Failure to Launch, Season One: Episode 6

Jennifer Lopez – the actress is such an anomaly to me. Most would probably find this weird, since I’d vouchsafe that most would say her acting “talents” are abysmal. For the first season of Failure to Launch I was focusing on actors that I felt had to launch – but I’m branching. It’d be wrong to call Jennifer a fine actor, but I’m not sure I’d say she’s failed to launch either, which makes her idea subject for you to decide on.

          

Prosecution, Exhibit A: Monster-In-Law (2005)

This remains as a fine example in confusing casting. Having 36 year old Jennifer parade around as a vaguely naïve intrepid wandering young lady is ridiculous – what’s more it doesn’t help that she has absolutely no chemistry with Michael Vartan. What’s more seeing Wanda Sykes and Jane Fonda try so hard to emit occasional laughter makes her performance looks even more mediocre.

Prosecution, Exhibit B: Maid in Manhattan (2002)

This is an entry from the Jennifer Lopez School of Overacting, although – oddly – even masters of reticence like Natasha Richardson seem guilty of it in this one. It’s odd-casting once again, or at the very least odd acting. Lopez shows emotions as the weirdest places turning an already tired storyline into something even more insidiously melodramatic. Horrific at times.

Prosecution, Exhibit C: The Wedding Planner (2001)

This remains as I film I loathe to no end, although my biggest issue is the vile Matthew McConaughey. There are times you almost catch her trying, and there are moments where opposite Justin Chambers she works surprisingly, surprisingly considering how awful she is in the film’s main arc. Often shrill, usually dull and almost never ostensibly worthy of the leading role.

     

Closing Statements: Oddly, though J-Lo has her share of stinkers, I realise that – judging from the three exhibits – she’s never the worse performer in her films...

         

Defence, Exhibit A: The Cell (2000)

True, The Cell succeeds at best for Vincent D’Onfornio and it’s overreaching to call her performance a revelation here. Still, Jennifer impresses. It’s not that she’s that brilliantly cast, and she is rough around the edges on occasion....but she’s so consistently on point – even when she seems to be trying too hard. It sort of works in context, truth be told...

   

Defence, Exhibit B: Selena (1997)

Selena, perhaps, will persist as my favourite performance of Lopez – indefinitely. It’s too predictable a notion to demand that “good” acting show some high level of difficulty or excess skill. The role here doesn’t demand either, but Lopez is perfectly cast and turns in a performance that’s occasionally comedic, occasional dramatic and always honest.

             

Defence, Exhibit C: Shall We Dance (2004)

It’s sort of an atypical performance for hers. The film is far from flawless, but a worse film might have made her into an illicit object of affection. Having her play the straight – professional – woman with a tentative secret is interesting. What’s more interesting is that playing the role from the sidelines makes her seem like a much more interesting actor than usual.

      

Closing Statements: And yet, there are reasons to explain her relative “goodness”. She thrives in The Cell under heavy makeup and effects, and in Selena she’s playing such a sweetheart it’s difficult to loathe that winsoe character and she doesn’t have to hold the film in Shall We Dance, which perhaps explains her relative goodness.

         

So, you decide? Be the jury – Jennifer Lopez...guilty or innocent? Has she failed to launch?

     

Previously Tried

Bradley Cooper, Guilty (2), Undecided (1), Innocent (1) 

Anthony Anderson, Guilty (2) 
Eva Mendes, Guilty (3), Undecided (2)
Jac Black, Verdict: Guilty (4), Undecided (2), Innocent (1)
Matthew McConaughey, Verdict: Guilty (8)

Failure to Launch, Season One: Episode 5

Matthew McConaughey was the first person I cited on this feature and we established that he was essentially ineffectual. It’s weird, as bland as McConaughey is I always think of Bradley Cooper as sort of a budget version of him – and since McConaughey is not someone of note it makes Cooper an obvious choice for this feature. Cooper keeps turning up in films being ineffectual and bland and this year he seems intent to go on a rampage set to star in two films this year. It’s about time we assess his career.

