12 at 4:12pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gabe T View Post

This movie... inspires!

One kid gets shot in the head, and the other teens all scream "Project X!"

 


Nope, wasn't the gunman's fault at all.  Sure convinced me.

 

We should absolutely start sterilizing movies and painting them with sunshine and rainbows only.  That way the mentally ill wont be set off like the walking time bombs they are.  Or least they'll be set off by something else...like seeing monkeys fight at the zoo.  S I guess we should think about removing zoos.  But crackpots can still go into nature and see violence, so maybe we should considering wiping out all wild animals.  What about humans...humans are a naturally violence species, right?  Somebody get a nuke.

 

 

Reply
post #44 of 52
3/15/12 at 4:29pm

Ambler, I think you're missing the point.  Gabe isn't advocating censoring movies.  He's advocating not supporting shitty movies that glorify irresponsible behavior.  There's a difference.

Reply
post #45 of 52
3/15/12 at 4:37pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bailey View Post

Ambler, I think you're missing the point.  Gabe isn't advocating censoring movies.  He's advocating not supporting shitty movies that glorify irresponsible behavior.  There's a difference.


I wasn't responding to Gabe, I was responding to the article and what it implies.  That a tragedy happens, so a bunch of blockheads scream out the name of a movie and it magically explains everything.  It takes the focus off the root of the problem and places it on circumstantial evidence.

Reply
post #46 of 52
3/15/12 at 4:40pm

The article didn't imply anything.  The party was reportedly inspired by the movie, and the article says so.  Then it quotes some people, but never does it blame the movie- it merely reports the connection.

Reply
post #47 of 52
3/15/12 at 5:04pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bailey View Post

The article didn't imply anything.  The party was reportedly inspired by the movie, and the article says so.  Then it quotes some people, but never does it blame the movie- it merely reports the connection.


They imply it in the headline:

 

'Project X Inspired Party Leads to Teen Killing'

 

What led to the teen killing was not the party, it was the gunman and whatever so far unknown motives he had for doing what he did.  But since they have no motive, they connect the movie to the killing per the headline, whether out of convenience or sensationalism or both.

Reply
post #48 of 52
3/15/12 at 5:25pm

If the headline is inaccurate and sensational, it is in stating that the party led to the shooting, not that the party was inspired by the movie.  It was inspired by the movie.

 

The point is nowhere in that article, or even in the wording of the headline, does it suggest movies should be censored, or only about sunshine and rainbows.

Reply
post #49 of 52
3/15/12 at 5:31pm

If I was "advocating" anything, it was that kids are fucking stupid. I have not seen "Project X".

Reply
post #50 of 52
3/15/12 at 5:48pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bailey View Post

If the headline is inaccurate and sensational, it is in stating that the party led to the shooting, not that the party was inspired by the movie.  It was inspired by the movie.

 

The point is nowhere in that article, or even in the wording of the headline, does it suggest movies should be censored, or only about sunshine and rainbows.

 

My rant about movie censoring was more a reaction to people who will blindly look at that headline and article and do no real rational thinking of their own.  Movies being a scapegoat for violence is a fairly ubiquitous topic.  And this article and it's inaccurate headline about the connection is more gasoline on the fire.

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: CHUD.COM Main
CHUD.com Community › Forums › THE MAIN SEWER › CHUD.COM Main › REVIEW: PROJECT X