05.24.08
Review: “What Happens In Vegas…”
Get Lucky.
Neon-lit Vegas – the place where dreams can come true as well as your worst nightmares. When originality and creativity fail, follow a tried and trusted Hollywood romantic comedy formula, and you may just end up with something that is adequate enough to call it “watch able.” But “What Happens in Vegas…” writer Dana Fox opted for the implementation of numerous formulas, formulae if you will, and the result is an accumulation of every cinematic device and cliché one would expect from a “modern romance” tale. Unfocused to say the least, the film suffers from a definite case of attention deficit disorder, not to be mistaken for immediacy or vibrancy, and literally jumps all over the place with little or no explanation. Depending on what you want out of the film, there is a great chance you will end up disappointed anyway, and if you were expecting something smart and sassy – don’t bet on it.
Joy (Cameron Diaz) is a Wall Street stoke trader, who spends her life working, and is the type of busybody that has to make a plan in order to make a plan, and needless to say, nothing outside of her working environment gets done. Her relationship with her fiancé (Jason Sudeikis) must have been taking a nosedive for quite some time, as she is dumped by him in front of all their friends, while Joy has set up a surprise birthday party for him. Jack (Ashton Kutcher) is a slacker, who just happens to work for his father (Treat Williams) in the carpentry business – but his utter carelessness gets him fired, by his own father.
As fate, or the inconvenience brought on by technology, would have it, Joy and her best friend Tipper (Lake Bell) decide to head to Sin City to let their hair down and have a little fun while Jack and his best bud Steve (Rob Corddry) have exactly the same idea, and the foursome are accidentally put in the same hotel room. They spend the night drinking, slurring, spilling and presumably doing the horizontal dance, all while reality could not be further from their minds.
Upon awakening, Joy finds a huge wedding ring on her finger, in the form of a tacky plastic souvenir ring. So she got engaged to Jack in a drunken stupor. Jack and Joy decide to call it quits after only a few hung-over hours of marital bliss, and mutually agree that a quick and easy divorce would be perfect. Until Jack uses a coin Joy gave him, and he plays a slot machine – and hits the big time, three million dollars to be precise. Since the two are married, the money is both of theirs, and getting a divorce is now more complicated. A judge sentences them to six months of marriage and counselling with a relationship therapist (Queen Latifah), and then they can split, if they still want to, and split the money in half. Of course, a predictable battle of the sexes occurs, where each party concerned tries their damn hardest to wear the other down.
The chemistry between Diaz and Kutcher is actually believable, and the two have a keen eye for comedy, especially that of the physical variety. What they do not manage to do, however, is build credible characters. It may be more the fault of the writer than the film’s leads, but Diaz comes across as a fun-loving girl from the start and not the corporately skilled individual we are made to believe she is. Kutcher manages to fit into his role quite well, even if it rarely transcends beyond goof-ball attempts at profanity and humour, and his role is so stereotypically him. The film is completely stolen by two of the films most underdeveloped and almost one-dimensional characters, those portrayed by Lake Bell and Rob Corddry. Both bring an edgy, smarter side out of their characters, and when they are not on screen, cliché after cliché manifest into an almost soulless film.
Without a shred of suspense, the action becomes increasingly tedious, moving back and forth between each of the main character’s gags, and its initial sense of screwball effortlessness wears off and calculated humour takes over. Its restrained quality is directly contradictory to its title. Vegas is a place for fun, sleaze and gold-plated raunchiness, yet the film feels as though it would rather settle for a quick dash towards an inevitable fairytale conclusion than a down and dirty examination of genuinely intriguing relationship dynamics. Which would have made for smarter and more humorous entertainment. The film is anything but. Should “What Happens in Vegas…” have stayed there? Perhaps, but one thing is certain – had a different route been taken to get to the film’s final destination – one without numerous plot/pot holes and seen it all before pit-stops – it would have made for a far more enjoyable film.
Fatac Rating: **
What Happens in Vegas…Directed by Tom Vaughn. Written by Dana Fox. Starring: Cameron Diaz, Ashton Kutcher, Rob Corddry, Lake Bell, Jason Sudeikis, Treat Williams, Deirdre O’Connell, Michelle Grusiec, Dennis Farina. Running Time: 99 minutes. Age Restriction: 10 L. USA 2008. Rating: 2 out of 5 stars. [E]
J.D. said,
May 24, 2008 at 1:03 pm
*passes out due to your awesomeness*
john g said,
May 24, 2008 at 2:58 pm
Well it looks like a typical chick flick with a bit of humour in there so I will probably watch it on DVD when it comes out
Craig Kennedy said,
May 24, 2008 at 5:43 pm
Thank you Nick for seeing this one for me and confirming that I can continue to ignore it in good conscience.