               
Prosecution, Exhibit A / B / C: Failure to Launch, The Hangover, He’s Just Not That Into You

I can’t even put them separately because it seems like Bradley Cooper always plays the same role, whatever he’s in. Really, there’s nothing wrong with actors playing to their strengths – but it becomes a problem when the guy you keep playing seems like a jerk. I just had to include this. Cooper stars in a supporting role opposite, you know who – Matthew McConaughey. True, Failure to Launch is a terrible and everyone just seems tired in it – from Kathy Bates all the way to Sarah Jessica Parker and Cooper isn’t being helped by the script, but that doesn’t really make him less culpable. Then there’s The Hangover, a movie I’m constantly out of the loop on. I still am nonplussed about its critical acclamation, and though Ed Helms tries (as he’s wont to do) Cooper is at his unbearable worst here. True, I feel bad for him in He’s Just Not That Into You – because he’s placed opposite Jennifer Connelly being unbearably shrewish. Yes, there are moments opposite Scarlett where he’s almost pleasant to watch – but they don’t really last which makes me wonder why he keeps on getting casted in movies?

                 

Defence, Exhibit A: Alias

I can’t think of a single film where I’ve been impressed with Cooper, but he was always interesting to watch on Alias. Perhaps, it’s because over time he was able to build his character and move from the lifeless ghoul he seems to be in most of his films. I can’t say why this is the only role of his I can bring to the table as possibility of promise from him...and that was four years ago.

                    

Am I alone here, or do you think Cooper’s guilty of being an abysmal actor? (And he went to acting school!) Guilty? Innocent?

                       

Previously

Anthony Anderson, Guilty (2) 
Eva Mendes, Guilty (3), Undecided (2)
Jac Black, Verdict: Guilty (4), Undecided (2), Innocent (1)
Matthew McConaughey, Verdict: Guilty (8)

Failure to Launch, Season One: Episode 4

I knew I’d end up featuring this guy sooner or later here I suppose better sooner than later – Anthony Anderson. Anderson easily ranks in the top ten of actors I find most annoying. He’s one of those character actors who shows up in a slew of Ebonics’ movies playing the same tired old wingman and making feeble attempts at comedy that fail to impress. Am I being harsh? You bet. Let’s take a look at the evidence.

         

Prosecution, Exhibit A: Kangaroo Jack

I cited this some time back as one of the worst films of the last decade, and that’s

a pronouncement that wasn’t done lightly. This film is awful, truly everything about it is, but Anderson is the most awful portion. From the over exaggerated expressions, the whiny voice the terrible acting – it was all just a very, very bad accident, but it can’t be that much of an accident. They did read the script after all.

Prosecution, Exhibit B: Romeo Must Die

I like Romeo Must Die. As far as Asian actors go I’d say Jet Li is one of the better ones and I’m a big fan of Aaliyah. It’s a typical action/romance/comedy but it’s enjoyable enough. Anthony Anderson doesn’t help. True, his involvement doesn’t turn the entire film into a hot mess or anything but his presence adds nothing. The only thing that makes him slightly passable is the fact that the characters in the film find him just as annoying, so there’s always the vicarious thrill of seeing him embarrassed. Call me cold-hearted, whatever.

Prosecution, Exhibit C: King’s Ransom

King’s Ransom is one of those awfully generic unfunny comedies that infuriate me to no end. It involves a running gag on kidnapping, and truly the script is awful but having Anderson as the lead makes it even worse. Usually I think that Rotten Tomatoes is ridiculous, but I can’t argue with the 0% rating for it. (I forgot to list it in my worst of the decade list, but who’d want to remember this?)

Defence, Exhibit A: The Departed

I don’t think it’s coincidental that the film where I find him tolerable is the one where he has a minute amount of screentime that’s balanced out by having Matt Damon, Jack Nicholson, Vera Farmiga and Leonardo DiCaprio buttressing the talent in the film and preventing any potential annoyances he may incur. He works in The Departed. I don’t know why, and I don’t know how...but he does. The only time I can admit to that happening.

                    

This seems essentially cut and dry to me, but what do you think about Anderson? Guilty? Innocent? Has he Failed to Launch? 

             

Previously

Eva Mendes Guilty (3), Undecided (2) 

Jac Black, Verdict: Guilty (4), Undecided (2), Innocent (1)
Matthew McConaughey, Verdict: Guilty (8) Innocent (0)   

Failure to Launch, Season One: Episode 3

I was thinking who my next subject would be when a certain sex tape that wasn’t hit the internet. It was too easy because I’m constantly asking myself what is this particular woman’s appeal – Eva Mendes. In the words of a very badass TV character "She makes me want to set myself on fire." Word. Let the arguments begin.

