|Page 2 of 14:||           |
|Index||133 reviews in total|
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
Much like anyone else who has seen this, or plans to see it, I was
lured in by the trailers, in particular the "funny" one, which makes it
seems like a seriously campy B movie, about a homicidal tire that goes
around and blows things up, for apparently no reason other than it can.
Unfortunately, any/all humour is located in that trailer.
The movie opens, weirdly enough, with shots of many chairs, and a man holding too many binoculars. What occurs after seems to really have no reason, as a car starts driving down the road, knocking over all of these chairs (and in no way tries to hide the fact, they were made to crumble at the slightest tap) The car pulls in next to binocular man, a "sheriff" of sorts gets out of the trunk, taps on the window, is handed a glass of water, and proceeds to seemingly break the fourth wall, talking to the audience about movies that contained elements of no reason, such as why ET was brown. Somehow I don't think people were really scratching their heads about that back in the day, or even today, and the rest of the list he rambles off just made me think, this is going to be a preachy movie. And sure enough, because after the "sheriff" is done his spiel, the camera pans back to a crowd of people, the ones he was actually talking to, they are handed the binoculars, and begin to "watch" the movie with us *groan* From this point on, while the movie is occurring, (which in all truth, if you consider the parts about the tire and it's journey the real movie, is maybe 20 or 30 minutes in total), we are constantly reminded that this is all happening, because these people, and us, are watching. I'm sure to a select few, this is great art. And that's fine. But it also shows why this was never released en masse (at least until DVD/blu ray) to the public and in theaters. There would have been no point, as word would have spread like wild fire about the horrendous nature of this film.
Much like the opening monologue, explaining no reason, there is no reason to this film, and that's apparently the whole point. It's an homage to no reason. Absolutely nothing must make sense, and nothing must be explained.
So essentially, they took the most annoying, idiotic thing about movies (the things that are never explained) and packed that into a full movie, in a constant state of moving. The minute you realize this, you're dreading watching the rest, morbid curiosity or not. Had they decided not to be so god damn preachy and constantly reminding you, that this is not real, this is a movie, actually gone the dark humor/b movie horror route, it would have been much better.
There is gore in this movie, heads/animals explode, in true enough B movie fashion. That, and the scene where people shoot at the "sheriff" because he tells them to, to prove it's not real, are really the only interesting parts, in this entire movie.
And be fore warned, at least 20 minutes of this debacle is artsy shots, shots of the drab, desert landscape, shots of the tire rolling around aimlessly, shots of plants, shots of the tire drowning in a pool, just laying there *sighs* The ending, as well, will have you smacking yourself in the head, wondering why you watched this POS.
Also, do not be fooled by the description of the movie. There is no town. There is the desert spot where the people are watching....and there is a gas station, and a very crappy looking motel. Which is somewhere near Hollywood *rolls eyes* People claim that it does give you the unexpected, that it is clever in it's own right, that it is ingenious!! Well beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and I think a lot of people are starting to get really blind to blatant stupidity, smacking them right in the face, and kicking them square in their ass. Watch, if you dare, because this is not a movie that is so bad, it's good. This is not Troll 2. This is a movie that a lot of money was put into, and there are no quirky catch phrases, or absurd plot devices aside from the sheriff shooting scene. There is just mind numbing, dragging you through mental hell torture.
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
You allow pretentious French DJ who has an ax to grind to write and
I don't know what happened in Quentin Dupieux's childhood to make him hate the world, but between cutting and pasting samples in his computer to create insipid techno music and his film Rubber, his contempt for his audience, regardless of medium, is clear.
This film is marketed as a throwback to grindhouse films, and it would have succeed beautifully if it were edited down to about 5 minutes. To keep others from befalling it's completely false advertising, here's what the movie actually is:
Eighty two minutes of "I'm-so-clever, huh?" diarrhea that causes a nasty diaper rash that no amount of soap, hot water and zinc oxide can clear. Thank you, so very, very much, Quentin Dupieux. You're a dear.
The actual plot involves some poor saps that have been forced to watch "the movie" from a nearby area in the desert, with binoculars. Luckily for them, some twerp comes along and poisons them, putting most out of their misery. Unfortunately for the actual audience, one person refuses to eat, and as a result does not die and therefore "the show" must go on.
