Mama, They're All Crazy Now... Or Are They?

Recently, I viewed Sucker Punch for the second time, this time on DVD, to see if it's a movie that actually gets better with repeated viewing. Does it improve second time around or is there no hope?

And yes, there will be spoilers.

In the 1960's, a young woman (Emily Browning), whose name is never revealed but goes by the nickname “Babydoll”, is sent to an asylum by her abusive stepfather in the wake of her sister's death (who she may or may not have killed) and is due to be lobotomized within the week of her arrival. Escaping into a fantasy, she conspires with four other girls to escape: Amber (Jamie Chung), Blondie (Vanessa Hudgens), Rocket (Jena Malone) and Sweet Pea (Abbie Cornish).

Let's start with that: the fantasy concept. So, she's in an asylum, with a lobotomy pending, and she's been fantasizing the entire time. What does everyone around her think? The people she sees in her fantasies are plucked from people she knows in real life and some of the events that happen within the fantasies are happening in reality. So, to anyone not involved, what do they make of this?
“Hey, what's the new girl doing?”
“I think she thinks she's a burlesque dancer or something? Who cares, she's weird”
They may all be in an asylum but I highly doubt they're sharing the same fantasy, it's not like there's magic in play. No cupboards holding gateways to other worlds, no books to conjure dimensional portals.

But what really annoys me is that within the fantasies, she will fantasize AGAIN. What, do you think you're Inception? A fantasy within a fantasy? You going to reveal there's another one in that? Or that the events of the entire movie were made up by some kid holding a snow globe? More on the fantasies within fantasies later.

Let's talk characters. Babydoll's expression throughout most of the movie is pretty blank. She says little and I find it hard to sympathize with her. Her stepfather might have been (OK, was) an arsehole and I'm disappointed that he survived the film but that doesn't mean she is entirely all there.
Blondie (why is she called that? Because of the five, three of them ARE blond but she's not? Why isn't Amber called Blondie then) adds little. And being played by Vanessa Hudgens isn't getting you points, either.
Amber (and why doesn't she get a nickname? What, is she not good enough? And if that is a nickname, it sucks, because it sounds like a real name as opposed to the others) is pretty much the same as Blondie, but actually likable.
Sweet Pea really does nothing for me, but then, I really, really do not like Abbie Cornish and I do not believe she's a capable actress (starring in my least favourite movie of all time does not help. Somersault, I loathe your existence and you are the antithesis of everything I love in film)
And Rocket... I actually like her. She's helpful, largely cheerful and full of spunk. So, naturally, the film has to do something about that...

Most of the other characters in this film are either irrelevant (Mrs. Gorski, who I don't hate but if she's trying to be the moral center of the movie, she's not very good at it) antagonistic but ineffectual (Blue) or barely worth a mention even if some things in the plot involve them (the doctor performing the lobotomy... who isn't even given a real name, that's just how much the movie cares).

Now, if it sounds like I'm being too negative, I want to point out I don't hate this film. There are points where it does look like it's trying. And one of the things I sing absolute praise to (no pun intended) is the soundtrack, even if it is anachronistic. Emily Browning actually provided the vocals for a darker remake of Sweet Dreams (Are Made Of This) and its really well done, as is the cover of White Rabbit by Emiliana Torrini. Normally I'm not big on remakes in music that take the song out of the genre when its fine in where it came from but they experiment and put some effort into and I applaud it (except for the usage of Queen. Do not frickin' touch Queen. They are immortal and should not be treated with such disrespect).

However, it's time to come to the biggest flaw of the movie. Going back to the fantasies within the fantasies... well, that's just it. Those fantasies are anachronistic, in a way that it almost seems like a plot hole. Remember, this film is set in the 1960's. So, what goes through the mind of the fantasy Babydoll? Giant robots, advanced computers and girls with guns.

…

This IS a movie I'm watching, right? And not the fanfic of some sex-starved teenager with little to no attention span?
“And it's gotta have chicks with guns, lots and lots of guns! And the sky is dark and smoke filled, when it's not filled with fire! And it needs giant mechas! And computers and bombs! Ooh, and put a dragon in!” Hell, all it was missing was two girls kissing and it would have been a teenage dream that gets their heart racing.

...Wait a minute. Oh my God, those sequences sound like the kind of things 90's Kid would write! Damn it 90's Kid, go back to reading Bloodgun!

Zack, you're better than this, you can have awesome action and still make sense. Dawn Of The Dead was a remake that didn't suck, 300 was over-hyped but still had decent fight choreography, and I still consider Watchmen one of my favourite movies of all time (even if it does lose points now that I have read the graphic novel). These films prove you can combine a solid narrative and invigorating action (on the subject of Zack, I have not seen Legend Of The Guardians: The Owls Of Ga'Hoole. I have no intention of seeing it. Ever. I am, however, very eager to see Zack's reboot of the Superman films in the upcoming Man Of Steel)

But anyway, back to the Incep- I mean fantasy-fantasies (I'm beginning to think they're like those Russian dolls that you open up and find a smaller version inside, and a smaller version inside that and so on and so forth. They are Russian aren't they? Probably should have researched that first. If I am wrong, consider this an apology and an admission of my stupidity)
So, considering the media available in that era, where exactly did she conjure these images from? I don't recall TV shows about giant robots that look kind of like rejected Big Daddies from Bioshock. And if she did read comics, they would have looked more simplistic. The whole thing just seems like an excuse to get arses onto cinema seats because no one could deal with the “mind-screwy nature” of the film


To sum up, I'd like to state something about the movies I watch and a marker of how good or bad they can be: a great movie (once again, I'll use Inception. Seriously, best movie of 2010 in my opinion) can leave you asking questions, in a way like a student eager to learn. You want to know more about the world its created, about the possibilities, the pasts of the characters if not fully disclosed, and you come up with theories for the unanswered stuff, and it makes you feel smarter.
A bad or disappointing movie leaves you asking questions, but usually the types of questions that poke holes in what the movie presents to you. It has failed to provide an answer and can't be bothered to think one up. And you really don't want to because it'll either raise further questions or because you don't like the answer. And Sucker Punch is the latter. As I addressed, this falls into the concepts of the fantasy-fantasies, what the supporting characters are doing while Babydoll is off in her own little world but also one big glaring problem (here's where the major spoiler comes in): so, Sweetpea escapes the asylum. She's rescued by somebody who appeared in one of the fantasy-fantasies, albeit not exactly as they were within that realm. So, does that mean Babydoll somehow accessed another world? How? And if she didn't, how did the Wise Man (as he is called) appear in the fantasy-fantasies? Is he a supernatural being of some sorts? Well, no. You can't do that, movie. You can't just make stuff up like that and keep changing the rules or keep the audience in the dark. That's cheap and lazy.

It's ironic that with Zack Snyder's career at this point being adaptations (or one remake), that the film to get the most scorn is the only original one in the bunch. Well, original in the sense that it's not based on prior work, I can't speak for its content being original. Especially ironic seeing as how we all complain that Hollywood's run out of ideas or it can't do anything original anymore. Well, here's proof that original isn't always going to work.

Despite all that, I give it a 2.5/5. It passes, but this could have been a lot better.