Prosecution, Exhibit A: Ghost Rider

I read about this over at FlixChatter, I vowed never to see it...then I realised I already had. Wish it'd stayed with me NOT remembering it because it's god awful. She plays the female (quasi)-lead and as per normal confuses sultry with trashy or whatever her brand of appeal is. It doesn't help that she's playing against Nicolas Cage at his worst...or thereabouts. Whatever.

            

Prosecution, Exhibit B: The Women

The Women wasn’t very good either. Although I’d argue that Annette tries, tries hard, to rise above the material – it’s still embarrassingly underwhelming. In an ensemble of poor things Eva is not the sole one responsible but she’s an accessory, a co-conspirator even. Technically, I suppose she is hot but I don’t Eva Mendes attractive – it’s so odd. Thus, her seduction skills – which essentially means her in tight clothing – as the “spritzer” girl is just embarassingly…well, it’s just embarrassing really.

           

Prosecution, Exhibit C: Hitch

I could hold my general hatred of Will Smith as the main person responsible for the awfulness. That doesn’t make me any less impressed with her. It’s not that she is horrible, she’s fair – she’s just not very good. It’s arguably one of her largest roles and she just exudes a blandness that’s just maddening in an already bland affair...

           

Prosecution, Exhibit D: 2 Fast 2 Furious

I don’t find it any worse (or better) than the original Fast & the Furious, but with Eva Mendes as the female lead it seems like a definite demotion of sorts. It doesn't help that the movie is completely forgettable. I've seen it more than once and I can't remember what it's about (yes, street racing, but what else). I have to think to remember Mendes....and I suppose it's better than her being so horrible I think about it for days (see above); but then again failed to launch? Ummm, yeah.

                

Defence, Exhibit A: Training Day

I’d go as far as to say that I found Eva to be fine in Training Day. Is it because her role was almost miniscule? Is it because Ethan Hawke and Denzel Washington are delivering brilliant performances, perhaps it’s the fact that Fuqua seems really on the mark here. Whatever it is, I don’t cringe when she appears. I believe her performance, I’m even moves. The fact that this was before most of her films makes me think it was probably a fluke.

       

Don’t go easy on her because she’s the first woman I've featured. Guilty? Innocent? Make your arguments.

            

Previously

Jac Black, Verdict: Guilty (4), Undecided (2), Innocent (1)

Matthew McConaughey, Verdict: Guilty (8) Innocent (0)  

Failure to Launch, Season One: Episode 2

Sooner or later I’ll end up featuring an actor that we’ll end up arguing over – chances are, this is not that episode. A few weeks ago Heather and I entered a discussion in the commenting section of her blog on Jack Black. Apparently we both loathed the man. Jack Black’s appeal escapes me. It boggles my mind even more that he’s considered a celebrated comedian, or at the very least a creditable box-office draw. But am I overzealous in my disdain of him?

                       

Prosecution, Exhibit A: Shallow Hal

Later in the week I’ll turn my attention to this film a little more, but until then I will intimate that it – along with Jack Black – does nothing but exasperate me. It remains as one of the un-funniest comedies and the fact that it garners any positive reviews only confuses more. The eponymous Hal is a shallow man who gets a “spell” placed on him so that he only sees the inside of people. Thus the fat, ugly, but sweet girl is seen as thin and gorgeous. I won’t go into the tirade on the actual film (later), but Black does nothing to improve it. It drags and his vexing lack of charisma does little to improve the situation.

             

Prosecution, Exhibit B: Nacho Libre

Another candidate for worse film of the decade…for me at least. It is neither “action” nor “comedy” yet it’s sometimes given the moniker of action-comedy. What an error. Even though Shallow Hal attempts (fleetingly) to take the spotlight off Black, Nacho Libre lets him do all – which only proves, once again, how unsatisfying he is a leading man and as an “actor”. It’s the sort of experience that makes you embarrassed for those involved and leaves a slight taste of vomit in your mouth.

               

Prosecution, Exhibit C: The Holiday

I liked The Holiday. Sure it’s not nearly as good as Meyer’s best film, but it’s a serviceable romantic comedy. I realised how little Jack Black was doing for me when, as the film neared its end, I found myself hoping that Kate Winslet would end up with the septuagenarian instead of him. Sure, he attempts to tone down his infuriating antics, but the best he manages to do is play a bland nonentity. Not to sound harsh, he’s not as horrible here as the two before – but the reason I single it out is because Black's apparent inability to play a serious romantic lead really spoiled the film at times for me, no matter how luminous Winslet is.