The plot jumps back and forth between the movie (Robert, the tire, on a killing spree) and the "I'm-so-clever, huh?" trots, with most of the screen time, naturally, going to the trots. We're supposed to be OK with all this thanks to a Rent-a-Center Quentin Tarantino monologue at the beginning about things happening in films "for no reason," but even the village idiot can see through this pseudo-philosophical garbage.
For the love of all things good, please, please, please, stop Dupieux before he is allowed to gain that mysterious status that M. Night Shyamalan and Kevin Cosner have attained allowing them to continue to make films despite how blatantly incompetent they are.
Wow. Just wow. This pretentious "film" known as Rubber is everything
wrong with wrong. It's an exercise in the film makers trying their
absolute hardest to make you walk out or turn away from this pile of
The "film" is about a tire that magically gets psychokinetic powers and can make objects, such as animals and people, blow up by vibrating every so often, or so what the advertising/film makers want you to believe. I kid you not there is a satire of film audiences in here that is so offensive that it makes you just want to punch whoever came up with this garbage.
The short list of qualities I enjoy of this film is anorexic, so excuse my contempt for these brief listings. I liked the cinematography/look of the film I thought that was good and I liked only some of the acting in this film like Stephen Spinella as the cop who breaks the fourth wall in the first minute of the film. That's about it.
The crap I absolutely hate about this film is quite a list. I dislike ALL of the characters because they are really stupid and aren't even characters as much as they are satires of movie going audiences/actors probably making the film. The one thing I thought could have been good, the kills, where all the same and mundane after a while. The plot is so paper thin there isn't even a paper. The dialog is atrocious as most of it is just repeating what already happened on screen. The film is really boring, I mean nothing goes on for long stretches of film, all the wasted potential of the production had me livid. There are no people to root for and the acting for the most part is really bad. The film wants you to give up on it so bad that there is even a scene where one of the "spectators" want to eat a rabbit the tire killed and his dad tells him straight up it's fake, almost as a way to give you the middle finger. But if that isn't a finger up your ass then the ending will be because it is a huge anticlimax and a straight up f-u to Hollywood.
So in total Rubber needs to find a trash bin to live in and to be seen by only people who think that pretension is art. This film would have been much more entertaining if it rolled with its outrageous and stupid premise and had way less to say to the hand that feeds it. It's not even so bad it's good, it's so bad it belongs in a trash bin.
-The Critical Warhead
I wanted to like this movie. I really did. It is, after all, about a killer tire called Robert who discovers he has destructive telepathic powers and so goes on a killing rampage. What's not to like there? Unfortunately, the director is the most pretentious man on the planet and overloads the film with postmodern flourishes that don't work and serve merely to remind you of the far superior directors he is ripping off - e.g. David Lynch and Tobe Hooper. What could have been a fun low budget horror comedy ends up a tedious mish mash of genres and ideas. For instance, the audience is a part of the film, represented by a group of people watching the events unfold and commenting upon them. An interesting idea but the director doesn't know where to go with it and it ends up sidetracking the film. Rubber should have been fun but it's far from that - slow, not remotely amusing or nearly as clever as it thinks it is, badly acted and written, bog standard direction. When the best thing in your movie is Wings Hauser, you know you're in trouble. To (sort of) quote Homer Simpson, this movie was more boring than church.
Which two words would you, and hopefully any other reasonable human
being, use to describe a movie with a plot synopsis like this: an
ordinary rubber tire comes to life in the middle of the Californian
desert, quickly discovers that he disposes of dangerous telepathic
powers and goes on a murderous stroll. The tire violently blows up
people's heads left, right and center while a cinematic audience
follows his joyful escapades from a safe distance through binoculars.
