Fast And Furious

            One positive effect of the recession is that people have started to flock to movie theaters once again. Movies that were once given the green light based solely on their profit making potential, are slowly being withdrawn or altered. With the release of Fast and Furious, the follow up to The Fast and the Furious released in 2001, movie goers were treated scenes of racing cars, testosterone layered acting and voluptuous woman in bikini tops. Not everyone appreciated the film and based on its overall score of 45 it seems most critics were decidedly mediocre about this film.

            Beginning with the strongest and brightest review, Lisa Schwartzbaum of Entertainment Weekly gave the film an above average “B+” or an 83 based on the metacritic scale. Scwartzbaum pointed out that although the film was all about “dirtied up car racing and bad ass drivers,” the film works with the scope of its intended audience. The indeed audience being of course, males who enjoy fast paced movies with little plotline and place emphasis the action and visuals in the movie rather than the story and character development. Its limited drama leaves more room for loud music and crazy unbelievable plotlines which emphasize the fast paced cars and their drivers.

            Next,   Desson Thomson of the Washington Post gave the movie a 70. Thomson wrote specifically that the movie focuses everything through a “guy-calibrated telephoto lens…a simple world where everything falls into an easy hierarchy is essential.” Once again the overall definition of the film is that mainly centered on men and the macho lifestyle which they live. Specifically, Thompson points to the themes of street racing, cheating death in slow motion and of course the bromance that seems to permeate through all levels of the film. Although the thrills are excellent and the visual explosions are eye popping it’s clear that this movie is no Oscar winner and simply seeks to make a buck using the classic action man fest template.

            Of course not everyone shared the same enthusiasm for thrills that other critics felt. Peter Travers of Rolling Stone calls the film, “idiotic but fun. hate myself for getting off on hot cars, hotter women. bad dialogue enjoyable, also exhausting. two hours of life hijacked. no hope of recovery.” Simply put the film takes advantage of the market that is out there for films like these and the sex appeal of actors like Vin Diesel and the skimpily clad women which overpopulate the film. Travers points out that Diesel is brought back into the films storyline because of his cave like qualities and the brawny manly feel he projects over his films. Of course, this degenerates from any real movie watching experience and instead obliteration, wheelies and plotless thrills ensue.

            Going farther down the list, Nathan Lee of the New York Times warns viewers to be aware of the quality of the film. Once again concentrating the review on Vin Diesel who’s role this critic clearly dislikes in this film, “an inexpressive chunk of man whose actorly range is largely restricted to the occasional furrowing of a brow.” A pop film with diversionary qualities, Lee rated the film a 50 on metacritic summing up his review by telling audiences they will be flabbergasted by the vast excesses seen in this film.

            Finally, Roger Ebert finishes this list of critics with the worst review of all handing Fast and Furious one and a half stars for being a pop movie with cheap thrills and few quality characteristics. Sticking to the template of the film series Fast and the Furious releases an expertly made action film in which the special effects are good but the acting is extremely basic. It is amusing to see that most of the older critics Ebert included simply loathe the films excesses and harshly criticize the fact that the film spends so much gas and destroys cars as if these things came off trees. Summing up the film Ebert notes, the film was made simply to turn a profit, what a waste.