I’ve heard from serveral people that it’s “not bad” or “it’s ok”, but who has time for not bad and ok? There are too many great movies to catch up on.
MikeM said,
May 24, 2008 at 9:26 pm
I kind of liked it, it was funny…
Nick Plowman said,
May 24, 2008 at 10:04 pm
J.D – why thank you.
John – I think it would make for a good enough DVD movie indeed.
Craig – If I had those “great” films to watch, which I wish I did, I would not have taken this bullet for you all, I am not that kind ;)
Mike – It was only fun because of the company we had, and not the actual movie….Don’t you think?
Matthew Lucas said,
May 25, 2008 at 12:46 am
OK, I took the “Huang Shi” bullet for you, you took the “Vegas” bullet for me. Now we’re even. ;-)
Nick Plowman said,
May 25, 2008 at 10:03 am
Yeah….btw, I just saw Forbidden Kingdom – sucked. I also saw 88 Minutes, which I remember you did not like – I think I liked it less.
Then I saw Be Kind Rewind and that was fun.
J.D. said,
May 25, 2008 at 2:18 pm
*hugs for comfort because of your unfortunate movie day*
Nick Plowman said,
May 25, 2008 at 5:00 pm
Thanks, but I really have seen some fantastic documentaries this weekend as well.
J.D. said,
May 25, 2008 at 6:19 pm
Ooh, do tell. *listening mode*
Nick Plowman said,
May 25, 2008 at 6:26 pm
*ahem*
I saw:
Over The Hill – about how the world of cosmetics and plastic surgery is destroying feminity, and has the most graphic scene of vaginal rejuvenation I have ever seen. The only vag rejuve I have ever seen anyway.
Bomb It – a great doc about graphetti. Really fun, and oddly lyrical.
Gonzo: The Life and Work of Dr. S Hunter…WOW.
Stranded: about this rugby team that crashed in the Andes in the 1970’s, another wow….
JOY DIVISION….OMG.
J.D. said,
May 25, 2008 at 6:34 pm
Vaginal rejuvenation…? OMFG, WTF? :(
AND OMG OMG OMG JOY DIVISION OMG OMG OMG!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Matthew Lucas said,
May 25, 2008 at 6:37 pm
I missed “The Forbidden Kingdom.” I didn’t like “88 Minutes,” but didn’t hate it as much as some did. I thought Pacino at least made it watchable, even if the movie around him was totally ridiculous.
Nick Plowman said,
May 25, 2008 at 6:41 pm
I know right, J.D!!!!
Matt – you were right to miss it, if I had anything better to watch, I would have missed it too.
Dude, I hated 88 minutes. Like for my review, I am thinking 1 star out of 5. Hate. And I am not a hateful person.
J.D. said,
May 25, 2008 at 6:44 pm
Nick…
hate…
* of out ***** review coming up…
[[EXPLODES]]
Matthew Lucas said,
May 25, 2008 at 6:52 pm
I can see where it would be easy to hate. It has one of the stupidest plots I have seen in a long time. And the ending is horrible.
But hey, Al Fucking Pacino! :-D
Nick Plowman said,
May 25, 2008 at 7:06 pm
Yeah, Pacino is the only reason I wanted to see the film. He was not bad at all, he was alright, and I enjoyed him, and some of the other actors/actresses, but overall, I was like blah.
Matthew Lucas said,
May 25, 2008 at 7:07 pm
Lelee Sobieski’s character pissed me off. But I mean, that whole thing was kind of obvious. And completely contrived.
J.D. said,
May 25, 2008 at 7:14 pm
I miss Leelee Sobieski. She used to be cool. *sigh*
Nick Plowman said,
May 25, 2008 at 7:17 pm
She pissed me off too, I wish she had died sooner. Is that a spoiler? Who gives. She was cool, she might still be cool, but not in that film.
Amy Brenneman was great and so was Alicia Wit, imo.
J.D. said,
May 25, 2008 at 7:20 pm
OMG, she dies?! :(
:P dude.
Nick Plowman said,
May 26, 2008 at 11:10 pm
Thankfully.
patrick said,
June 6, 2008 at 1:42 am
most of the chick flicks i’ve seen with Ashton Kutcher have been at least halfway decent, A Lot Like Love is one example
Nick Plowman said,
June 6, 2008 at 10:47 am
I guess, but it depends on personal preference. For me, I am not a fan of Kutcher really, but “A Lot like Love” was not an awful film by any means.