Well, most likely but completely justified you will use the words
"absurd" and "random". The most clever gimmick about this film,
however, is that it actually points out the randomness before you even
have the opportunity to ponder about it. "Rubber" opens with an
extended spoken monologue by one of the characters and he repeatedly
emphasizes the fact that everything in this film happens for absolutely
no reason at all. Even more so, "Rubber" is an hour and a half long
homage to randomness. Robert the tire comes to life for no reason. He
can make small animals and human heads explode for no reason. He chases
a cute brunette girl around for no reason. A group of bizarre people
observe him like it's a real life movie for no reason. You get the
One could claim, of course, that writer/director Quintin Dupieux' approach is innovative, courageous and humorous. This is true, in fact, but sadly just for a very brief period. The first few images of a seemingly half-drunken tire rolling through the sand and causing cute little bunny rabbits to explode are undeniably hilarious (if you share the same twisted sense of humor, that is) but it becomes dull and derivative enormously fast. The "no reason" gimmick quickly loses its panache and general fun-factor. Okay, so there's a psychopathic tire on a rampage and it doesn't make any sense. We would have understand that after five exploding heads instead of fifty as well. If "Rubber" had been a short feature, it would have been equally effective. Perhaps even more. Also, and this might be a purely personal opinion, I don't really like it when director hide themselves behind the randomness excuse. Everyone can think up a story that makes absolutely no sense. It's too easy like that. Obviously I think there are several good things to enjoy about "Rubber" as well, otherwise I wouldn't have given the average rating. The desolate filming locations and complementary references towards older movies are fun to spot. It was also tremendously cool to see former B-movie star Wings Hauser ("Night Shadows", "Vice Squad") in a prominent role again after so long. The special effects and make-up art look adorably cheesy and the electro/experimental soundtrack is quite awesome. The latter quality shouldn't come too much as a surprise, since writer/director Quintin Dupieux is primarily known as a musician and scored a humongous hit in the late 1990's as Mr. Oizo with "Flat Beat".
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
Artists break rules all the time in order to advance their craft, keep
their audiences engaged, and say new things. However one rule that
should never be broken is this: "Use the time of a total stranger in
such a way that he or she will not feel the time was wasted." This
movie breaks that rule in a terrible way.
As you know from reading blurbs about it, it's about a killer tire named Robert (name not given until the ending credits), and is designed to explore elements of style vs. plot in movies. In order to do this, almost every conceivable element of plot is deleted from the script, and every stylistic trope from B-movies that can be employed to carry the movie without the plot is brought to bear. This produces some interesting effects - the tire's journey of self discovery through the desert at the beginning does a pretty good job of personifying it, and the invisible force that animates it may represent that distilled essence of a narrative pushing a story along - but all in all, to kill the plot of a movie, you have to make it deeply, deeply stupid. Not stupid in the sense of being facile (like GI Joe or something with Rob Schneider), but stupid to the point of incoherence. For example, the actors in the movie want the audience killed (there's a very self-referential audience in the film) so that they can stop working. However, one audience member doesn't eat the poisoned food offered to him, so the actors must continue pretending to hunt down a killer tire. An actor tries to poison the last audience member again, but instead eats the poisoned food (for no reason, of course - this is the mantra of the film). If this example I've just narrated seems not to have a punchline, know that the whole film is like this - it is literally assembled with no purpose, and in the end there is nothing to tell.
Ultimately, the most obvious inference to be drawn from the movie is that there must be some necessity to what is being said in a story, and that any audience has an innate expectation that it be compelling. That real life often violates the rules of narrative is a cliché observation. It's an open questions as to why the producers decided to waste 90 minutes demonstrating this rather than just writing a lucid undergraduate-level film essay. The end product is not much more fun, and not much more profound.
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
Nothing happens! This is the worst spent 76 minutes of my entire life. I have specially created an IMDb account to warn potential viewers of how bad this film is, which is if you hadn't guessed, ABSOLUTE DOG POOPERY. There is no 'artistic' merit to it and honestly words can't describe how bad this film really is. I'd imagine that this is the sort of crap that university students would make as a class project. There is only a certain amount of times that you can watch a tyre apparently use telepathic powers blow up peoples heads. If you're after a film that is that bad its class then my advice is go for Piranha 3DD.I can not stress strongly enough how much you should reconsider if you're even considering watching this film! I would have give this a 0/10 if possible.
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
I never thought I would type these words, but I have a new appreciation
for Synecdoche, New York. Yes, that film is an uber-pretentious piece
of masturbatory tripe that crawls so far up its own ass it disappears
into a parallel universe. But at least it tries hard and puts a lot of
brain power into its willful oddity. Rubber is like Synecdoche, New
York's lazy, mentally challenged half-cousin. It's just as pretentious
and masturbatory but doesn't have the energy or intelligence to scratch
its own ass, let alone venture up in there. Here's what I actually
thought while watching this movie.