         

Defence, Exhibit A: School of Rock

I remember this most for Joan Cusack offering another brilliant take on an old character part. The thing is, the film is something of a blast and Black is good here. I don’t know if it’s because the script is tighter, I don’t know if it’s because he’s in the habitat where he should remain (with people who seem to have the mental capacity as he; no offense to children) but it works. It all works very well so that when he does (unfortunately) shift into his slapstick antics I’m being distracted by all the other good stuff around.

Defence, Exhibit B: Margot at the Wedding

This film is oft forgotten and when remembered it is not with fondness. It’s not an easy film, by any stretch, though I do think Nicole’s quite brilliant in it playing severely against type. Yet, it’s not Nicole who’s the revelation (I already know she’s a star) it’s black pacing himself, being subtle (as much as he can) and doing one hell of a job to make me think I could have been wrong about him. Was I?

                 

You decide. Guilty? Innocent? Am I being harsh or has Black’s career failed to impress you? Make your arguments. 

           

PREVIOUSLY:

Matthew McConaughey, Verdict: Guilty (8) Innocent (0)

Failure to Launch, Season One: Episode 1

Weeks ago when I wrote my final post on Forgotten Characters (for the time being) I promised you a new feature. Well, I’m still working on that, but I’ve still decided on another feature (I know, lofty ideals and all). By now you probably know I have my weird idiosyncrasies when it comes to irrational loathing of some actors, but sometimes it’s more than just irrational – they’ve just done nothing to make them worthwhile. So, every now and then I’ll focus on one of them. And it’s too easy to pass up on one of the most obvious choices when the feature’s title is begging me to mention him. And who am I to ignore the obvious?

                            

One career that has failed to launch, with me at least? Matthew Matthew McConaughey

                      

Prosecution, Exhibit A: The Wedding Planner

Against my better judgement I’m rather fond of Jennifer Lopez, the actress. She’s not amazingly talented, but she is personable. It’s weird, she’s doing her best to play a romantic comedy lead in The Wedding Planner and everything’s working with her except her co-lead, Mr. Matthew McConaughey. I’ll be honest, the one thing I particularly treasure in The Wedding Planner is Justin Chambers. He’s donning a faux Italian accent and he’s playing someone completely different to his congenial bastard on Grey’s Anatomy. It’s like the riddle of the sphinx with these romantic comedies, why does the leading lady always go for the prick of a man? I don’t know if Matthew McConaughey’s trying but he’s doing such a good job of making me despise him that The Wedding Planner just leaves a horrid taste in my mouth – not one for repeat viewing.

          

Prosecution, Exhibit B: How to Lose A Guy in 10 Days

This is actually a key bit of evidence used in people’s hatred of Kate Hudson. Poor Kate, she’s much better than she’s given credit for but even she can’t make this sinking ship work. Once again, a leading lady who’s trying and Matthew McConaughey just seems to be going through the motion. Surprise, surprise – he’s (once again) playing a grating character. I don’t know if that points to his range or not (or lack thereof). The film is an utter plod, but it would have been nice if he could have at least tied. Ugh.

               

Prosecution, Exhibit C: Failure to Launch

Sarah Jessica Parker, despite what everyone thinks, is a talented woman. She can play more than Carrie Bradshaw (who is more than just the self-absorbed narcissist she’s referred to as). She’s trying to be a normal romantic comedy lead here, I’m not sure if Matthew McConaughey is playing his character so well or so badly but once again I feel nothing but intense loathing for him. Sure, he goes around shirtless as is his wont, but that’s not impressing me and every time he gives that sickening grin I want to hurl. Add that to the fact that he’s starring with the other loathsome thirtysomething year old (Bradley Cooper) means that the title of the film is just a self-fulfilling prophecy.

           

Defence, Exhibit A: A Time to Kill

It’s just a little ironic that after giving a fairly nuanced performance in this Grisham thriller that Matthew McConaughey decided to continue his career as an unappealing romantic comedy lead. A Time to Kill isn’t a film for the ages (it’s not Grisham’s best novel or best novel adaptation) but it works. Sandra Bullock, Matthew Matthew McConaughey and Ashley Judd put in good performances and Samuel Jackson is particularly moving here (should have been Oscar nominated, I say). Matthew McConaughey works as the conflicted lawyer and his final speech in the courtroom solidifies his top billing status. Pity, he never took it to this level again.

                

Verdict: I say he’s failed, irrefutably. But what you do think? Which side are you on? Has Matthew McConaughey proved his talents or do you, like me, think his career has failed to launch? What are your thoughts on the new feature?