10 minutes in - "Oh, good lord."
20 minutes in - "This was a mistake."
30 minutes in - "Am I missing something?"
40 minutes in - "I don't care if I'm missing something."
50 minutes in - "Nope. There's nothing in here to miss."
60 minutes in - "This is like one of those films they would show during Sprockets on Saturday Night Live."
70 minutes in - "Well at least Wings Hauser got a paycheck out of this. I've always kind of liked him."
80 minutes in - "This is almost over, right?"
82 minutes in - "Yes, it's over and I'm 82 minutes closer to death."
Rubber is about two things. There's a tire that comes to life and rolls through the desert landscape, blowing up things with its psychokinetic power and developing a taste for television and this dark haired girl (Roxane Mesquida). There's also a group of spectators in the desert watching the tire's antics through binoculars like they're the audience viewing a test screening in a movie theater. All but one of them is killed off by a guy with a bad haircut and a bicycle (Jack Plotnick) while Stephen Spinella gives a remarkable performance of an actor stuck in an insipid production that will not end, which is perhaps the greatest instance of art imitating life, simultaneously intentionally and unintentionally, in all cinema.
The more unconventional your storytelling, the smarter you have to be to pull it off. Writer/director Charlie Kaufman is very smart and it's reflected in Synecdoche, New York. Even though that movie is pointless, meaningless, self-indulgent blather, it's complex and detailed blather that occupies your time. "Writer"/"director" Quentin Dupieux is not smart at all and Rubber is pointless, meaningless and self-indulgent, but in an adolescently shallow and simplistic way. I'd bet the folks who are impressed with this film are the same ones whose minds were blown by that philosophy class they took freshman year in college and wouldn't shut up about for 6 months afterward.
I mean, outside of Spinella, none of the cast get a chance to do anymore acting than they would in a commercial for chewing gum or switching to a new wireless provider. The best dialog in the film all belongs to the tire, which is completely mute the whole time. The direction looks like it belongs in 30 second promo spots for some 5th tier cable movie channel that only shows Mexican wrestling flicks and film school projects. And I hope Dupieux sent a royalty check to the guys who made Scanners.
If you've ever wondered why Hollywood beats the Euro film industry at the box office like a rented mule, watching Rubber will explain it to you. If you've ever wondered why the immensely more successful Hollywood continues to look to Euro douches like Quentin Dupieux for artistic validation well, Rick James said it best. "Cocaine is a hell of a drug."
When I read the blurb for this, I was intrigued. Then I watched it and had to be stopped from clawing my eyes out. Slow, silly and not funny at all, except to think that some people paid to see this, the story of a sentient tire with ESPer abilities, going around blowing up peoples heads, while the cast is both part of and critiquing it, was mostly boring. I'm not going to spoil anything here, since simply watching this movie is punishment itself. The best part of the film is the lead, the woman who the tire is obsessed with. Roxane Mesquida carries her role well as the object of the tires lust, but the movie just doesn't go anywhere. I understand that this is supposed to be a satire or a spoof, but it just didn't work for me. Another 90 minutes of my life that will never be regained.
Just because a movie has a low budget and is unique doesn't make it a
good movie. My favorite part about this movie is basically the intro
since it sort of pumps you up, it seemed like a excuse later on for the
movie for not making any sense. Not only does the movie not make any
sense the characters are very awkward, but that is what somewhat makes
this movie interesting since the characters aren't super serious. The
plot is basically about a serial killer tire that goes around blowing
stuff and people up using psychokinetic powers. the awkwardness of the
situations is what make this movie remotely intriguing. Also trying to
figure out exactly what is going on is what drives this movie as well.
I don't know if some scenes were intended to be funny, but it was sort
of humorous at times which is a plus. The flaw is that the movie just
wasn't all that fun to watch and was repetitive with lot of the time
taking up with a tire rolling around. Just because it has a unique idea
that hasn't really been done before just doesn't make a movie good
sometimes and that applies to this movie. I was expecting at least a
crazy final scene but that didn't really happen either.
|Page 2 of 14:||           |
|Parents Guide||Official site||Plot keywords|
|Main details||Your user reviews||Your vote history|